[vinceguidry]

There's a difference between searching for someone's name online and figuring out what's public, and asking for identifying information so that you can do a targeted search, failure to furnish means you will be refused a place to live.

Though I don't think in this case not having a Twitter account would cause you to be unable to rent in NYC. She could have simply said she didn't have one. Not sure if that would make you legally culpable or not.

> I don't think its as clear cut as you make it out to be.

I don't mean to be rude, but these kinds of questions are exactly what the judicial system and the body of civil rights law and precedent are aimed at answering. We pass the law, then it's the judicial system's job to work out the particulars by adjudicating individual cases. It's the whole reason they exist.

[mc32]

It's not rude and that's a good point. We may yet have to decide what's allowable and what's not.

On the other hand, when they do a background check, any competent service is going to find that information for the lessor anyway. I don't see a difference in result.

Of course I dont like the idea of using people's online personae as helping decide whether they are tenant worthy or not.