Reading through the past few pages, I guess I feel in a half-way house.
I can understand that the files were released on CD to journalists for simple reasons of expediency. However, it was then up to the journalists to use the information responsibly.
From those that I've read, PT court rulings name the plaintiff / defendant, then everyone gets substituted by letters (e.g. AA, BB). In the files that were released, personal details weren't redacted, possibly due to a lack of time. The files then got leaked and uploaded, and the rest is history.
The downside has been the inevitable scrutiny of everyone named, sometimes no doubt with an unwanted intrusion of privacy, and perhaps unpleasant consequences due to various [ censored word ]s.
The upside has been an opportunity to fact check the myriad of myths and conspiracies both in tabloids and on social media.
Unless I'm mistaken, many of us have named people in the files in the course of various discussions (myself included).
Any tabloid hack could have picked up on a discussion here and would have found a new "exclusive" to fill a few lines. At least one in PT regularly does so in relation to a a certain "research group".
That said, I don't understand the point of highlighting their names to the media.
