Website With Searchable Addresses Showing Owner's Names

Forums › Off topic › Website With Searchable Addresses Showing Owner's Names

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9

167 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 54

#3036326 14-Feb-2023 12:04

cokemaster:

My 2 cents is that the developers are not genuine about their desires about transparency and privacy. If they were, they wouldn't feel compelled to hide their Whois information and they'd have their contact information available.

There is a significant difference between applying assumptions to non-personal-identifiable aggregated vs identifiable data - I'd argue that there should be a duty of care towards accuracy and consent. I also think that they need to 'own' any flaws and not hand wave their methodology of attributing properties to people.

Whilst this is off topic, this site does trigger an interesting discussion on whether New Zealands privacy laws are strict enough. Whilst this site does consume and compile public information, I doubt that this utilisation was what the policy holders at the time had in mind. I think we need to have a bipartisan effort to shore up the privacy rights and define obligations for those who disseminate information into the public domain.

In extreme, in the US, sites similar 'public information' have been used to effectively compile 'target lists' of people or buildings to go after (eg. Abortion clinics, Pro-life centres, Judges etc) - which has resulted in property damage and significant personal safety issues. There is the possibility of this happening happening here or with other causes.

This. So much this.

cokemaster

Exited
4937 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1089

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3036331 14-Feb-2023 12:34

RE: Eitsop‘s post

If I may, sidestepping the morality of property ownership… almost everyone surfaced on this tool have purchased their properties lawfully and pay taxes to retain ownership of this property. I firmly believe that if the purpose of this site is to litigate the morality of the land ownership: lobbying legislators with facts and opinion is the correct path of action.

In my opinion, the sole purpose of this tool seems to be “here is a reason to get angry and maybe put ‘pressure’ on the property owner” rather than improving public discourse. Of course if violence comes out of it, the first thing will be “well we only supplied that information, we can’t be held responsible for anyone taking matters into their own hands”.

Switching back to the morality point: if the purpose was to raise awareness of consolidation of land by a few individuals, they could:
- aggregate it by suburb or street (eg. X property owners on this street also own Y properties elsewhere)
- if going down to the street level is desired, then saying (eg. The owner of this property might own y other properties, with no personal information disclosure).
- do research based on personal level information and release the findings aggregated.

Ironically - tools like this may actually cause more to apply for their information to be withheld from registrars on the basis of personal safety. Or it may drive people to use trusts and LL companies to help shield their holdings (if they aren’t already for tax purposes). Both of these dilute the benefits of the registry.

webhosting

Loose lips may sink ships - Be smart - Don't post internal/commercially sensitive or confidential information!

Kiwifan

181 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 127

Lifetime subscriber

#3036485 14-Feb-2023 17:29

I was surprised and a bit miffed on day one. Yes we own three homes, our family home where we live, a small house that was purchased for staff and my late mothers house that I inherited as any only child that my daughter and her family now live in.

To see our full names listed alongside the three homes made us look like tycoons but the reality was through hard work and a death.

Kyanar

4089 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1684

ID Verified

Trusted

#3036534 14-Feb-2023 17:45

Kiwifan:

I was surprised and a bit miffed on day one. Yes we own three homes, our family home where we live, a small house that was purchased for staff and my late mothers house that I inherited as any only child that my daughter and her family now live in.

To see our full names listed alongside the three homes made us look like tycoons but the reality was through hard work and a death.

Sounds like you're part of the problem with the colonial system of private land ownership... or something. At least that's what the word salad on the website's "Why?" page claims.

EDIT: Oh, actually, never mind - their blog from Feb 11 explains this:

In fact, we believe that owning *any* amount of land is a privileged position in society that should be scrutinized, particularly in a country where land is cut up and sold through colonial violence.

There you have it. If you own any land, it's because you're privileged and something something colonial violence.

Eitsop

584 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 153

ID Verified

#3036535 14-Feb-2023 17:57

sir1963:Again, by someone who does not share who they actually are.

Play the ball not the man..

Its generally available information, its just making it more accessible.. don't think I would find it offensive that people could see that I own 37 properties..

I personally also think peoples salaries should not be private within a workplace, partly to ensure equality of earnings between gender.

I mean why do you want to hide your salary or home ownership?

Kyanar

4089 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1684

ID Verified

Trusted

#3036539 14-Feb-2023 18:05

Eitsop:

Play the ball not the man..

Its generally available information, its just making it more accessible.. don't think I would find it offensive that people could see that I own 37 properties..

I personally also think peoples salaries should not be private within a workplace, partly to ensure equality of earnings between gender.

I mean why do you want to hide your salary or home ownership?

It's information made available for particular purposes, not to "demonstrate the problem with the colonial system of private land ownership". Turning people's information into a political statement is not why it is published.

Why should ownership of a property be scrutinised like these people are claiming? By whom? And why do they spell "scrutinised" in US English?!?

Lenovo

Shop now for Lenovo laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

cokemaster

Exited
4937 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1089

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3036555 14-Feb-2023 18:28

Play the ball, not the man… that’s exactly what this website is not doing. They’re not providing a useful service for tenants, they’re attempting to drive hostility towards people who have lawfully purchased properties.

Playing the ball would be advocating for changes in property ownership or tenancy laws. Or providing tenancy advocacy services or publishing info on your tenancy rights.

webhosting

Loose lips may sink ships - Be smart - Don't post internal/commercially sensitive or confidential information!

Eitsop

584 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 153

ID Verified

#3036572 14-Feb-2023 19:07

Play the ball, not the man - was in reference to someone looking at my GZ profile, not the subject at hand

Yeah, while I think it's a stretch that they are driving hostility. Its gathering inform, so people can be more informed around promoting changes in property laws

I just found the website a little entertaining to see who owned what, will I do anything with that info, no..

But if a tenant of a bad landlord, got into contact with other tenants of other properties.. to band together.. good on them.. get rid of the bad landlords.

sir1963

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#3036573 14-Feb-2023 19:12

Eitsop:

sir1963:Again, by someone who does not share who they actually are.

Play the ball not the man..

Its generally available information, its just making it more accessible.. don't think I would find it offensive that people could see that I own 37 properties..

I personally also think peoples salaries should not be private within a workplace, partly to ensure equality of earnings between gender.

I mean why do you want to hide your salary or home ownership?

Did you not see the protest in Wellington.

Those unhinged nut cases will use anything that agrees with their beliefs to justify all sorts of behaviour.

Do we also get a web site to show how much money people on benefits hav collected ?, after all this is public money paying for this, why are all tax payers not entitled to this information ?

This "right to know" is complete BS, no one but anarchists and those with some kind of axe to grind actually cares.

This is an interesting watch

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3-niZ-YvsU

Its about how emotion is more important than truth.

sir1963

3428 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3756

Subscriber

#3036605 14-Feb-2023 19:53

Eitsop:

Play the ball, not the man - was in reference to someone looking at my GZ profile, not the subject at hand

Yeah, while I think it's a stretch that they are driving hostility. Its gathering inform, so people can be more informed around promoting changes in property laws

I just found the website a little entertaining to see who owned what, will I do anything with that info, no..

But if a tenant of a bad landlord, got into contact with other tenants of other properties.. to band together.. good on them.. get rid of the bad landlords.

Nah its all about tall poppy syndrome.

If I am not allowed more than 1 property here in NZ, I am just as happy to invest in Australia. There is about NZ$1 Trillion in rentals, just how would NZ cope if even only 1/2 went overseas ?

Never mind about just the money heading overseas, its also the taxes they lose.

YOU may not do anything, but I have seen people on twitter advocating murder of property owners, and they have a very distorted view of reality and have self justified why that is an acceptable thing to do.

Just look at the wing nut and the Christchurch massacre, and the people who shared the video, etc etc etc, and they STILL believe that he did the right thing.

social media is used to fan the flames, these kind of "right to know" site are there to aim the anger of the misguided.

There is no benevolence in what these people do.

Kyanar

4089 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1684

ID Verified

Trusted

#3036612 14-Feb-2023 20:02

Eitsop:

Play the ball, not the man - was in reference to someone looking at my GZ profile, not the subject at hand

Where exactly did anyone do that? I think you've read far too much into a comment that was clearly not about you.

Eitsop:

Yeah, while I think it's a stretch that they are driving hostility. Its gathering inform, so people can be more informed around promoting changes in property laws

How is it "gathering inform"? And what does that even mean?

And I don't think it's a stretch at all that they're driving hostility. They're using highly charged emotive language like "colonial violence" and "deserving of scrutinisation" to describe anyone who owns land whether it's an owner occupier, a person renting out their old family home they've recently moved out of, or a business with 47 rentals. They clearly hold hostility to land owners, and convey such every time they comment. And they do so, as others have commented, from a position of anonymity themselves, while arguing that others should not only not be entitled to anonymity, but should be "scrutinised" simply for the reason that they own property.

Geekzone support

Support Geekzone with one-off or recurring donations Donate via PressPatron.

Eitsop

584 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 153

ID Verified

#3036615 14-Feb-2023 20:03

yeah, I don't condone any misuse of information to hurt people.

But I am a fan of more transparency

how much public services spend, I worked at a SOE that spent 50k doing up work toilets, that was lucky to cost $10k
peoples salaries , I think we get better outcomes if people know what others earn to ask for pay equity, I have no issues people knowing I am on $273k
so called charities, that are sometimes a tax haven to the unscrupulous

I would love to know how much doctors and health staff earn? and the hours worked. and compare that nationally to see if there are anomalies...

I think doctors should earn very good money, I just want to see we are getting value for money.

I think the more info out there can help the public opt for better laws

Eitsop

584 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 153

ID Verified

#3036619 14-Feb-2023 20:09

Kyanar: Where exactly did anyone do that?

here

sir1963: Again, by someone who does not share who they actually are.

Kyanar

4089 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1684

ID Verified

Trusted

#3036669 14-Feb-2023 20:15

Eitsop:

how much public services spend, I worked at a SOE that spent 50k doing up work toilets, that was lucky to cost $10k
this is already either proactively published information or legally required to be disclosed on request
peoples salaries , I think we get better outcomes if people know what others earn to ask for pay equity, I have no issues people knowing I am on $273k
just because you have no issues, does not mean everyone else has no legitimate issues. what someone else earns is none of anyone else's business, though "muzzle" clauses should be unlawful (and in Australia, they actually are unlawful)
so called charities, that are sometimes a tax haven to the unscrupulous
charities are required to be audited and their financial statements are available for review
I would love to know how much doctors and health staff earn? and the hours worked. and compare that nationally to see if there are anomalies...

why is it any of your business how much health staff earn? that's between their employers, unions, and colleagues

I think doctors should earn very good money, I just want to see we are getting value for money.

who's this "we"? most doctors and health staff work in the primary health sector, and are employed by private sector businesses

Responses inline due to quote limit.

Kyanar

4089 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1684

ID Verified

Trusted

#3036673 14-Feb-2023 20:18

Eitsop:

here

Again, where did anyone do as you claim?

It has been stated on a number of occasions (@sir1963 was the first to do so!) that the publishers of this website do not disclose their identities (nor even their names) but have instead opted for "Redacted for Privacy Reasons" domain ownership records, while simultaneously publishing other people's details including in some cases (by process of elimination) their residential addresses.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9