[deakam]

Ridiculous take. If you're posting in a server that's intentionally open to the public and accessible to anyone with a link or even indexed by server discovery you shouldn't expect privacy. That's just the basic reality of the internet.

[sReinwald]

No, what's "ridiculous" is this simplistic, black-and-white framing that deliberately ignores any nuance, the concept of contextual integrity or reasonable user expectations.

Of course, no one expects absolute secrecy in a public-facing Discord server. That's a straw man. The issue isn't about some naive belief that messages are invisible. It's about the scope, permanence, and method of access and archiving.

People participating in public Discord spaces have reasonable contextual expectations about how their words will be accessed and by whom. They expect their messages to be seen by current and maybe future server members - not extracted, permanently archived, and made globally searchable by entirely unrelated third parties.

This is similar to how conversations in a public park are technically "public," but most people would be rightfully disturbed if someone recorded everything, transcribed it, published it online with their names attached, and made it all searchable forever. Just because something isn't strictly private doesn't mean any and all forms of collection, republication, and indexing are ethically justified.

If you can't see the distinction between "not perfectly private within this specific semi-public space" and "archived indefinitely, and globally searchable forever by anyone, anywhere, for any reason," then you're either arguing in bad faith or your understanding of these issues is so superficial that further engagement is pointless.