1. 1.

   Draw a “bright line” between the source material and the published data; i.e. “we are not changing the data, we are a mirror”. [a]
2. 2.

   Avoid aggregating already-public PII in a way that would make it more public than it already is [b].
3. 3.

   Strive for our stated mission [c] of being a complete source of truth. i.e. “we could not be accused of editorializing by omission”. Our current policy is that we're allowed to collect PII [d] .

• Should we define "PII that we must not make more public" as "Name"? 3 yes 0 no 1 yes + address
• Should we show PII in the mirrored source material? 2 yes 1 no
• Should we aggregate data on whether a field is included in the source data? 3 yes 0 no
• Should we restrict data usage to non-commercial in our published policy? 4 yes 0 no
• Should we redact PII when we provide data at scale (i.e. via API or queryable database)? 4 yes 0 no

[...private data] may also include personal data that can identify an individual person, such as name, email, phone number, and address. If in doubt, omit such personal data from the scope of the scrape.