@janne @troed
1. Yes, search engines apply non-consensual scraping to an extent. But it's an interesting case to reason around.
If the premise of publishing a web page is that it can be indexed - the robots.txt file being a standard - then it can be reasoned that it's possible to publish a web page with the correct code for not being indexed. It's an opt-out, yes, but it can be applied *before* actually publishing the page. The action never happens.
The difference between adding a consent and adding a non-consent could be argued as negligible in this scenario. As long as the rules of engagement are clear.
2. In pratical ethics it's great to judge one's own actions based on adherence to, or misconstruction, of intent. Though I would argue that it's dangerous to assume people want to reach "everyone" because they have public posts.
There is a difference in low and high levels of attention. Though I'm not really talking about boosts it's a good case for reflecting on responsibility based on number of followers. Does more followers imply more responsibility, for example.