Those are good practices if you have privacy concerns.
we’re just talking about custom interfaces to analyze public data
Semi-public. As it stands, only instance admins have access to per-user vote data. Possibly also API users, but I’m not sure the lemmy api has an endpoint for exposing per-user vote data, I believe it just gives you a tally of the up/down votes of posts and comments, but not who made each vote. But most people don’t have the skillset to host their own instance and process the data into something meaningful/easy to digest.
You could make the argument that semi-public is basically public, but I think there is some nuance to be explored:
Once a site like open lemmy stats launches, it becomes trivial for any user to query that data, who upvoted what, who downvoted what, when they up/downvoted it, etc.
There’s a difference between something being available to people motivated enough to get it vs it reaching critical mass and being trivial to access by anyone with a browser. How the data is ultimately used, whether it is used nefariously or not, is going to be up to the people that access openlemmystats and what they wish to use it for.
Which has me considering an analogy, without expressly intending to make this political, please consider the statement “guns don’t kill people, people kill people”. “Openlemmystats doesnt harass political dissenters! The people who use it do!”. One could argue that openlemmystats wouldn’t do anything inherently bad, it’s the people who would use it. Just like with guns, there will likely be debate on whether or not the world would be better without openlemmystats or if we should start doing things to make it impossible for openlemmystats-alike sites to exist.
That said, I mostly agree with you, and I appreciate your privacy suggestions/best practices, good stuff!
Edit: for the record, I think “guns don’t kill people, people do” is a stupid statement, but I thought it was an interesting analogy. That is to say nothing of my feelings on gun control, I’m just not a fan of distilling complex issues into dismissive one line statements.