How should a user's death be handled?

Question

It is a bit of a morbid concept, but having recently had a friend die unexpectedly and having to deal with the online repercussions of this event has gotten me to thinking about what should happen to my accounts when I kick the bucket.

I haven't had any great insights yet, but here are some things I think are worth thinking about:

1. an entry in the FAQ telling the person's loved ones what to do with respect to the account would be extremely helpful, specifically who to contact, how to contact them, and what proof is necessary
2. some form of optional date of death on the user account screen
3. some way to mark the user as no longer being able to generate content and blocking any attempt to login as the user.

The danger I see in implementing such features is the possibility of someone faking another person's death and thereby locking a user out of his or her account or worrying his or her friends.

Answer 1

We re-examined this issue recently in light of Aaron Swartz's tragic suicide.

We concluded that, for a site like ours, a formal policy or process around memorializing the accounts of the deceased might do more harm than good.

Here's why:

1. On a site like ours, it's not as necessary as it is on more social networks. For many, sites like Facebook serve as the primary "heartbeat" check for one's acquaintances and more distant friends. As such, the ability to convey that a user has passed serves as an important source of information for some people. Additionally, it prevents painful situations in which someone lacking shared connections with the deceased today posts a happy birthday for someone who passed, leaving other friends with the awkward and painful task of telling them that someone died some time ago. That's not to say that people don't make real connections here, and I don't mean to minimize how hard it might be to lose someone you grew to know and respect or love here, but most users' interactions on SE are more informational exchange-based, especially outside of chat.
2. Just being absolutely certain who's dead is harder than it sounds. In less publicized cases than Aaron's, you have to worry about pranks or harassment, even if your process is reversible, as marking someone as dead can obviously cause others serious trauma. As a result, to do it at places like facebook requires not just proof of your relation to a user, but also that you provide an obituary in a publication. (Close friends of ours literally couldn't do it for their son because they didn't run an obit, and Facebook deemed the death certificate copy to be too easily forgeable.)
3. Even when you can confirm death, the deceased's wishes can be hard to discern and honor. This is the most important reason. What happens if (for example) a husband wants a "live" account, where he can watch his deceased husband's points run up over time, representing the help he's giving others posthumously, but the parents find it uncomfortable, and want the account frozen?

In Aaron's case, he actually left a digital will of sorts:

I designate Sean B. Palmer as my virtual executor to organize such things. (And if you delete anything, Sean, I will haunt you from the grave!)

I ask that the contents of all my hard drives be made publicly available from aaronsw.com ... (Source)

So, for Aaron, any process we had to allow someone other than Sean Palmer to cut off access to his account would likely have superseded and contradicted his explicit wishes, which is the last thing we'd want.

Obviously, we are always happy to work with deceased users' loved ones, and we will try to accommodate requests that we believe honor the dead's wishes, but our default approach is to believe that our users who are taken from us continue to want what they did when they were alive - for their posts to help those that come after them, and for their profile to represent who they are in whatever way they decided when they filled it out.

Since I know that many reading this have Aaron's case in particular in their thoughts, I'd be remiss not to point out a couple of things worth reading:

• Our co-founder, Jeff Atwood, a.k.a. Coding Horror wrote a powerful, candid post on the passing of Aaron Swartz.

• Suicides can sometimes be triggers for others suffering from depression. If you're having trouble coping, call the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline at 1-800-273 TALK (8255). They're there 24/7, and are happy to talk to folks outside the US. I can't promise it'll help, but how could it possibly hurt?

Answer 2

It is not unlike a book club you might join. You occasionally go the the club, people get to know you a little bit, and one day you stop attending. Meeting minutes may include your contributions to the discussion for future attendees, but there's no need to post a message to all that details the reason you are not attending.

In fact, such a public notice would be more disruptive than no notice at all. Those who are personally interested in the deceased might ask around and find someone closer to you that will then fill them in, and it will be, as it should, a private chat regarding a mutual friend.

The account does not accrue debt, nor are there any pecuniary rights associated with it. It has no extrinsic value - the reputation was associated with the knowledge and skills of the deceased, so there's no reason to pass that along in the will.

The person who owns the account might themselves choose to give their account details to a trustee if they would like something special done with the account after their death. This is what a trustee, whether legal, or merely a good friend or family member, does for one after their passing.

The deceased did not make it clear what was to happen with their account prior to death, therefore there is nothing that needs to be done, and therefore NO need to provide this in the system.

However, for those families that have concerns, they may contact [email protected] and discuss their options with them.

Answer 3

My husband and brother died at age 40 and 34 respectively, and another close friend also died at a young age. As I was left to totally deal with my husband's affairs and many of the affairs of my brother, I feel experienced as a voice to advocate the point of view of family and loved ones surviving the "deceased" user.

If an account on Stack Exchange is left opened, after the death of a user, this is, most likely, because the loved one's of the user have left it open. An idea supporting this is Facebook. Many profiles are left open, or have even been opened since a person's death. Most of these do not memorialise the person's death, as it is way people try to keep someone alive.

I believe firmly that the accounts of deceased users should be left as is. Just as the accounts "living" users (that are kept in order) are not interfered with by Stack Exchange, and neither should those of deceased users. The deceased user's account becomes the responsibility of the next of kin or the estate of the deceased, not the responsibility of the community.

The only thing people have left when someone close to them dies, is some semblance of control over what happens to their estate. People only go through cupboards and clothing of their loved one's as they are ready to face the finality of their death. There is enough distress without our site causing any more.

It is my opinion for what it is worth.

Answer 4

In April 2013, Google introduced Inactive Account Manager (aka Death Manager), offering:

Timeout period

You set a timeout period, after which your account can be classed as inactive. The timeout period starts with your last sign-in to your Google account.

Alert me

Inactive Account Manager will alert you via email or text message before the timeout period ends.

Notify contacts and share data

Add trusted contacts who should be made aware that you are no longer using your account. You can also share data with them if you like.

Optionally delete account

If you wish, instruct Google to delete your account on your behalf.

From the help pages:

How do we detect activity?

We look at several signals to understand whether you are still using your Google Account. These include your last sign-ins, your web history, usage of Gmail (i.e., the Gmail app on your phone) and Android check-ins.

Earlier, the Dutch Mediamatic.net organized a few events on this topic, like their early 2009 Ik R.I.P. — About death and self-representation on the internet.

Their website IkRIP ("I Rest in Peace") allows one to define what to do with ones profile on their websites (including PICNIC Network).

I think the Mediamatic account settings or Google approach should be standard functionality on sites like Facebook et al. Maybe here as well? In that case, I think that "deletion" should only imply de-association of the author and their profile though. The actual posts should not be deleted, I'd say.

Answer 5

While dealing with one's online estate is an issue many highly connected people should think more about, what's the worst thing that happens to a SOFU account?

No one can get access, so it goes permanently dormant. Good questions and answers remain helping people all over the internet. Bad questions and answers remain voted into oblivion, hurting no one. The only real bummer is that contact info in the profile silently stops working. OK, not ideal, but not really a big problem either.

Maybe the team should set policy on how to handle things in the event that they get contacted by someones heirs, but there is no need for a lot of infrastructure.

Answer 6

One thing I am thinking about doing outside of SO specifically is setting up some form of password escrow that will allow my family to get at my usernames and passwords after I am dead. I am also giving thought to building an online deadman's switch, but there are many dangers associated with that (the possibility of bugs in the code, sites changing format, accidental trigger due to illness, the danger of putting that much power in one place, etc.).