You've hit the nail on the head though. Strava encourages you to make a decision. It doesn't make it for you. Any good laywer is going to view it as information that is meant as a call to action however neutrally it is delivered. Not very different from seeking someone out to casually mention that they've been insulted out of earshot. You've only passed on information, but you know there s a good chance that the person will act upon it - could you have anticipated they had a gun or were likely to over-react? If you didn't anticpate that before giving them the information you were surely being careless and possibly even negligent. I think I'm a good lawyer, and I don't see it as a call to action to put myself in danger But seriously, the person giving information in your scenario is not negligent - they had no duty to stop the other person from committing a crime. Just like strava, giving information, have no duty to stop people acting on the information in a way that endangers them or others. tony_farrelly wrote: No doubt the lawyer will also argue that if you create an online environment that encourages people to ride fast in the real world, and in which competition is the compelling component you can't be insulated from the consequences when things go wrong as a result of people competing to post the best time. Why should strava be responsible for people, of their own