If someone is advocating for the death of another person or groups of persons, I think it's perfectly fine to expose that person. You should not be able to hide behind the anonymity of the...
If someone is advocating for the death of another person or groups of persons, I think it's perfectly fine to expose that person. You should not be able to hide behind the anonymity of the internet while advocating for violence.
In any other circumstance, including simply being racist (such as the statement "all asians are bad at math"), I do not believe it's justifiable to doxx someone. I believe that the anonymity of the internet does hurt society in this case, but exposing someone for public ridicule (or worse) is morally reprehensible.
This might be just a semantic issue (or possibly my own ignorance), but I thought doxxing applied only to the internet. I thought doxxing specifically meant the act of identifying the real person...
the scenario described in the New Republic piece about identifying and naming the neo-nazis that marched in Charlotesville?
This might be just a semantic issue (or possibly my own ignorance), but I thought doxxing applied only to the internet. I thought doxxing specifically meant the act of identifying the real person behind an internet pseudonym. I didn't think doxxing could be applied to 3D life.
If you identify the person behind "Algernon_Asimov", that's doxxing. If you identify me participating in a public event, that's a different form of identification, but not doxxing.
Since the alt-reich are willing to doxx and harass their opposition, I'm OK with paying them in their own coin by using their own tactics against them.
Since the alt-reich are willing to doxx and harass their opposition, I'm OK with paying them in their own coin by using their own tactics against them.
From losing an eye? I don't think so. Anyway, counter-attack is not the same as self-defence. To defend myself, I merely need to prevent you removing or damaging my eye, and there are many ways to...
From losing an eye? I don't think so.
Anyway, counter-attack is not the same as self-defence.
To defend myself, I merely need to prevent you removing or damaging my eye, and there are many ways to do this non-violently and without hurting you. For one thing, I could simply run away, complete with both of my eyes. I could put on a helmet to protect my head and face. I could hold up some sort of barrier between you and me so you can't touch me. I could block your arm as you reach towards my eye. I could restrain you so you can't attack me. All of these things count as self-defence, and none of them require me to remove your eye.
However, if you manage to remove my eye despite my efforts, me removing your eye in return is not defence: it's a counter-attack. In response to your attack, I have attacked you. That is not defence. Revenge might feel good but it won't bring my eye back and it'll only escalate matters.
I remember that the Nazis turned Europe into an abbatoir. As far as I'm concerned, anybody who associates with that ideology deserves whatever cruelty befalls them.
I remember that the Nazis turned Europe into an abbatoir. As far as I'm concerned, anybody who associates with that ideology deserves whatever cruelty befalls them.
I think doxxing is a part of life now, and people are going to have to realize that the internet is real life. Or at least, an extension of real life. Thinking that the two are separate is 20th...
I think doxxing is a part of life now, and people are going to have to realize that the internet is real life. Or at least, an extension of real life. Thinking that the two are separate is 20th century thinking. The expectation of a disconnect between your online-self and your real-life-self is the same as expectations of online privacy. It's quickly become unrealistic to maintain.
That being said, I couldn't bring myself to doxx someone unless I thought there was an actual threat of a crime or someone being hurt. I also don't get into heated vendettas against people online, so I can't say that I've ever walked a mile in the shoes of either group mentioned in your post.
I see this a lot: "It's just the internet. It doesn't matter." Whether it's writing badly, or attacking people, it doesn't matter because the internet isn't "real". Which, as you say, is a flawed...
people are going to have to realize that the internet is real life. Or at least, an extension of real life. Thinking that the two are separate is 20th century thinking.
I see this a lot: "It's just the internet. It doesn't matter." Whether it's writing badly, or attacking people, it doesn't matter because the internet isn't "real".
Which, as you say, is a flawed point of view. What we write on the internet is as real as what we say to people's faces. We are all real people expressing real thoughts to other real people, even if the medium we use is electrons, cables, and pixels. This is the modern reality.
I am a real person. Sure, "Algernon" might be a pseudonym, but he represents me (or, at least, a significant part of me: my intellectual side). I can't distance myself from anything "Algernon" says because he's not real. He is an expression of me. Anything said by "Algernon" is being said by me. He's not a fictional character. He is a real part of me. And the person I'm writing this to under the pseudonym "Kijafa" is also real. You have real feelings and real hopes and real emotions. And I can say things to really hurt you.
The internet is real, people! The words are real. The thoughts and emotions and opinions are real. The people are real. We are all real.
Yep. And the thing is, the things that happen online have real consequences. People are starting to realize that and I expect opinions will be very different in 5-10 years.
Yep. And the thing is, the things that happen online have real consequences. People are starting to realize that and I expect opinions will be very different in 5-10 years.
I've been doxxed from my time on reddit, almost doxxed once and had lots of other times that people tried to dox me. The first time was an almost and my fault for posting too much info and someone...
I've been doxxed from my time on reddit, almost doxxed once and had lots of other times that people tried to dox me. The first time was an almost and my fault for posting too much info and someone stalked my history and threatened my kids after I removed a post. After that, I made sure that I was damn near impossible to dox. The time I was actually doxxed was from trusting a shitty app that stole my info from my computer.
Neither of those times was due to being an asshole online (although I definitely can be one). I had many other attempts by people to dox me, even had a couple subs dedicated to hate me. I am against doxxing when it's just for something you don't like that someone said or did on a forum. IF you want to go march in person, you are forfeiting that right to not be doxxed.
"Doxxing", in the comprehensive sense of not simply publishing someone's meatspace name, but also publishing their phone number, home address, place of work, family names, kids' schools,...
"Doxxing", in the comprehensive sense of not simply publishing someone's meatspace name, but also publishing their phone number, home address, place of work, family names, kids' schools, whereabouts, etc. is an intrinsically hostile and threatening act that started with people at dire risk of violence - physicians performing abortions, women protesting online, and so on. At least one murder was a direct result. Doxxing opens the door to SWATing, which could be even deadlier.
For me everything depends on reasonable expectations. If you go out protesting, you absolutely should assume someone might see you protesting and identify you with the cause. If you say sketchy...
For me everything depends on reasonable expectations. If you go out protesting, you absolutely should assume someone might see you protesting and identify you with the cause. If you say sketchy shit on twitter and tie your name to that account, you should expect that someone, at some point, might make that connection in other areas of your life where that same information is also used. On the other hand if you're in your home and someone is recording something you're saying without your knowledge or permission, that's not okay. If you're trying to organize an online community and you want to keep your identity private, you should probably limit your activities in that community to that community. The moment you start seeking to coordinate those activities to, say, political activism, that's when all the fire and vitriol from politics can come crashing on your head. Beware the emotions of hte audiences you're engaging with.
That's all from the victim's point of view of this practice, so let me get into what you've actually asked. When is it okay to actively seek out and reveal that information? Generally, it isn't ever really okay. The focus-fire from social media revealing someone's information does nothing but ruin one person's life at a time. If that attempt goes viral, there will be death threats and threats of physical violence, potential employment repercussions, all manner of hate that well exceeds the proportionality the original "offense" might have caused basically always, and more spin off effects I haven't even thought about because this fortunately hasn't happened to me. If you hypothetically hate someone so much that you would wish all of this onto them, then I can't say I have much sympathy if the same were to happen to you.
This is one of those things that you should, as the victim, try to do due diligence to keep it from being likely, but given the law of numbers among humanity, you must assume there will always be one person out there who either has rationalized the behavior to themselves, lacks any moral compass about this issue at all, or does not believe sharing the information could at all spin out of control the way it all-too-often has shown itself to do. Use the internet responsibly.
no, it's never acceptable. If someone has committed a crime, report it to the authorities and let the legal system deal with it. If doxxing is acceptable then inevitably innocent people are going...
no, it's never acceptable. If someone has committed a crime, report it to the authorities and let the legal system deal with it. If doxxing is acceptable then inevitably innocent people are going to become victims of mob "justice".
Due process is the cornerstone of a civilized society.
I'd rather have people that induce violence banned from the community than us going lowly like them. Doxxing is bad netiquette, and can have grave consequences. Yes, it's silly to think that one...
I'd rather have people that induce violence banned from the community than us going lowly like them. Doxxing is bad netiquette, and can have grave consequences. Yes, it's silly to think that one is safe behind a nickname on the web today, but why would we be the cause of the possible harm that some person might end up getting? I'd support, though, reporting such a person to authorities instead if you have the ability/information to actually doxx them.
When I protested the invasion of Iraq, I would have been happy to be identified. The point was that I wanted my voice heard. When I protested Scientology I wore a mask. Not because I feared being...
When I protested the invasion of Iraq, I would have been happy to be identified. The point was that I wanted my voice heard.
When I protested Scientology I wore a mask. Not because I feared being identified but as a way to draw attention to their practice of SLAPP tactics.
I think there is a huge difference between identifying people who make their voice public, and using identification as a threat to silence dissident voices.
Definitely. I do think that the idea that your online identity is separate from your real identity is a concept that is dying though. It's definitely something I expect my grandkids to see as a...
Definitely.
I do think that the idea that your online identity is separate from your real identity is a concept that is dying though. It's definitely something I expect my grandkids to see as a wild concept.
I would agree completely, except I've seen how shitty people are in local facebook groups even with their real identities out there. Over the dumbest shit too. People are worse online than they...
I would agree completely, except I've seen how shitty people are in local facebook groups even with their real identities out there. Over the dumbest shit too. People are worse online than they are face to face. Not being in the physical presence of someone makes it a lot easier to be a shitheel.
Anonymity makes it a LOT easier to be a dick though. I'll be interested to see how @deimos implements the discussed temp-anonymity if and when that happens, because it at least sounds like there will be some accountability involved.
Sort of a tradeoff though, right? Like I would not be comfortable saying much of the stuff I say if it wasn't somewhat anonymous, not because it's horribly racist or bigoted but because it's...
Sort of a tradeoff though, right? Like I would not be comfortable saying much of the stuff I say if it wasn't somewhat anonymous, not because it's horribly racist or bigoted but because it's personal or political or whatever.
But, if you do tell them what you are, or even if you divulge enough information to let them deduce or assume it, you're then suddenly a potential target. It's not only the threat of violence...
Nobody on the internet knows you’re a [whatever] until you tell them, and even then they can’t be sure.
But, if you do tell them what you are, or even if you divulge enough information to let them deduce or assume it, you're then suddenly a potential target.
Further the anonymity of online discourse serves to prevent the threat of violence from silencing opinions.
It's not only the threat of violence which silences opinions on the internet.
If I post an opinion in a forum saying I like daisies, and my inbox is suddenly flooded with messages abusing me for daring to like daisies because roses are the best... I'm not likely to post about liking daisies again. The internet is short one daisy-lover. If all the other daisy-lovers get treated the same way, and we all give up... there's no more love for daisies on the internet. It's all roses.
Or, slightly less drastically, if my comments in favour of daisies get downvoted (on those forums which have downvotes) or simply ignored... I might feel like there was no point sharing my preference for daisies. And, there's one less person speaking out in favour of daisies on the internet, letting the rose-lovers have more space for their opinions.
I think if someone is going to exercise their free speech in public, without even the veneer of a screen name or anonymous profile picture, they should expect to be held to account for that.
I think if someone is going to exercise their free speech in public, without even the veneer of a screen name or anonymous profile picture, they should expect to be held to account for that.
I don't think people should expect to keep their actions private when they're taking those actions in public. That's not really doxxing IMO, it's just being recognized. That's why the KKK members...
I don't think people should expect to keep their actions private when they're taking those actions in public. That's not really doxxing IMO, it's just being recognized. That's why the KKK members wore hoods.
If someone is advocating for the death of another person or groups of persons, I think it's perfectly fine to expose that person. You should not be able to hide behind the anonymity of the internet while advocating for violence.
In any other circumstance, including simply being racist (such as the statement "all asians are bad at math"), I do not believe it's justifiable to doxx someone. I believe that the anonymity of the internet does hurt society in this case, but exposing someone for public ridicule (or worse) is morally reprehensible.
This might be just a semantic issue (or possibly my own ignorance), but I thought doxxing applied only to the internet. I thought doxxing specifically meant the act of identifying the real person behind an internet pseudonym. I didn't think doxxing could be applied to 3D life.
If you identify the person behind "Algernon_Asimov", that's doxxing. If you identify me participating in a public event, that's a different form of identification, but not doxxing.
Since the alt-reich are willing to doxx and harass their opposition, I'm OK with paying them in their own coin by using their own tactics against them.
So you think after someone takes out your eye, you should not take out theirs, leaving only yourself maimed?
You don't end violence by committing more violence. That's obviously a contradiction.
Yeah but if you don't defend yourself then you die.
From losing an eye? I don't think so.
Anyway, counter-attack is not the same as self-defence.
To defend myself, I merely need to prevent you removing or damaging my eye, and there are many ways to do this non-violently and without hurting you. For one thing, I could simply run away, complete with both of my eyes. I could put on a helmet to protect my head and face. I could hold up some sort of barrier between you and me so you can't touch me. I could block your arm as you reach towards my eye. I could restrain you so you can't attack me. All of these things count as self-defence, and none of them require me to remove your eye.
However, if you manage to remove my eye despite my efforts, me removing your eye in return is not defence: it's a counter-attack. In response to your attack, I have attacked you. That is not defence. Revenge might feel good but it won't bring my eye back and it'll only escalate matters.
On an individual level it makes sense. As soon as you apply it to groups, it's an invitation for everyone to be as bad as the worst actor.
When they go low. We go just as low
Seems like a short sighted view to me. Each side will remember what the other has done so just take that into account.
Yeah I was kinda being sarcastic. Mrs. Obmas quote "When they go low. We go high."
I remember that the Nazis turned Europe into an abbatoir. As far as I'm concerned, anybody who associates with that ideology deserves whatever cruelty befalls them.
I think doxxing is a part of life now, and people are going to have to realize that the internet is real life. Or at least, an extension of real life. Thinking that the two are separate is 20th century thinking. The expectation of a disconnect between your online-self and your real-life-self is the same as expectations of online privacy. It's quickly become unrealistic to maintain.
That being said, I couldn't bring myself to doxx someone unless I thought there was an actual threat of a crime or someone being hurt. I also don't get into heated vendettas against people online, so I can't say that I've ever walked a mile in the shoes of either group mentioned in your post.
I see this a lot: "It's just the internet. It doesn't matter." Whether it's writing badly, or attacking people, it doesn't matter because the internet isn't "real".
Which, as you say, is a flawed point of view. What we write on the internet is as real as what we say to people's faces. We are all real people expressing real thoughts to other real people, even if the medium we use is electrons, cables, and pixels. This is the modern reality.
I am a real person. Sure, "Algernon" might be a pseudonym, but he represents me (or, at least, a significant part of me: my intellectual side). I can't distance myself from anything "Algernon" says because he's not real. He is an expression of me. Anything said by "Algernon" is being said by me. He's not a fictional character. He is a real part of me. And the person I'm writing this to under the pseudonym "Kijafa" is also real. You have real feelings and real hopes and real emotions. And I can say things to really hurt you.
The internet is real, people! The words are real. The thoughts and emotions and opinions are real. The people are real. We are all real.
Yep. And the thing is, the things that happen online have real consequences. People are starting to realize that and I expect opinions will be very different in 5-10 years.
I've been doxxed from my time on reddit, almost doxxed once and had lots of other times that people tried to dox me. The first time was an almost and my fault for posting too much info and someone stalked my history and threatened my kids after I removed a post. After that, I made sure that I was damn near impossible to dox. The time I was actually doxxed was from trusting a shitty app that stole my info from my computer.
Neither of those times was due to being an asshole online (although I definitely can be one). I had many other attempts by people to dox me, even had a couple subs dedicated to hate me. I am against doxxing when it's just for something you don't like that someone said or did on a forum. IF you want to go march in person, you are forfeiting that right to not be doxxed.
"Doxxing", in the comprehensive sense of not simply publishing someone's meatspace name, but also publishing their phone number, home address, place of work, family names, kids' schools, whereabouts, etc. is an intrinsically hostile and threatening act that started with people at dire risk of violence - physicians performing abortions, women protesting online, and so on. At least one murder was a direct result. Doxxing opens the door to SWATing, which could be even deadlier.
While it might be fitting to use the same weapons as your enemies, be damn sure they're pointed accurately and don't do collateral damage.
For me everything depends on reasonable expectations. If you go out protesting, you absolutely should assume someone might see you protesting and identify you with the cause. If you say sketchy shit on twitter and tie your name to that account, you should expect that someone, at some point, might make that connection in other areas of your life where that same information is also used. On the other hand if you're in your home and someone is recording something you're saying without your knowledge or permission, that's not okay. If you're trying to organize an online community and you want to keep your identity private, you should probably limit your activities in that community to that community. The moment you start seeking to coordinate those activities to, say, political activism, that's when all the fire and vitriol from politics can come crashing on your head. Beware the emotions of hte audiences you're engaging with.
That's all from the victim's point of view of this practice, so let me get into what you've actually asked. When is it okay to actively seek out and reveal that information? Generally, it isn't ever really okay. The focus-fire from social media revealing someone's information does nothing but ruin one person's life at a time. If that attempt goes viral, there will be death threats and threats of physical violence, potential employment repercussions, all manner of hate that well exceeds the proportionality the original "offense" might have caused basically always, and more spin off effects I haven't even thought about because this fortunately hasn't happened to me. If you hypothetically hate someone so much that you would wish all of this onto them, then I can't say I have much sympathy if the same were to happen to you.
This is one of those things that you should, as the victim, try to do due diligence to keep it from being likely, but given the law of numbers among humanity, you must assume there will always be one person out there who either has rationalized the behavior to themselves, lacks any moral compass about this issue at all, or does not believe sharing the information could at all spin out of control the way it all-too-often has shown itself to do. Use the internet responsibly.
no, it's never acceptable. If someone has committed a crime, report it to the authorities and let the legal system deal with it. If doxxing is acceptable then inevitably innocent people are going to become victims of mob "justice".
Due process is the cornerstone of a civilized society.
It's not that big of a problem, John.
Is this a meme or something? Sorry I'm not hip!
i was just joshing, Josh.
Oh wow, that really flew over my head!
how did this lead to doxxing?
The comment you were actually trying to reply to is here :)
I'd rather have people that induce violence banned from the community than us going lowly like them. Doxxing is bad netiquette, and can have grave consequences. Yes, it's silly to think that one is safe behind a nickname on the web today, but why would we be the cause of the possible harm that some person might end up getting? I'd support, though, reporting such a person to authorities instead if you have the ability/information to actually doxx them.
Does identifying someone openly involved in a march count as doxxing? I feel like that's just putting yourself out there.
When I protested the invasion of Iraq, I would have been happy to be identified. The point was that I wanted my voice heard.
When I protested Scientology I wore a mask. Not because I feared being identified but as a way to draw attention to their practice of SLAPP tactics.
I think there is a huge difference between identifying people who make their voice public, and using identification as a threat to silence dissident voices.
Definitely.
I do think that the idea that your online identity is separate from your real identity is a concept that is dying though. It's definitely something I expect my grandkids to see as a wild concept.
I would agree completely, except I've seen how shitty people are in local facebook groups even with their real identities out there. Over the dumbest shit too. People are worse online than they are face to face. Not being in the physical presence of someone makes it a lot easier to be a shitheel.
Anonymity makes it a LOT easier to be a dick though. I'll be interested to see how @deimos implements the discussed temp-anonymity if and when that happens, because it at least sounds like there will be some accountability involved.
Sort of a tradeoff though, right? Like I would not be comfortable saying much of the stuff I say if it wasn't somewhat anonymous, not because it's horribly racist or bigoted but because it's personal or political or whatever.
But, if you do tell them what you are, or even if you divulge enough information to let them deduce or assume it, you're then suddenly a potential target.
It's not only the threat of violence which silences opinions on the internet.
If I post an opinion in a forum saying I like daisies, and my inbox is suddenly flooded with messages abusing me for daring to like daisies because roses are the best... I'm not likely to post about liking daisies again. The internet is short one daisy-lover. If all the other daisy-lovers get treated the same way, and we all give up... there's no more love for daisies on the internet. It's all roses.
Or, slightly less drastically, if my comments in favour of daisies get downvoted (on those forums which have downvotes) or simply ignored... I might feel like there was no point sharing my preference for daisies. And, there's one less person speaking out in favour of daisies on the internet, letting the rose-lovers have more space for their opinions.
What about the other way around? Doxing whistleblowers or "antifa" (which I'm convinced is mostly made up in the US).
I think if someone is going to exercise their free speech in public, without even the veneer of a screen name or anonymous profile picture, they should expect to be held to account for that.
I don't think people should expect to keep their actions private when they're taking those actions in public. That's not really doxxing IMO, it's just being recognized. That's why the KKK members wore hoods.
It's to be expected, which is why anti-fascists typically wear masks or otherwise cover their faces.