zlacker

>>danso+(OP)
Whenever I read stories of big tech making decision to destroy some digital asset by taking decisions like this or banning people from their accounts (read gmail, google drive, etc.) It makes me shiver. They can put a brick wall in front of anyone's life/business.

>>firstS+fI1
I'm okay with removing someone from the internet if their business is to harass and dox people.

>>manuel+zI1
Absolutely. When there is a due process and it is done with the accordance of law that we are all supposed to abide. Not by unilateral decision of a tech CEO/Staff.

>>firstS+eJ1
Do you believe that being on the Internet Archive is a god-given right and that only a judge should be able to tell IA to delete the work that IA chooses to do on their own?

If you're a shithead in a club, you get kicked out. If you're a shithead with your family, you get kicked out. If you're a shithead on the internet, you also get kicked out.

>>ohgodp+LR1
I do not believe any shithead should be given a pass. My comment was mostly about who decides who is a shithead. If tomorrow someone famous/outreaching enough on twitter/etc. decides that I am a shithead, should google close my account?

>>firstS+mT1
If you were to host your own forum, and people began using it to dox trans individuals with the explicit goal of harassing them, how would you react and what action(s), if any, would you take?

>>jjuliu+fV1
I don't understand the point of your example because that isn't what is happening here. Harassing is against the rules and will get you banned.

>>HereIG+R32
You are demonstrating a clear failure to understand not only the magnitude of what occurs, and can occur, when someone is doxx'd, but also KiwiFarms' history as a party to specific incidents of suicide and external harassment as a result of said doxx'ing on that site.

>>jjuliu+J62
Doxxing is not illegal, if posting publicly available info can even be called that. The only suicide that was actually blamed on the site by the victim, is someone nobody can show any official or direct evidence of's death. The second of the 3 alleged deaths, literally blamed the mental health system and becoming homeless the day before.. no mentions of kiwifarms.. It was online "allies" after the fact that made the link among efforts to get the site shut down in the past. All of the claims largely cases of "if you say something enough times people will start repeating it"

This whole mess has some real rabbit holes, but anyone who does a little research will find a lot of the claims used to drum up hysteria are quite wanting in the way of facts or proof.

>>HereIG+7d2
> Doxxing is not illegal

This is true, in some jurisdictions, in the same sense that it is true that homicide is not illegal.

Doxxing with particular intent is illegal in those jurisdictions; e. g., California where Penal Code § 653.2 was adopted specifically to address harassment by doxxing.

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySectio....

>>dragon+yf2
There are exceptions but the point still mostly stands. Secondly, "with intent" the rules of the site explicitly forbid harassing or interacting so that's going to be quite a claim, even in those rare exceptions, to make let alone prove. Plus, a lot of what we are talking about isn't likely to qualify anyway since most of it is simply posting publicly available information, usually from the person themselves and still available from their accounts/SM etc.

>>HereIG+ki2
> the rules of the site explicitly forbid harassing or interacting so that's going to be quite a claim

Not really; showing that rules like that are conscious fig leaves and actually indicators of knowledge and intent is... not at all uncommon. Lots of sites taken down by law enforcement for deliberate facilitation of prostitution or human trafficking had “don’t use this platform for prostitution/trafficking” rules, too.