zlacker

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+(OP)
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+o6
> 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+P8
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+Bb
> 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.

>>dragon+xj
Not really. Those rules are and have been enforced quite strictly. In order to show intent you're going to have to do a lot better than just saying they posted it so it's their fault. And again, we are mostly talking about public info that the person themselves has openly posted online. That's not private information no matter how you look at it.

>>HereIG+Nl1
On the one hand, we have freely shared information. On the other hand, meta information obtained by digital stalking (or, in some cases, literal stalking). The later is absolutely not ok.

I agree regarding the freely available information (which often involved self-made drama). There is nothing bad about archiving it per se. With one interjection: some of this information is decades-old. While the right to forget does not exist on the internet, if people reflected on things, admitted they made mistakes and changed their perspective, it should be possible for any sensible webmaster/reader, to allow some kind of redemption.

This was exactly the case with byuu - he realized past mistakes, openly admitted and wanted a somewhat fresh start. But KW's webmaster did not allow it. At this point I percieved KF as openly cruel and kind of showing their true colors.

>>jbuhbj+RH3
> But KW's webmaster did not allow it.

From what I've seen it wasn't as straightforward as that. The operator, Null, shared the email exchange and there seems to have been less than 24 hours between Byuu's first message and his last.

Null's last message was this, after which he went to bed (apparently, idk the timezones involved in this). It doesn't seem like a "no".

> I feel like you're being genuine. There's a fear here that you're just trying to prank me to show people "look, Josh just wants money", but it's one of the small subsets of concerns at play here. > > So hear me out: Send me your resume, I'll make you a counter offer.

https://archive.ph/R1oRN