Wrapped up in this drama are 2 very separate and very different issues that most people are confusing; trying to wrap up into one accusation; and conflating in an attempt to garner sympathy without sticking to facts and laws.

1) There is first the issue of doxxing. (Srayzie's husband's info getting publicized)

2) There is second the issue of privacy. (Srayzie' photos getting uploaded)

On the first topic of doxing. This is illegal if private information is released for the purpose of harassment. Private information is usually in the form of a phone number, first and last name, a home address and/or work address. Doxing is illegal.

Most site admins have no choice but to take threats of doxing seriously, otherwise they can be held liable for negligence. Putt had no choice but to ban once a threat to dox was made known.

~

On the second topic of privacy. Srazyie has absolutely no expectation of privacy if her photos were previously uploaded onto another social media site.

If Srayzie had already uploaded her photos onto another social media site, she waived away all her rights over those photos. Correct me if I am wrong, but her photos were found on Twitter, I believe. Has anybody here bothered to read the TOS for Twitter? Here is a short excerpt that is applicable to her situation:

You are responsible for your use of the Services and for any Content you provide, including compliance with applicable laws, rules, and regulations. You should only provide Content that you are comfortable sharing with others.

Repeat that last sentence: You should only provide Content that you are comfortable sharing with others.

Also of note:

By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through the Services, you grant us a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute such Content in any and all media or distribution methods (now known or later developed). This license authorizes us to make your Content available to the rest of the world and to let others do the same. You agree that this license includes the right for Twitter to provide, promote, and improve the Services and to make Content submitted to or through the Services available to other companies, organizations or individuals for the syndication, broadcast, distribution, promotion or publication of such Content on other media and services, subject to our terms and conditions for such Content use. Such additional uses by Twitter, or other companies, organizations or individuals, may be made with no compensation paid to you with respect to the Content that you submit, post, transmit or otherwise make available through the Services.

TLDR on that last paragraph:

• You grant fair use to Twitter for any content you submit.

• Twitter will distribute your content worldwide.

• Don't expect to be paid by Twitter.

• Don't expect to be paid by any company or individual who wants to use your content.

You can find both paragraphs under Section 3. Content on the Services

Trolls finding Srayzie photos available online are no different than people making memes out of pictures of Clinton or Trump and passing them around. Unless she had taken steps to copyright her selfies - which I highly doubt - she has zero expectation of privacy regarding those photos. They have been freely available in the public domain and are legally considered public property under copyright laws.