All doxxing occurs by correlating meta information between various sources to make and expose connections from an online identity to personal information about someone's real world identity. That is literally what doxxing is.

Ok so to sum up, a doxx is the establishment of a connection between User X and it's personal data in order to hurt this particular User. It also needs to be published by a third party against the User X's will. What happens when User X made that connection already willingly. Is that still a doxx done by a third party or a self inflicted doxx?

You're effectively insisting that "it couldn't be doxxing because it was merely doxxing".

No what I am saying is that it can't be doxx if the user in question made the link in the first place endangering herself and with disregard of the consequences of a possible doxx. Several users advised her to remove that information but even then she made posts that linked to her personal social media and hence there is no doxx happening since she did that publishing herself in the first place.

All this hair-splitting and hand-wringing and grasping-for-straws over made up technicalities that aren't even true. And for what? You just feel such a desperate need to defend people who do shit like this?

What you are doing is conflating my defense for Voat and defending the people that harassed the user. For your information I was one of the few that defended her and her friend against the constant harassment she was getting. I don't remember ever seeing you there nor did I ever remember seeing you denouncing and calling out the users that were harassing her. Suddenly you come here and tell me that there was doxxing on Voat but you can't prove it. So we are supposed to accept your word filled with emotional indignation just because you are offended and outraged?

The link that you posted if of a post made by a User that never brought concrete proof of said doxx. He just brought proof that he was being trolled by Zyklon_b. A known user to make disgusting jokes about "X user raped and murdered an infant in 1990" - he did it to me more than once. Does that imply a doxx? Does that imply a serious accusation or a mere effort to trigger sensitivities? He is also know for saying "deaf to her kids". Where is the doxx there? Do you even realize that there isn't any concrete evidence of doxxing there for you to even say that?

I agree he is a fucking imbecil. I agree there is harassment there but in no moment there is a credible source of evidence showing that he will perpetrate or has perpetrated any doxx or inciting harm into them at all. He did incite a harassment here. That definitely needs to be addressed but no doxx nor credible source of inciting damage.

How mighty Christian of you. You rape altar boys on Sundays, too? Then tell yourself it's not really rape, because they came to church themselves? Because they should have known, that these things can happen, when a pretty young boy goes to church?

Your poor attempt to try to appeal for any guilt on my position here is not going to accomplish anything. The reason why I say this is the following:

• I stand by the Truth. If you have concrete evidence of the threat and doxxing, bring it to the table. If not then stop crying about it.

• Trying to resort into some type of hypothetical character assassination of my online persona is not going to help you construct a valid argumentative point here. Basically what you are doing is throwing tantrums and ad hominem instead of actually providing concrete evidence of the matter. An analogy that can compare to this is the following: You are a racist because you don't think there is systematic racism - Do you see how stupid you sound now?

Yes, she was naive. Yes, she didn't protect her identity well enough. Especially for a place like this.

Thanks for accepting at least one part of your mistake here. She doxxed herself, end of discussion. I am sorry for what she went through but she did it to herself. Should you or I be held accountable for something that she did to herself? If you want to go on a guilt trip be my guest. I am responsible for what I do and I don't wish ill to anybody but I can't help her defend herself if she hurts herself.

None of that justifies what they did, and continue doing. None of that makes it "not really doxxing".

No one ever justified what they did. Which is why we need to work on a due process that attacks the type of harassment that she went through so it doesn't happen again. But that doesn't mean that she was doxxed by them. She doxxed herself.

f you spread information that exposes an online user's real world identity to people who didn't know it, especially with malicious intent, you are doxxing.

If the user spreads that personal information herself that is not doxxing. Stop conflating third party action with a direct action from herself. Because they are two different things.

Doesn't matter how you got the information.

Yes it matters because if you post your information yourself that is not doxxing and becomes of public domain so ANYONE can get it. No doxx happen there it was your reckless behavior that got you there in the first place.

Doesn't matter how easy it was.

Had she not linked her personal twitter account here I would agree that it was doxxing because someone took an outside source that was never referred here on Voat to spread it here on Voat. Since she made the link herself then that is just repeating what she did, hence it is not doxxing. The user should have placed a request to remove that information but not leave aside the fact that she posted the link herself as I showed on the post.

In this case, the threat of violence is quite explicit.

Here is what he stated - "pangaea aged maggotbait88 want to get some kids?" Though he is pinging alleged pedophiles what in here shows that is explicit violence? It could very well be other users with the same phrase and still not be explicit. And also it wouldn't incite harm to the kids because he is not doxxing the kids.

It is fucked up what he does. Yes I agree with you, but you can't fucking throw someone in jail for ambiguous commentary addressing alleged pedophiles. I also don't like aged either but imagine me going to the FBI and saying to them "aged is an alleged pedophile because he does a lot of loli posts on an anon forum and that offends me. So you need to do something about it" Do you see how stupid does that sound?

Do you understand that it can't hold on court?

Your defense of this is indefensible. You are complicit now.

I am not defending them I am defending Voat. Stating that there was doxxing on Voat hurts Voat. There was not doxx. There was harassment. And there is still harassment going on. You are right. And we need a due process to handle with this shit in order to stop it and prevent it. But we can't compromise the site's main core value that is Free Speech.

And again with your stupid analogy "You are racist because you don't believe in systemic racism".

They are vermin and scum. And, now, so are you.

And the stupidity continues... (G.G) Let's do one thing, please go ahead and report User zyklon B to the Authorities with all that you have from Voat. Go ahead and place the report and then tell me what comes out of it?

Please do it and take a screencap of the report also without doxxing yourself of course and then please make a post with an update to let us know what happened in the end.

I will be more than happy to wait for your update.

Why don't you go ahead and consult with a criminal lawyer while you are at it. Let me know what happens also. Because if you don't do that, according to your stupid logic, that also makes you an accomplice and hence that also makes you a vermin and scum.

Let's see if you are not full of shit.

EDIT format some spelling and adding tag on @kevdude.