Did you invent this bullshit before or after you threatened to share an innocent child's information with pedophiles?
I didn't invent shit! I caught you, and YOU know it! I know you're a fraud so you use that comment against me to try and deflect off your weasely fuckery.
I have already addressed the comment I made and why I made it before with you
In chat you indicated you could understand how a person could snap after having death threats against my kids for WEEKS from that punk! Now all of a sudden when I mention our bullshit again, you suddenly forget that? Real classy Kev!
I also wrote "all is satire" so it's all a big fucking joke bro! That seems to work for ZB to get a pass from you, but once again kev's double standards for ZB and SBBH are on display again!
I prefer not engaging u/theoldones on this because he has a limited view on the matter. He conveniently ignores the fact that u/srayzie doxxed herself and then omitted that due to convenience to accuse u/trigglypuff of doxxing her. Which got u/trigglypuff unjustly banned.
When I showed proof that it was a unjust ban then in that regard the ban was reversed and she then decided to "leave" the site because of the reversal of the ban.
When u/theoldones thinks he is in the right side of the argument he will basically go ahead and ignore facts to conveniently fit his narrative. For example he will defend and justify the doxx on u/GothamGirl with the argument "they did it first" instead of taking an objective position and state both behaviors are disgusting.
He even witnessed doxxing done by the party that he joined and never said anything about it. Why? Because again, he needs the argument to be on his side. This is why I prefer to ignore his denunciations in many cases. For example: https://voat.co/v/ProtectVoat/3311363/19528911/10#19528911 you will see on his reply to that comment he states "I don't care what you saw nigger"
If you check his history you will see that he had run a "test bot" - (according to him) to detect bots on Voat that were harassing him and brigading him. So he pinged constantly multiple users asking them "not to downvote if you are not a bot", forgetting completely that the users annoyed by his questionable campaigned will automatically downvote anything he pinged them on. So he considered that a positive on his test.
He attacked another user, u/Obrez, regarding that and after him and I interacted I started to see an objective and reasonable character reacting to u/theoldones harassment. Reason why I made a post on PV about that: https://voat.co/v/ProtectVoat/3043374
When u/MadWorld made a post with verifiable evidence that suspicious links were being shared on Voat and u/theoldones name showed up he completely freaked out and started harassing u/MadWorld, even after my interactions with him I showed him that he did posted suspicious links but did it without knowing so that he didn't have intent in doing so. But that was quite an episode.
u/theoldones has applied power moderation also and complained of it being applied to him. u/thebuddah can attest for that if you ask him because u/theoldones started making posts about u/thebuddah questioning his hypocrisy.
The only campaign I support of his, is his constant hunt for pedophiles and honestly I think he should stick with that instead of playing a moral high ground person of reference because he ignored the defense that v/ProtectVoat gave to u/srayzie (after all he came late to the issue) and then united with u/Crensch on his campaign to attack v/ProtectVoat because we didn't supported his power moderation and then his alleged coordinated attempts with the users recently that got banned from which one of them u/hollacost was an alt of u/shizy (u/shizie).
At this moment the only party that has defended users from being doxxed has been v/ProtectVoat. Which is one of the reasons why I stick with it and returned to being a mod/owner of it.
@virge and you were correct in that @theoldones wasn't worth engaging with. It was interesting to note that, despite a great number of opportunities to give a straight answer @theoldones refused to be honest, refused to make cohesive arguments and continued to evade reasonable questions.
I think there has been a concerted effort by many to confuse the issue of what actually constitutes "doxx" as there is no clear definition, though intent seems to play a large role in the eyes of the law. Everyone is supposed to automatically hop on board with "doxx is bad" which leaves the matter of Wikileaks diametrically opposed to anyone who subscribes to a blanket ban against doxx.
If I write a news article and submit it, using public information from the court, that is not doxx. We should be allowed to do that to any public figure. @srazyie made herself a public figure and I did not doxx any private information and it had no use as any form of "harassment". There is literally no harm in posting someone's criminal history because the harm was already caused by the criminal and that is why it is public.
It was interesting to note that, despite a great number of opportunities to give a straight answer @theoldones refused to be honest, refused to make cohesive arguments and continued to evade reasonable questions.
Only interesting if you haven't observed him long enough to know that's the account's modus operandi.
I think there has been a concerted effort by many to confuse the issue of what actually constitutes "doxx"
Remove the words doxx and replace with just about any other word you can think of and you're starting to see the bigger picture.
Posted automatically (#62359) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here. (@thewebofslime: Click here to suppress your crosslink notifications from @Crensch)
He's just after power, he leads a sad and useless life being obese in his parent's basement burning through their savings and forcing them to work into old age to support his NEET ass.
He uses his "anti-pedo" crusade to Target his critics and rarely makes any effort of his own to discover pedos, the whole thing with aged was about the crusade, not truth or protecting children, he just wants into people's inner circles so he can have more influence as a power user.
Zero harm has come from @srazyie being doxxed. Nobody has called her kids school. Nobody has gone to her location. Nobody has done anything accept laugh at what a degenerate she is. There is literally nothing evil about publicly available information. it is what people do with it. You argument is invalid and no one should bother listening to you.
Your writing doesn't make any sense. If I don't have a criminal history, it is going to be hard for you to share the public records about it. Now, if I posted @srazyie's sealed juvie records, it would be a different story.
I merely explained the difference between what can or cannot be prosecuted and, therefore, what has value to an investigator. Your intellectual dishonesty is noted... again.
I agree that personal information should not be posted by third parties without the authorization of the owner. However she engaged in behaving in the same way u/zyklon_b did with her and I have a much bigger problem with her on that because she lower herself to his level.
So the difference between you and I, is that I do not justify a wrong with another wrong. I take them in the same way. Both behaviors were despicable from both parties involved there and the only party that defended users from doxxing attemps was v/ProtectVoat.
Your "righteous" indignation will not control the discussion and you know perfectly well that you won't win a debate against me if you tried specially on this subject. Why? Because your vision is limited.
zyklon_b and gothamgirl started up a doxxing campaign in front of me and tried to get away with it. there's past backstory before that point? i don't give a fuck.
I believe u/GothamGirl can attest that I have criticised her for supporting u/zyklon_b and that I don't like her. However that doesn't affect me defending a user when the user is being doxxed. So you can keep turning things the way you like to. If you want I can dig up the comment I made about me not liking her and about the fact of me stating that despite that I would defend her against the doxx he was suffering from the other parties just as I did with u/srayzie.
I don't apply convenience in my actions. Don't compare me to you.
Bitch, if she blabs about "my son this or that" then someone she picks a fight with says an empty threat abt her kids, it is not only her fault but she knows it and didn't even care except when she could brandish it for sympathy and get people banned
That literally happened with u/hojuruku one of the best anti-Pedo activists who's been on InfoWhores etc
There's something called natalist policy where you make women birth enough in time to sustain the transfer payments for social programs.
I could say I would personally impregnate every 13yo around and it still wouldn't make me a pedo if she's bled. Because that's the biological definition of female adulthood and your Jew laws and psychology can suck my balls.
That's how we get Good Goy dipshits like @darkknight111 claiming brain development stops at 25 and that's the real age of consent, as if any species is able to gestate before it's developed enough to care for offspring, LMFAO
There is definitely a larger ethical picture that is easy to lose sight of and why I worried when a lot of random pedos were being wrapped up in Pizzagate because the real problem is the organized crime surrounding trafficking.
There is an aspect of human nature that Pizzagate will not be able to deal with.
Since this corruption ties to a lot of other corruption, Pizzagate is a good target for people interested in "truth movements" and dealing with high level corruption.
In Utah, the age of consent is low. Across the world, the age of consent is low. It is a weird thing that exists because legal acts are illegal when recorded in the eyes of the world's law because of the US. The same thing happened with drugs. US say drugs bad, everyone follows. Black markets are successfully controlled and prices of black market goods, including people, goes up.
In fact, the great hypocrisy exists within the US that people who HAVE child porn get longer sentences than those who are actually producing it. However, if viewing the material was legal, anyone, in this day and age, can use facial recognition to find the pedophiles. Censorship, in this case, protects pedophiles.
So, there are some weird paradoxes surrounding the issue but I have never claimed that I am trying to solve the problem of people attracted to children. I am trying to solve the problem of the corruption surrounding it so that it isn't an industry for corrupt politicians. It is an easy problem to solve. Just raise awareness. Constantly.
I don't really have an answer for the problem that exists within human nature... the will to harm others. And, let's face it, there are many types of pedophiles. A lot of them are incels who love children and would literally never hurt them. They will pleasure themselves to the images of children, but they would never go near one to do them harm because they actually love them. On the other end of the spectrum, there are pedovores. Again, most of them would never actually hurt a child, they just stick to the thought of it. I'm not condoning it, but I am not into the existence of thought police, either.
Point being, there are rabbit warrens of convoluted issues when you start going down the trail of trying to bring the beat down to every potential pedophile. At a certain point, there are a lot of issues that are not clear cut and is easy to rabble rouse with but is, ultimately, a futile exercise.
To simplify things, I look at the money trail and I consider someone to be prosecutable pedophile if they are taking pictures or are in pictures with naked children. I don't really see it as art, I see it as grooming and people who take a bunch of pictures of a bunch of naked children are waiting for the ones who exhibit personality traits/ social situations that show they can be molested without consequence.
As to your point about 13 year olds, the truth is that this has always been going on and the government is designed to support this behavior. If you import a dozen Romanian brides to the UAE, marry them, then bring them to the US, you are legally allowed to have sex with these girls without legal consequence. In fact, if you were clever enough, they can be your money stream. Buy a cheap apartment complex and a corner store and pump children into your fundamentalist Mormon girls/Muslim girls/whatever, where the state will pay them cash aid and EBT, where you collect the rent and sell them food from your corner store. Now, you are a millionaire with a hundred children and it was sponsored by tax payer dollars. This is legal. Many people do it. This is a family model that is tried and true in many places but the US is the only place that pays people to do it.
That is why the corruption surrounding it is the problem that we can realistically solve.
Posted automatically (#52261) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here. (@thewebofslime: Click here to suppress your crosslink notifications from @Shizie)
Pedophilia is a paraphelia like foot fetishism: it's a mental thing affecting some small percentage of a given population and LE can use dragnets etc
In Latin America according to the leading NGO, 1/4 of all marriages would be considered "child brides.". Relatedly they have strong patriarchy (el machismo), high birth rates, and MORE insane cases like pregnant 8 year olds.
Pizzagate is abt pedophilia in politics and industry (power centers)
Politics and industry since 1970 are united in and succeeding in REPLACING WHITE PEOPLE with the higher birth rate browns
Thus they use a two-pronged simultaneous approach to lower white birth rates by:
brainwashing young girls into LGBT and promiscuity to assure above all STERILE SEX
DISCREDITING the patriarchies associated with ill-reputed browns, ie young brides because girls aren't massively subsidies by the state
Thus you get kikeshills like Tommy Robinstein deflecting attention from the Jew media degeneracy that led girls to prostitute themselves to "groomers" and onto a pointless abstraction like "Islam" (thereby also obscuring the racial question).
Pedophelia is a slippery thing to pin down, because the language used is all over the place, this is how it's going to be pushed with linguistic tools and rhetoric because the antipedo crowd is largely composed of perpetually mad and aggressive/emotional people, who are absolutely willing to conflate all of the possible definitions; in reality that action is self defeating.
So when you say pedophile what specifically do you mean? The actual definition, the literal meaning or the catch-all that people use as a blunt instrument? it gets more confusing when you bring on existing research by the foremost experts in the field because if you've spent any time on 4chan and the other backwaters of the internet you'll see that their research is clearly rife with incomplete data sets likely for self protection.
I didn't say she didn't defend u/zyklon_b. I criticised her for that and she knows it.
But you are ignoring the fact that the party you are so called "defending" engaged on the same behavior.
So again, I am not interested in engaging you on your position about this subject because your view is so limited. You are not relevant to the discussion.
This will be my last reply to you on this subject.
What harm did I intend? You are making up fiction. You are a liar.
I've already been doxxed and I'm not a career criminal, like @srazyie. I didn't say a word. Another false claim by you. Discredit yourself repeatedly. Your continued defense of @srayzie proves you are a shill.
Posted automatically (#62365) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here. (@thewebofslime: Click here to suppress your crosslink notifications from @Crensch)
Absolutely, she runs Q and pizzagate, everyone should be aware, they are taking the word, and following an ex convict. That criminal was intentionally running pizzagaters, and Q followers off of here with her gang of thugs. These people feel they own this place. What goes around comes back around, and it's wonderful to see her get a taste of her own medicine. Don't let that whining @theoldones get to you. He is probably just an alt of theirs. He is completely biased.
They looked up court records on me. I sued an ex, and they shared that information here. Through that court case they obtained my bank statements and went through those too.
everyone should be aware, they are taking the word, and following an ex convict.
So they should just take your word for everything instead? A woman who married a FELON who served hard prison time for attempted murder? That's a "convict" right there, not a woman who got a DUI 10 years ago! But if that's how you want to define "convict", I guess you're a convict too!
It is a fact @srayzie did time. I assume you know that and that you are @srayzie.
Remember, just before you deleted, you falsely accused @kevdude of making an anonymous post and it was obvious you were wrong? You are a known liar.
Nobody should take your word for anything. In fact, I am not even asking anyone to take my word that @srayzie is a criminal. You can ask the state of California.
Posted automatically (#62367) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here. (@thewebofslime: Click here to suppress your crosslink notifications from @Crensch)
It is a fact @srayzie did time. I assume you know that and that you are @srayzie.
Hahahah, ok another nutter saying I'm Srayzie too.
Remember, just before you deleted, you falsely accused @kevdude of making an anonymous post and it was obvious you were wrong? You are a known liar.
Bullshit! I wasn't wrong! I caught him pulling some fuckery in anon and called him out. I would think that someone who pretends to want the truth would help perpetuate lies for kevdude. Suspicious....
Nope not me, never served any time in a prison. Beatle was always upfront about his actions, she hide it ,and pretended to be better then everyone else, while degrading and slandering others that didn't play along with her larps.
and pretended to be better then everyone else, while degrading and slandering others that didn't play along with her larps
No, that's your job GothamGirl! You enable and make excuses for your price of shit husband! You act like you are better than everyone and love to put on airs acting like you're wealthy. You pretend that your husband is some prize you won! How fun it must be to be living with an addict and alcoholic who has sexual fantasizes about children! But keep telling everyone how you're a "winner"! 😂
Posted automatically (#52367) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here. (@zyklown_b: Click here to suppress your crosslink notifications from @forget-me-not)
My kids are not niggers, never stole anything from anywhere, and I don't even know Dial. You didn't dump me, i left you in another state.
Now run along to the obeast bitch in Commiefornia, that makes Srayzie look tiny,
With that cleft palate, who you said is a nasty Dyke and as large as a bus. Who can't afford to stop mooching off her parents... You both sound like winners....
😂🤣sticking up for the guy who threatened your kids that you cried and moaned about for a month, this is golden!
How is what I said sticking up for him? As much kdna piece of shit he is, he's still better off without you cause you're an even bigger piece of shit! 🤣
naw she made me let her use my acct to post that shit. she i like conman and criminal type. she was raised by heroin junkies and her kids are all on welfare due to thats how they was raised.
Anyone can see you are not being truthful. You got left because you threaten peoples kids, and I dont go for that shit even if I dislike them, and you have warrants for your arrests in Logan and Johnson county Arkansas. I obey laws, and you ain't my type. You played a good game on me... But you are now blocked and forgotten.
When my site was attacked and I tracked down all the information I could find to solve the problem, I asked Voat if I should share the doxx of those who attacked the site. Literally no one answered the question. Instead, I was mostly attacked, but it was a genuine inquiry. I erred on the side of caution, but, recently, when @kevdude was threatened with a frivolous lawsuit, I decided that those responsible should get a taste of their own medicine. Especially, since doxxing was not yet a bannable offense.
Additionally, I question why doxxing finally became bannable when @srayzie had her criminal history posted, and not before that. It seems like she required special protection and everyone else was fair game. But, in order to maintain a sense of fairness, the rule was applied more widely.
Of course, I have been painted by the bad guy but only by those who refuse to admit @srayzie was doing the same thing, only worse. Whatever anyone thinks of @gothamgirl, all of the accusations against her are conjecture and @srazyie is factually everything everyone accused @gothamgirl of being. Factually. In that there is no question. DUI, drug charges, trespassing, failure to appear, failure to pay and on and on.
With all the moralizing that has gone on, I find it truly distasteful that anyone should expect @srazyie to be an authority on anything. She is the exact opposite type of person who should be involved in any conservative movement. If you are going to moralize at me, then you should be prepared to aim that in the proper direction because I would never stoop to what my detractors have stooped to and supported.
Posted automatically (#62370) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here. (@thewebofslime: Click here to suppress your crosslink notifications from @Crensch)
Doxxing has been a bannable offense for years, as an aside, but:
I would never stoop to what my detractors have stooped to and supported
You mean, like... Doxxing?
Just so we're on the same page, I'm not on anybody's side about this. I find the entire episode distasteful, and the use of doxxing to fuck with somebody in the real is despicable, unethical, and cowardly. Both sides who engaged in this sort of behaviour should be banned and publicly shamed.
I can't believe some stupid shit like this would implode the user base either, like fuck people c'mon. Whatever happened to adults acting like it?
I'm a bit out of the loop, did that user dox her? My understanding was that she shared her twitter or some other social media and it had connections to her personal name or some shit like that.
This isn't me trying to be snarky or smug I generally haven't been able to get a straight answer on whether she gave out her personal information online(doxed herself) or someone else used some underhanded tactic, or security loophole/weakness to find her real name and put her dox out.
Please set me straight but my impression was that she doxxed herself unwittingly and then trolls went after her, she fed them until they got real big and whether legitimately or not she feared for her safety and "dipped out"* of the community(I imagine a BO had an alt so I'd put an asterisk next to the idea of her being gone) this OP then having her personal information decided to look up her criminal history and shared that on voat as retribution of some sort of ill will or slight and has been getting shit because of it or because it showed she was a seedy character.
Would you not call posing as a friend, being given the usernames in confidence, then breaking said confidence and using that to harass and threaten an "underhanded tactic"?
All info is public, and the internet doesn't forget. Doxxing is the not the same as looking up county records. Doxxing is finding those records, putting them together and disseminating them, usually for nefarious means.
I don't care about any of the underlying issues, TBH, if pretty much everybody involved died tomorrow, then I'd just figure some dirt on the Clintons got out. I'm only here to discuss the issue of doxxing, and to make sure we clarify what doxxing is.
When you gather and publish information on a person, for any means, although most are not good for the doxee, you are guilty of doxxing. When you use it to harass and threaten, or use it to enable others to harass and threaten because you're too chicken shit to do it yourself, then you're just adding coward to your repertoire.
You say "being given the usernames in confidence" but the last time I tried to figure all this shit out I saw posts going back many months which detail zyklon and his buddies having her dox, posting her pics and shit way back when and she admitted to it, my understanding from a quick google search is that she had been using the same username on all of her social media and she was sharing photos and identifying information on these accounts, I can only muster up so much pity for such foolishness. Even admin seems to have agreed that the supposed doxer triglypuff or whatever was banned on false pretenses.
I'm sort of putting you on the spot here, I get not using names if you don't want to fan the drama flames, but names in direct association with accused actions are really what I'm missing here.
Like I said above I'm seriously out of the loop here and everytime I try to figure this shit out I'm met with contradicting information about who did what and why and the old screen-caps I had been finding on searches are mostly unreadable after people started deleting accounts.
I'll list what I don't know in the shape of how I'm guessing things went down and see if you can correct me.
Someone doxxed Srayzie, I've heard a number of people accused of this, I don't know who actually did it or honestly if it wasn't her own negligence that led to her self doxing.
Some folks began to spread the dox because of some reason, I don't know the reason, simple trolling, directed trolling for disliking her sub or moderation style, simply because she took bait foolishly, I don't know, who did it? Zyklon b and some of his buddies? I think.
Crensch has been pursuing multiple vendettas that largely seem to be overkill about a matter of opinion on the distinction of srayzie's doxing, banning people from his subs for not agreeing with him and instead siding with the admin's decision. | I'm not saying I know this definitively it seems to be what I'm seeing though.
Srayzie is probably running alts along with her side of things to harass users like kevdude for some reason, threatening to dox him.
Hadn't presumed this to be remotely true but I've seen it enough so it bears mentioning, something about nudes and affairs involving other users, specifically kevdude getting srayzie's boob pics and sharing them?
The Crenshch-Srayzie camp is being accused of doxing and/or harassment that predates Srayzie leaving, I'm unsure if this predates her dox getting out, the case I saw mentioned some time ago was that gothamgirl was accused of doxing her and so in retaliation they used an alt to dox gothamgirl
This seems one sided but I am well aware that the other side of things seem to be a loose assortment of regular users and trolls who have their own axes to grind with GA, Crensh or Srayzie or in some cases I assume are just trolling for fun and that the trolls and some regular users seem to have conglomerated a unified front at one time or another to push something about "1990" which I'm assuming is a reference to a glibert godfried bit about "bob sagget raping and murdering a girl in 1990" another troll effort, I assume.
I'm guessing if I went looking for the dox (I've only seen profile pictures) I could find the criminal record in question so I don't expect you to inform me of it, I could only see that her criminal record would matter if she were at fault for basically all of this drama and her criminal record entailed a whole bunch of sketchy shit like fraud, a bunch of meth or hard drug charges would make sense of the drama though.
If you presume I'm taking a side with this personal drama at hand, know I'm not. I am not well informed enough to have a valid opinion at the moment.
A final aside on the definitions of doxing, I'm unaware of a great formal authority on the matter but I do have personal account of similar tribulations:
I was once a clan leader for an online gaming clan and a female member was unduly harassed by another clan leader after she took his spot on a competitive team and began hobknobing with the leadership. Like most girls she enjoyed the attention a bit too much and made the mistake of sharing a pic of herself on the forums or as her user profile on the forums, which she also shared on facebook or myspace, one reverse image search later and he had her full dox, it wasn't a major secret, he never shared this full dox, she actually gave us her full name and added us on social media before hand but I don't think he saw the chats, he used her social media to backtrack to a picture of her home, got the address and posted satellite or helicopter photos of her home on our forums with a vaguely intimidating message, that faggot was maybe 16 and a few hundred miles away in another country, everybody knew he wasn't gonna do shit but still he crossed a line and we had to punish him, but first came distinguishing "was this doxing?" and we found it was tangential to doxing but more like E-stalking as he never used anything other than information she had been carelessly sharing and did constitute undue harassment, we were prepared to ban him, but it must be understood we were all 15 and 16 at the time so this was seen as more of the fault of his social awkwardness, seeing as no harm came of it, we convinced him he was wrong and the punishment we let her choose was to fight a 1v1 on record and if she won he had to apologize and admit she belonged on the comp team, he got taken to the cleaners and screamed like a man on the edge the whole match, had to apologize and the video was shared on the clan forum, his actions weren't publicly disclosed because basically nobody in our ~300 man clan saw the post before we caught it and he took a demotion in the clan. Was this absolute justice? probably no; but did she fail to protect herself online? the first rule we were all taught about the internet? Absolutely yes, it was even in our ToS and clan rules. The next part has little bearing but they actually became good friends for a while, she even helped him out after he had a rough break up.
In my position all of the hearsay I have heard surrounding the srayzie thing indicates it could have been doxing, it could have been undue harassment, it could have been e-stalking, or it could have been her own personal failure which resulted in trolling, that she encouraged by feeding it and it's entirely possible that some ammount of trolling or harasment was deserved, that said I specifically believe anybody taking precautions to protect their identity online, no matter how cunty, awful, politically opposed, or what have you does not ever deserve to be doxxed I can't think of a scenario where I find it acceptable to set out with the intention to dox someone that doesn't want to be doxxed, maybe if they have doxxed other people or if they are using litigation to dox people they should have some of their own poison but I wouldn't even want to see antifa people doxxed online, it sets an awful precedent. that said I don't think E-stalking is a fair tactic either, you should be arguing ideals, if you can't fight and win on the basis of ideology, concept, philosophy, and rhetoric, that said I believe if other users are going to play dirty you have every right to retaliate using their tactics against them, that isn't hypocrisy, it's counter punching, somebody hits you, you hit them back but if you tarted it you probably deserved to be hit.
I get your questions, but the sad reality is that with the (multiple) personalities involved nobody will ever know the full truth. The shit's been stirred by too many people, there've been probably quite literally 500 posts about this, and I am not nearly autistic enough to sort through it all.
Again, I don't really care about their issues anyway. I originally just replied because I didn't like the hypocrisy presented, but now I'm staying to make sure we can come to a consensus on what doxxing is because no matter how you define it, all parties involved are guilty to some extent.
The counter punch that should have been thrown was the Admin stepping in, cause that's what they're there for, and slamming the gate shut on this shit as soon as he found out about it.
Which he did. Kind of. Then reversed it. Regardless. My point is that you never let idiots drag you down to their level. They'll always beat you with experience.
There's recourses that don't involve "not threats! Just putting your info out there for any random Joe to find, lala" which are much more long lasting, especially when they can be backed up by the police state we pay so diligently for.
I'd say your summary of events is fairly accurate, though it is missing the part where @srayzie was doxxing other users and they were all working together to make multiple false accusations against /v/Pizzagate users which is where I got dragged in when they started calling me a shill and labeled my site a security risk even though Voat does way more tracking than my site.... which is completely bare bones.
Doxxing is slang for nothing in the legal world. There is no law against sharing public information about anyone. Stalking is a crime and @srayzie made multiple accounts to repeatedly share personal information over the course of a year, meeting the legal requirements of stalking and for a civil harassment restraining order when taking into consideration the threats against children.
The whole thing is a "vicious cycle" where the downvote brigade bullies refuse to admit they were wrong and also choose to double down on their dishonesty. They call out people for the behavior that they, themselves, are doing, which generated a great deal of ill will towards them. A lot of what they do is destructive, unproductive and illegal and they are getting paid to do it or they are getting naked pictures from @srayzie in order to be convinced to do it.
@crensch referred to the 45 year old, overweight convict with tattoos of being a "smokeshow." So, a lot of the people who came to the defense of @srazyie were merely whiteknights who were sorely misguided because they were emotionally compromised to the point that they were allowing a pass for behavior they were attacking other people over. It defies reason that people who continue to defend @srazyie, despite her doing exactly the behavior they are supposedly outraged over, turn a blind eye and maintain a hard double standard.
There was a lot more going on in the background, but you can see that now, after @srayzie was doxxed, that anyone who sheds light on proof that shows the extent of what was going on in the background will be banned on Voat.
But, there is always Dissenter, which can be used as a meta layer on top of Voat pages.
There are a lot of definitions of what people think is "doxxing" but most are not actually doxxing and I certainly am not doxxing for the specific intent of harassing users. If the state of California considers it public information, then so do I. I was highlighting that a criminal was trying to moralize at a large group of people when she, herself, is a complete lowlife who thought doxxing was fine.
And, in truth, I've doxxed plenty of people on this site and, even now, nobody cares about pedophiles being doxxed... like Kevin Reynolds of East Hampton Babysitters. So, there is a double standard and there is no legal line.
If someone is doxxed, most people do nothing.
However, when @gothamgirl was doxxed, it was specifically to harass and allow people to call her kids school or something and, in the case of @kevdude, he was harassed with a lawsuit, specifically.
So, let me ask you... what is your understanding of what doxxing really is? A face picture? A name? An email address? Publicly available information? Private information? There is a spectrum of opinions on this.
But, to find all "doxxing" to be "disgusting behavior" you would havce to find Wikileaks to be terrible, as well. I'm sure you have a line, somewhere.
If you gather and publish information on a specific person, whether you are responding to being doxxed, whether you're threatening/harassing them yourself or simply enabling others to do it, you are doxxing. That's what it is, gathering and publishing information to identify a particular individual, generally to further ones own motives and not for a good cause.
All doxxing is disgusting and unethical behavior, that's all there is to that.
WikiLeaks does not, generally, point to John Doe down the street and say "He's a pedo, get em!". They usually stick to bigger things and do not make individuals who have a slight expectation of privacy a focus. Public officials, celebrities, etc, have a diminished right to privacy but not nonexistent. They're just under more scrutiny and while 'Did you know Harrison Ford has a house in TN?' wouldn't be doxxing because he is in the public domain, if you listed mine it would be because I, not being so, would have a higher expectation along with the hopefully added respect of any adult who came across it to ignore it.
Unfortunately, we do not live in a world of morals.
I did not gather information about one specific person. I gathered information about a group of people who were harassing me and spreading lies. I did not post the information but I did ask Voat first about it and nobody bothered to respond. I posted one piece of information that is provided by the government that anyone can look up.
When I was doxxed, someone thought it was great to make a bunch of dating profiles for me all over the country. Fortunately, there aren't any recent pictures of me online that would make sense in an online dating profile, so the ruse was somewhat obvious.
I'm not sure if you are suggesting what I did was illegal doxxing, but it does not qualify as restricted information. The information I shared is public information and not restricted or private in any way. It is possible to make it private by having the records sealed, but that is not something @srayzie was willing to do because... lazy.
There is no federal law that criminalizes all of the conduct that may be called doxing, such as publishing someone’s contact information. However, there is a federal law against stalking that @srayzie is guilty of. 18 U.S. Code § 2261A.
I have to strongly disagree that all doxxing is wrong. In fact, I don't think there is a problem with doxxing, in general. Everything is already on the Internet and if it moves from one place to another there is no crime and there is no ethical conundrum. It is, indeed, what people do with the information that the law provides for.
(2) with the intent to kill, injure, harass, intimidate, or place under surveillance with intent to kill, injure, harass, or intimidate another person, uses the mail, any interactive computer service or electronic communication service or electronic communication system of interstate commerce, or any other facility of interstate or foreign commerce to engage in a course of conduct that—
(A) places that person in reasonable fear of the death of or serious bodily injury to a person …; or
(B) causes, attempts to cause, or would be reasonably expected to cause substantial emotional distress to a person …
shall be punished as provided in section 2261(b) of this title.”
I wanted to state my disagreement with a lot of what you said, but I also want to clarify to others, because of your wording, what @srazyie has done is illegal. What I have done is not. Being guilty of a crime is not a legal cause for "emotional distress."
So, in the absence of any action being taken for an actual legal problem that @srayzie was creating... where Voat was allowing a crime to repeatedly take place... the obvious choice was to expose a criminal for what she is. And, like magic, the problem solved itself.
But, again, I don't have a problem with posting criminal histories on state websites. I think it is very, very clear, in the eyes of the law and anyone with a reasoned approach that information posted by the government is perfectly within everyone's rights to share.
No one could do any decent reporting if they were limited to your standards. Not everyone is a politician and nobody should b e a protected class. The intelligence community has all your doxx, you should have theirs. It's that simple.
@srayzie played a stupid game and won a stupid prize.
Posted automatically (#62364) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here. (@thewebofslime: Click here to suppress your crosslink notifications from @Crensch)
I did not gather information on one specific individual...
I did not post any information...
I posted one piece of information...
Bro, that's three contradictions in your first like 3 sentences.
Yeah, we're all aware this information can be found with a simple court search. I see you're trying to quote some law like a lawyer, nobody said you did anything illegal.
I said it was amoral, unethical, and cowardly.
You set out specifically to identify and gather information on individuals you somehow believed were harassing you and then set about using said information in nefarious ways, or provided that information to other players whom you knew would engage in inappropriate conduct.
That is doxxing. It's that simple. Quit twisting my words. We've gone over this several times. Reporters already don't identify anybody beyond name, they most assuredly don't post their address and say "Hey. We think this guy might be guilty of something but we don't really have any proof, but hey. Don't do anything. *Wink.
And, really, that's the crux of the issue is the threats. If people could act like adults, this wouldn't be as much of an issue. You learn something about a neighbour, and you go 'oh' and file it away for your dealings later. Sure, you spread it around so other people know what's up. But you don't threaten their children, or post pictures of their house around town, that's fucking low.
These people were factually harassing myself and others. You are suggesting that I don't defend myself, which is terrible advice.
It is not amoral to look up a criminal record, nor is it unethical. Megan's Law website exists for a reason. It isn't cowardly, as it levels the playing field of someone who was already engaged in doxxing. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
Reporters already don't identify anybody beyond name
False.
I didn't post anyone's address... also a false accusation. Just regroup your thoughts... don't be dishonest.
"Hey. We think this guy might be guilty of something
The person in question is literally, factually guilty of many things. We have the court records to prove it.
"doxxing" is a neologism. It isn't illegal. It is what people do with the information... just like the Megan's Law website.
But you don't threaten their children, or post pictures of their house around town, that's fucking low.
I did no such thing. Knock it off. I posted information from a state/website and I made no threats.
Shizie ago
I didn't invent shit! I caught you, and YOU know it! I know you're a fraud so you use that comment against me to try and deflect off your weasely fuckery.
I have already addressed the comment I made and why I made it before with you
https://voat.co/v/ProtectVoat/3299539/19407100
In chat you indicated you could understand how a person could snap after having death threats against my kids for WEEKS from that punk! Now all of a sudden when I mention our bullshit again, you suddenly forget that? Real classy Kev!
I also wrote "all is satire" so it's all a big fucking joke bro! That seems to work for ZB to get a pass from you, but once again kev's double standards for ZB and SBBH are on display again!
thewebofslime ago
It was @Rotteaux, dummy. It was not @kevdude.
Gothamgirl ago
It wasn't me that made death threats soooo....
thewebofslime ago
Good move. I recommend "WebSiteSniffer"?
sguevar ago
I prefer not engaging u/theoldones on this because he has a limited view on the matter. He conveniently ignores the fact that u/srayzie doxxed herself and then omitted that due to convenience to accuse u/trigglypuff of doxxing her. Which got u/trigglypuff unjustly banned.
When I showed proof that it was a unjust ban then in that regard the ban was reversed and she then decided to "leave" the site because of the reversal of the ban.
When u/theoldones thinks he is in the right side of the argument he will basically go ahead and ignore facts to conveniently fit his narrative. For example he will defend and justify the doxx on u/GothamGirl with the argument "they did it first" instead of taking an objective position and state both behaviors are disgusting.
He even witnessed doxxing done by the party that he joined and never said anything about it. Why? Because again, he needs the argument to be on his side. This is why I prefer to ignore his denunciations in many cases. For example: https://voat.co/v/ProtectVoat/3311363/19528911/10#19528911 you will see on his reply to that comment he states "I don't care what you saw nigger"
If you check his history you will see that he had run a "test bot" - (according to him) to detect bots on Voat that were harassing him and brigading him. So he pinged constantly multiple users asking them "not to downvote if you are not a bot", forgetting completely that the users annoyed by his questionable campaigned will automatically downvote anything he pinged them on. So he considered that a positive on his test.
He attacked another user, u/Obrez, regarding that and after him and I interacted I started to see an objective and reasonable character reacting to u/theoldones harassment. Reason why I made a post on PV about that: https://voat.co/v/ProtectVoat/3043374
When u/MadWorld made a post with verifiable evidence that suspicious links were being shared on Voat and u/theoldones name showed up he completely freaked out and started harassing u/MadWorld, even after my interactions with him I showed him that he did posted suspicious links but did it without knowing so that he didn't have intent in doing so. But that was quite an episode.
u/theoldones has applied power moderation also and complained of it being applied to him. u/thebuddah can attest for that if you ask him because u/theoldones started making posts about u/thebuddah questioning his hypocrisy.
The only campaign I support of his, is his constant hunt for pedophiles and honestly I think he should stick with that instead of playing a moral high ground person of reference because he ignored the defense that v/ProtectVoat gave to u/srayzie (after all he came late to the issue) and then united with u/Crensch on his campaign to attack v/ProtectVoat because we didn't supported his power moderation and then his alleged coordinated attempts with the users recently that got banned from which one of them u/hollacost was an alt of u/shizy (u/shizie).
At this moment the only party that has defended users from being doxxed has been v/ProtectVoat. Which is one of the reasons why I stick with it and returned to being a mod/owner of it.
thewebofslime ago
@virge and you were correct in that @theoldones wasn't worth engaging with. It was interesting to note that, despite a great number of opportunities to give a straight answer @theoldones refused to be honest, refused to make cohesive arguments and continued to evade reasonable questions.
I think there has been a concerted effort by many to confuse the issue of what actually constitutes "doxx" as there is no clear definition, though intent seems to play a large role in the eyes of the law. Everyone is supposed to automatically hop on board with "doxx is bad" which leaves the matter of Wikileaks diametrically opposed to anyone who subscribes to a blanket ban against doxx.
If I write a news article and submit it, using public information from the court, that is not doxx. We should be allowed to do that to any public figure. @srazyie made herself a public figure and I did not doxx any private information and it had no use as any form of "harassment". There is literally no harm in posting someone's criminal history because the harm was already caused by the criminal and that is why it is public.
virge ago
Only interesting if you haven't observed him long enough to know that's the account's modus operandi.
Remove the words doxx and replace with just about any other word you can think of and you're starting to see the bigger picture.
@sguevar
theoldones ago
virge, i defend people who i see get harrassed. you're talking a lot of shit and what happened to srayzie was bad.
virge ago
Well thats complete horseshit, you've defended me a total of one time ever.
It's the Internet you goddamn Boomer, that isn't shit-talk that's just dialogue.
I'm still convinced most of the srayzie drama is made up by SBBH.
sguevar ago
Ok this cracked me up.
virge ago
Glad somebody laughed at me crying in real life.
Ha ha ha..
sguevar ago
Didn't know that you could come up with some fun statements. I have to admit it. Both made me laugh..
theoldones ago
m8, i dont see hide nor hair of you anywhere becuase im not there to see it. i dont know what the fuck you're on about.
srayzies kids got threatened, dont you fucking dare call that just "shit-talk". member when their picture got posted and some pedos likely got pinged?
thewebofslime ago
Do you have any proof that @srayzie was really the one behind the account?
SearchVoatBot ago
This comment was linked from this v/GreatAwakeningMeta comment by @Crensch.
Posted automatically (#62359) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here. (@thewebofslime: Click here to suppress your crosslink notifications from @Crensch)
Obrez ago
He's just after power, he leads a sad and useless life being obese in his parent's basement burning through their savings and forcing them to work into old age to support his NEET ass.
He uses his "anti-pedo" crusade to Target his critics and rarely makes any effort of his own to discover pedos, the whole thing with aged was about the crusade, not truth or protecting children, he just wants into people's inner circles so he can have more influence as a power user.
He is voat's version of gallowboob.
sguevar ago
Good to see you!
8thDeadlySin ago
He's not innocent. He's had a thread deleted for actually doxxing someone and here is a link to one example of an attempt to find personal information. And here is a link to one of his personal subverses where he is asking for others to help find doxing information. Apparently poor behavior is absolutely allowable when you're favored by the admin.
Gothamgirl ago
Thank you for sharing.
theoldones ago
she didnt post that shit so you could all ruin her life with it.
you all used information for evil intent.
thewebofslime ago
Zero harm has come from @srazyie being doxxed. Nobody has called her kids school. Nobody has gone to her location. Nobody has done anything accept laugh at what a degenerate she is. There is literally nothing evil about publicly available information. it is what people do with it. You argument is invalid and no one should bother listening to you.
theoldones ago
i dare you to link me the same things you linked regarding srayzie, but for YOU
if you think this is okay, you will prove it by letting me do the same to your public records.
thewebofslime ago
Your writing doesn't make any sense. If I don't have a criminal history, it is going to be hard for you to share the public records about it. Now, if I posted @srazyie's sealed juvie records, it would be a different story.
theoldones ago
FULL STOP new topic, why are you defending pedophiles?
https://voat.co/v/ProtectGoats/3319514/19596082/
thewebofslime ago
I merely explained the difference between what can or cannot be prosecuted and, therefore, what has value to an investigator. Your intellectual dishonesty is noted... again.
sguevar ago
I didn't ruin anyone's life.
I agree that personal information should not be posted by third parties without the authorization of the owner. However she engaged in behaving in the same way u/zyklon_b did with her and I have a much bigger problem with her on that because she lower herself to his level.
So the difference between you and I, is that I do not justify a wrong with another wrong. I take them in the same way. Both behaviors were despicable from both parties involved there and the only party that defended users from doxxing attemps was v/ProtectVoat.
Your "righteous" indignation will not control the discussion and you know perfectly well that you won't win a debate against me if you tried specially on this subject. Why? Because your vision is limited.
theoldones ago
zyklon_b and gothamgirl started up a doxxing campaign in front of me and tried to get away with it.
there's past backstory before that point, i don't give a fuck.
sguevar ago
I believe u/GothamGirl can attest that I have criticised her for supporting u/zyklon_b and that I don't like her. However that doesn't affect me defending a user when the user is being doxxed. So you can keep turning things the way you like to. If you want I can dig up the comment I made about me not liking her and about the fact of me stating that despite that I would defend her against the doxx he was suffering from the other parties just as I did with u/srayzie.
I don't apply convenience in my actions. Don't compare me to you.
theoldones ago
gothamgirl is guilty and i will treat her as such.
Gothamgirl ago
No I didn't say I never did anything ever, I asked you to provide proof I threatened her kids, and you can't because I didn't.
He was not threatening, he was joking, and it was stated to all of you in advance. Don't pretend like you didn't know...
Don-Keyhote ago
Bitch, if she blabs about "my son this or that" then someone she picks a fight with says an empty threat abt her kids, it is not only her fault but she knows it and didn't even care except when she could brandish it for sympathy and get people banned
That literally happened with u/hojuruku one of the best anti-Pedo activists who's been on InfoWhores etc
theoldones ago
hold up.
you're a pedo account.
we've busted you over v/antipedosquad
Don-Keyhote ago
Lmfao, your GAY LITTLE "SQUAD" is nothing compared to my nigga hojuruku, a political exile.
I own v/pizzagate. If you care so much abt fighting pedos you'd be there, faggot poseur
Gothamgirl ago
I liked hojuruku, he cared. These people suck.
theoldones ago
(sigh) you don't own pizzagate.
here's the evidence about you being a pedo.
Don-Keyhote ago
None of that is "evidence" you tard.
There's something called natalist policy where you make women birth enough in time to sustain the transfer payments for social programs.
I could say I would personally impregnate every 13yo around and it still wouldn't make me a pedo if she's bled. Because that's the biological definition of female adulthood and your Jew laws and psychology can suck my balls.
That's how we get Good Goy dipshits like @darkknight111 claiming brain development stops at 25 and that's the real age of consent, as if any species is able to gestate before it's developed enough to care for offspring, LMFAO
thewebofslime ago
There is definitely a larger ethical picture that is easy to lose sight of and why I worried when a lot of random pedos were being wrapped up in Pizzagate because the real problem is the organized crime surrounding trafficking.
There is an aspect of human nature that Pizzagate will not be able to deal with.
Since this corruption ties to a lot of other corruption, Pizzagate is a good target for people interested in "truth movements" and dealing with high level corruption.
In Utah, the age of consent is low. Across the world, the age of consent is low. It is a weird thing that exists because legal acts are illegal when recorded in the eyes of the world's law because of the US. The same thing happened with drugs. US say drugs bad, everyone follows. Black markets are successfully controlled and prices of black market goods, including people, goes up.
In fact, the great hypocrisy exists within the US that people who HAVE child porn get longer sentences than those who are actually producing it. However, if viewing the material was legal, anyone, in this day and age, can use facial recognition to find the pedophiles. Censorship, in this case, protects pedophiles.
So, there are some weird paradoxes surrounding the issue but I have never claimed that I am trying to solve the problem of people attracted to children. I am trying to solve the problem of the corruption surrounding it so that it isn't an industry for corrupt politicians. It is an easy problem to solve. Just raise awareness. Constantly.
I don't really have an answer for the problem that exists within human nature... the will to harm others. And, let's face it, there are many types of pedophiles. A lot of them are incels who love children and would literally never hurt them. They will pleasure themselves to the images of children, but they would never go near one to do them harm because they actually love them. On the other end of the spectrum, there are pedovores. Again, most of them would never actually hurt a child, they just stick to the thought of it. I'm not condoning it, but I am not into the existence of thought police, either.
Point being, there are rabbit warrens of convoluted issues when you start going down the trail of trying to bring the beat down to every potential pedophile. At a certain point, there are a lot of issues that are not clear cut and is easy to rabble rouse with but is, ultimately, a futile exercise.
To simplify things, I look at the money trail and I consider someone to be prosecutable pedophile if they are taking pictures or are in pictures with naked children. I don't really see it as art, I see it as grooming and people who take a bunch of pictures of a bunch of naked children are waiting for the ones who exhibit personality traits/ social situations that show they can be molested without consequence.
As to your point about 13 year olds, the truth is that this has always been going on and the government is designed to support this behavior. If you import a dozen Romanian brides to the UAE, marry them, then bring them to the US, you are legally allowed to have sex with these girls without legal consequence. In fact, if you were clever enough, they can be your money stream. Buy a cheap apartment complex and a corner store and pump children into your fundamentalist Mormon girls/Muslim girls/whatever, where the state will pay them cash aid and EBT, where you collect the rent and sell them food from your corner store. Now, you are a millionaire with a hundred children and it was sponsored by tax payer dollars. This is legal. Many people do it. This is a family model that is tried and true in many places but the US is the only place that pays people to do it.
That is why the corruption surrounding it is the problem that we can realistically solve.
SearchVoatBot ago
This comment was linked from this v/ProtectGoats comment by @Shizie.
Posted automatically (#52261) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here. (@thewebofslime: Click here to suppress your crosslink notifications from @Shizie)
Don-Keyhote ago
It's all pretty intuitive.
Pedophilia is a paraphelia like foot fetishism: it's a mental thing affecting some small percentage of a given population and LE can use dragnets etc
In Latin America according to the leading NGO, 1/4 of all marriages would be considered "child brides.". Relatedly they have strong patriarchy (el machismo), high birth rates, and MORE insane cases like pregnant 8 year olds.
Pizzagate is abt pedophilia in politics and industry (power centers)
Politics and industry since 1970 are united in and succeeding in REPLACING WHITE PEOPLE with the higher birth rate browns
Thus they use a two-pronged simultaneous approach to lower white birth rates by:
brainwashing young girls into LGBT and promiscuity to assure above all STERILE SEX
DISCREDITING the patriarchies associated with ill-reputed browns, ie young brides because girls aren't massively subsidies by the state
Thus you get kikeshills like Tommy Robinstein deflecting attention from the Jew media degeneracy that led girls to prostitute themselves to "groomers" and onto a pointless abstraction like "Islam" (thereby also obscuring the racial question).
Obrez ago
Pedophelia is a slippery thing to pin down, because the language used is all over the place, this is how it's going to be pushed with linguistic tools and rhetoric because the antipedo crowd is largely composed of perpetually mad and aggressive/emotional people, who are absolutely willing to conflate all of the possible definitions; in reality that action is self defeating.
So when you say pedophile what specifically do you mean? The actual definition, the literal meaning or the catch-all that people use as a blunt instrument? it gets more confusing when you bring on existing research by the foremost experts in the field because if you've spent any time on 4chan and the other backwaters of the internet you'll see that their research is clearly rife with incomplete data sets likely for self protection.
sguevar ago
I didn't say she didn't defend u/zyklon_b. I criticised her for that and she knows it.
But you are ignoring the fact that the party you are so called "defending" engaged on the same behavior.
So again, I am not interested in engaging you on your position about this subject because your view is so limited. You are not relevant to the discussion.
This will be my last reply to you on this subject.
Have a good day.
Gothamgirl ago
So you have not noticed in the last few weeks alone, they have done exactly the same to me?
theoldones ago
you deserve it for engaging with that practice to the point of driving not 1, but 2 users off the site.
you threatened kids
thewebofslime ago
By your logic, they also deserved it. So, you should have no room to complain.
Gothamgirl ago
Fuck your bs opinions...
theoldones ago
you still doxxed.
thewebofslime ago
I posted public information that the State of California provided. The courts decided that it was public information. It is, technically, not doxx.
In your opinion, what qualifies as doxx? Face? Email address? Birthday? What?
theoldones ago
with intent to harm and doxx.
thewebofslime ago
What harm did I intend? You are making up fiction. You are a liar.
I've already been doxxed and I'm not a career criminal, like @srazyie. I didn't say a word. Another false claim by you. Discredit yourself repeatedly. Your continued defense of @srayzie proves you are a shill.
SearchVoatBot ago
This comment was linked from this v/GreatAwakeningMeta comment by @Crensch.
Posted automatically (#62365) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here. (@thewebofslime: Click here to suppress your crosslink notifications from @Crensch)
Gothamgirl ago
Absolutely, she runs Q and pizzagate, everyone should be aware, they are taking the word, and following an ex convict. That criminal was intentionally running pizzagaters, and Q followers off of here with her gang of thugs. These people feel they own this place. What goes around comes back around, and it's wonderful to see her get a taste of her own medicine. Don't let that whining @theoldones get to you. He is probably just an alt of theirs. He is completely biased.
They looked up court records on me. I sued an ex, and they shared that information here. Through that court case they obtained my bank statements and went through those too.
Shizie ago
So they should just take your word for everything instead? A woman who married a FELON who served hard prison time for attempted murder? That's a "convict" right there, not a woman who got a DUI 10 years ago! But if that's how you want to define "convict", I guess you're a convict too!
thewebofslime ago
It is a fact @srayzie did time. I assume you know that and that you are @srayzie.
Remember, just before you deleted, you falsely accused @kevdude of making an anonymous post and it was obvious you were wrong? You are a known liar.
Nobody should take your word for anything. In fact, I am not even asking anyone to take my word that @srayzie is a criminal. You can ask the state of California.
SearchVoatBot ago
This comment was linked from this v/GreatAwakeningMeta comment by @Crensch.
Posted automatically (#62367) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here. (@thewebofslime: Click here to suppress your crosslink notifications from @Crensch)
Shizie ago
Hahahah, ok another nutter saying I'm Srayzie too.
Bullshit! I wasn't wrong! I caught him pulling some fuckery in anon and called him out. I would think that someone who pretends to want the truth would help perpetuate lies for kevdude. Suspicious....
Gothamgirl ago
Nope not me, never served any time in a prison. Beatle was always upfront about his actions, she hide it ,and pretended to be better then everyone else, while degrading and slandering others that didn't play along with her larps.
Shizie ago
No, that's your job GothamGirl! You enable and make excuses for your price of shit husband! You act like you are better than everyone and love to put on airs acting like you're wealthy. You pretend that your husband is some prize you won! How fun it must be to be living with an addict and alcoholic who has sexual fantasizes about children! But keep telling everyone how you're a "winner"! 😂
thewebofslime ago
And you are making excuses for exactly the same degenerate behavior you don't like other doing but is fine for yourself.
This behavior is textbook "intellectual dishonesty" which completely invalidates any credibility you are trying to conjure up.
zyklown_b ago
she aint no winner she got dumped cause she and her nigger kids are skanks
SearchVoatBot ago
This comment was linked from this v/SoapboxBanhammer comment by @forget-me-not.
Posted automatically (#52367) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here. (@zyklown_b: Click here to suppress your crosslink notifications from @forget-me-not)
Gothamgirl ago
You fucking liar..
Shizie ago
Who got dumped? GothamGirl?
Gothamgirl ago
Nope..
zyklown_b ago
her nigger kids were caught stealing from a walmart so i dumped her ans dial and her are together now.
i may be trashy but aint no thief or nigger lover
Gothamgirl ago
My kids are not niggers, never stole anything from anywhere, and I don't even know Dial. You didn't dump me, i left you in another state.
Now run along to the obeast bitch in Commiefornia, that makes Srayzie look tiny,
With that cleft palate, who you said is a nasty Dyke and as large as a bus. Who can't afford to stop mooching off her parents... You both sound like winners....
Gothamgirl ago
I don't even know Dial, my kids don't steal anything.
Shizie ago
You're better off.
Gothamgirl ago
Wow you have to be kidding shizy 😂🤣sticking up for the guy who threatened your kids that you cried and moaned about for a month, this golden!!!
Shizie ago
How is what I said sticking up for him? As much kdna piece of shit he is, he's still better off without you cause you're an even bigger piece of shit! 🤣
zyklown_b ago
yes she gave me herpes
Shizie ago
That's a shame. I thought she was our soulmate?
https://voat.co/v/Automobiles/3186555/18303380
zyklown_b ago
naw she made me let her use my acct to post that shit. she i like conman and criminal type. she was raised by heroin junkies and her kids are all on welfare due to thats how they was raised.
Gothamgirl ago
Anyone can see you are not being truthful. You got left because you threaten peoples kids, and I dont go for that shit even if I dislike them, and you have warrants for your arrests in Logan and Johnson county Arkansas. I obey laws, and you ain't my type. You played a good game on me... But you are now blocked and forgotten.
Shizie ago
You really expect anyone to believe that you NOW decide you can't be with him because of that? 🤣🤣🤣 Oh please!
zyklown_b ago
HAHAHHA. GO BE WITH XAVIER MEDINA OR SHAWN LEPORE....
Shizie ago
Figures!
Gothamgirl ago
I didn't pretend nothing....
We seperated already sooo...
Shizie ago
larpity larp larp!
Gothamgirl ago
That's bullshit I dont have herpes.
Shizie ago
Your husband says otherwise.
thewebofslime ago
When my site was attacked and I tracked down all the information I could find to solve the problem, I asked Voat if I should share the doxx of those who attacked the site. Literally no one answered the question. Instead, I was mostly attacked, but it was a genuine inquiry. I erred on the side of caution, but, recently, when @kevdude was threatened with a frivolous lawsuit, I decided that those responsible should get a taste of their own medicine. Especially, since doxxing was not yet a bannable offense.
Additionally, I question why doxxing finally became bannable when @srayzie had her criminal history posted, and not before that. It seems like she required special protection and everyone else was fair game. But, in order to maintain a sense of fairness, the rule was applied more widely.
Of course, I have been painted by the bad guy but only by those who refuse to admit @srayzie was doing the same thing, only worse. Whatever anyone thinks of @gothamgirl, all of the accusations against her are conjecture and @srazyie is factually everything everyone accused @gothamgirl of being. Factually. In that there is no question. DUI, drug charges, trespassing, failure to appear, failure to pay and on and on.
With all the moralizing that has gone on, I find it truly distasteful that anyone should expect @srazyie to be an authority on anything. She is the exact opposite type of person who should be involved in any conservative movement. If you are going to moralize at me, then you should be prepared to aim that in the proper direction because I would never stoop to what my detractors have stooped to and supported.
SearchVoatBot ago
This comment was linked from this v/GreatAwakeningMeta comment by @Crensch.
Posted automatically (#62370) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here. (@thewebofslime: Click here to suppress your crosslink notifications from @Crensch)
Memorexem ago
Doxxing has been a bannable offense for years, as an aside, but:
You mean, like... Doxxing?
Just so we're on the same page, I'm not on anybody's side about this. I find the entire episode distasteful, and the use of doxxing to fuck with somebody in the real is despicable, unethical, and cowardly. Both sides who engaged in this sort of behaviour should be banned and publicly shamed.
I can't believe some stupid shit like this would implode the user base either, like fuck people c'mon. Whatever happened to adults acting like it?
Obrez ago
I'm a bit out of the loop, did that user dox her? My understanding was that she shared her twitter or some other social media and it had connections to her personal name or some shit like that.
This isn't me trying to be snarky or smug I generally haven't been able to get a straight answer on whether she gave out her personal information online(doxed herself) or someone else used some underhanded tactic, or security loophole/weakness to find her real name and put her dox out.
Please set me straight but my impression was that she doxxed herself unwittingly and then trolls went after her, she fed them until they got real big and whether legitimately or not she feared for her safety and "dipped out"* of the community(I imagine a BO had an alt so I'd put an asterisk next to the idea of her being gone) this OP then having her personal information decided to look up her criminal history and shared that on voat as retribution of some sort of ill will or slight and has been getting shit because of it or because it showed she was a seedy character.
Memorexem ago
Would you not call posing as a friend, being given the usernames in confidence, then breaking said confidence and using that to harass and threaten an "underhanded tactic"?
All info is public, and the internet doesn't forget. Doxxing is the not the same as looking up county records. Doxxing is finding those records, putting them together and disseminating them, usually for nefarious means.
I don't care about any of the underlying issues, TBH, if pretty much everybody involved died tomorrow, then I'd just figure some dirt on the Clintons got out. I'm only here to discuss the issue of doxxing, and to make sure we clarify what doxxing is.
When you gather and publish information on a person, for any means, although most are not good for the doxee, you are guilty of doxxing. When you use it to harass and threaten, or use it to enable others to harass and threaten because you're too chicken shit to do it yourself, then you're just adding coward to your repertoire.
Obrez ago
You say "being given the usernames in confidence" but the last time I tried to figure all this shit out I saw posts going back many months which detail zyklon and his buddies having her dox, posting her pics and shit way back when and she admitted to it, my understanding from a quick google search is that she had been using the same username on all of her social media and she was sharing photos and identifying information on these accounts, I can only muster up so much pity for such foolishness. Even admin seems to have agreed that the supposed doxer triglypuff or whatever was banned on false pretenses.
I'm sort of putting you on the spot here, I get not using names if you don't want to fan the drama flames, but names in direct association with accused actions are really what I'm missing here.
Like I said above I'm seriously out of the loop here and everytime I try to figure this shit out I'm met with contradicting information about who did what and why and the old screen-caps I had been finding on searches are mostly unreadable after people started deleting accounts.
I'll list what I don't know in the shape of how I'm guessing things went down and see if you can correct me.
Someone doxxed Srayzie, I've heard a number of people accused of this, I don't know who actually did it or honestly if it wasn't her own negligence that led to her self doxing.
Some folks began to spread the dox because of some reason, I don't know the reason, simple trolling, directed trolling for disliking her sub or moderation style, simply because she took bait foolishly, I don't know, who did it? Zyklon b and some of his buddies? I think.
Crensch has been pursuing multiple vendettas that largely seem to be overkill about a matter of opinion on the distinction of srayzie's doxing, banning people from his subs for not agreeing with him and instead siding with the admin's decision. | I'm not saying I know this definitively it seems to be what I'm seeing though.
Srayzie is probably running alts along with her side of things to harass users like kevdude for some reason, threatening to dox him.
Hadn't presumed this to be remotely true but I've seen it enough so it bears mentioning, something about nudes and affairs involving other users, specifically kevdude getting srayzie's boob pics and sharing them?
The Crenshch-Srayzie camp is being accused of doxing and/or harassment that predates Srayzie leaving, I'm unsure if this predates her dox getting out, the case I saw mentioned some time ago was that gothamgirl was accused of doxing her and so in retaliation they used an alt to dox gothamgirl
This seems one sided but I am well aware that the other side of things seem to be a loose assortment of regular users and trolls who have their own axes to grind with GA, Crensh or Srayzie or in some cases I assume are just trolling for fun and that the trolls and some regular users seem to have conglomerated a unified front at one time or another to push something about "1990" which I'm assuming is a reference to a glibert godfried bit about "bob sagget raping and murdering a girl in 1990" another troll effort, I assume.
I'm guessing if I went looking for the dox (I've only seen profile pictures) I could find the criminal record in question so I don't expect you to inform me of it, I could only see that her criminal record would matter if she were at fault for basically all of this drama and her criminal record entailed a whole bunch of sketchy shit like fraud, a bunch of meth or hard drug charges would make sense of the drama though.
If you presume I'm taking a side with this personal drama at hand, know I'm not. I am not well informed enough to have a valid opinion at the moment.
A final aside on the definitions of doxing, I'm unaware of a great formal authority on the matter but I do have personal account of similar tribulations:
I was once a clan leader for an online gaming clan and a female member was unduly harassed by another clan leader after she took his spot on a competitive team and began hobknobing with the leadership. Like most girls she enjoyed the attention a bit too much and made the mistake of sharing a pic of herself on the forums or as her user profile on the forums, which she also shared on facebook or myspace, one reverse image search later and he had her full dox, it wasn't a major secret, he never shared this full dox, she actually gave us her full name and added us on social media before hand but I don't think he saw the chats, he used her social media to backtrack to a picture of her home, got the address and posted satellite or helicopter photos of her home on our forums with a vaguely intimidating message, that faggot was maybe 16 and a few hundred miles away in another country, everybody knew he wasn't gonna do shit but still he crossed a line and we had to punish him, but first came distinguishing "was this doxing?" and we found it was tangential to doxing but more like E-stalking as he never used anything other than information she had been carelessly sharing and did constitute undue harassment, we were prepared to ban him, but it must be understood we were all 15 and 16 at the time so this was seen as more of the fault of his social awkwardness, seeing as no harm came of it, we convinced him he was wrong and the punishment we let her choose was to fight a 1v1 on record and if she won he had to apologize and admit she belonged on the comp team, he got taken to the cleaners and screamed like a man on the edge the whole match, had to apologize and the video was shared on the clan forum, his actions weren't publicly disclosed because basically nobody in our ~300 man clan saw the post before we caught it and he took a demotion in the clan. Was this absolute justice? probably no; but did she fail to protect herself online? the first rule we were all taught about the internet? Absolutely yes, it was even in our ToS and clan rules. The next part has little bearing but they actually became good friends for a while, she even helped him out after he had a rough break up.
In my position all of the hearsay I have heard surrounding the srayzie thing indicates it could have been doxing, it could have been undue harassment, it could have been e-stalking, or it could have been her own personal failure which resulted in trolling, that she encouraged by feeding it and it's entirely possible that some ammount of trolling or harasment was deserved, that said I specifically believe anybody taking precautions to protect their identity online, no matter how cunty, awful, politically opposed, or what have you does not ever deserve to be doxxed I can't think of a scenario where I find it acceptable to set out with the intention to dox someone that doesn't want to be doxxed, maybe if they have doxxed other people or if they are using litigation to dox people they should have some of their own poison but I wouldn't even want to see antifa people doxxed online, it sets an awful precedent. that said I don't think E-stalking is a fair tactic either, you should be arguing ideals, if you can't fight and win on the basis of ideology, concept, philosophy, and rhetoric, that said I believe if other users are going to play dirty you have every right to retaliate using their tactics against them, that isn't hypocrisy, it's counter punching, somebody hits you, you hit them back but if you tarted it you probably deserved to be hit.
Memorexem ago
I get your questions, but the sad reality is that with the (multiple) personalities involved nobody will ever know the full truth. The shit's been stirred by too many people, there've been probably quite literally 500 posts about this, and I am not nearly autistic enough to sort through it all.
Again, I don't really care about their issues anyway. I originally just replied because I didn't like the hypocrisy presented, but now I'm staying to make sure we can come to a consensus on what doxxing is because no matter how you define it, all parties involved are guilty to some extent.
The counter punch that should have been thrown was the Admin stepping in, cause that's what they're there for, and slamming the gate shut on this shit as soon as he found out about it.
Which he did. Kind of. Then reversed it. Regardless. My point is that you never let idiots drag you down to their level. They'll always beat you with experience.
There's recourses that don't involve "not threats! Just putting your info out there for any random Joe to find, lala" which are much more long lasting, especially when they can be backed up by the police state we pay so diligently for.
thewebofslime ago
I'd say your summary of events is fairly accurate, though it is missing the part where @srayzie was doxxing other users and they were all working together to make multiple false accusations against /v/Pizzagate users which is where I got dragged in when they started calling me a shill and labeled my site a security risk even though Voat does way more tracking than my site.... which is completely bare bones.
Doxxing is slang for nothing in the legal world. There is no law against sharing public information about anyone. Stalking is a crime and @srayzie made multiple accounts to repeatedly share personal information over the course of a year, meeting the legal requirements of stalking and for a civil harassment restraining order when taking into consideration the threats against children.
The whole thing is a "vicious cycle" where the downvote brigade bullies refuse to admit they were wrong and also choose to double down on their dishonesty. They call out people for the behavior that they, themselves, are doing, which generated a great deal of ill will towards them. A lot of what they do is destructive, unproductive and illegal and they are getting paid to do it or they are getting naked pictures from @srayzie in order to be convinced to do it.
@crensch referred to the 45 year old, overweight convict with tattoos of being a "smokeshow." So, a lot of the people who came to the defense of @srazyie were merely whiteknights who were sorely misguided because they were emotionally compromised to the point that they were allowing a pass for behavior they were attacking other people over. It defies reason that people who continue to defend @srazyie, despite her doing exactly the behavior they are supposedly outraged over, turn a blind eye and maintain a hard double standard.
There was a lot more going on in the background, but you can see that now, after @srayzie was doxxed, that anyone who sheds light on proof that shows the extent of what was going on in the background will be banned on Voat.
But, there is always Dissenter, which can be used as a meta layer on top of Voat pages.
thewebofslime ago
There are a lot of definitions of what people think is "doxxing" but most are not actually doxxing and I certainly am not doxxing for the specific intent of harassing users. If the state of California considers it public information, then so do I. I was highlighting that a criminal was trying to moralize at a large group of people when she, herself, is a complete lowlife who thought doxxing was fine.
And, in truth, I've doxxed plenty of people on this site and, even now, nobody cares about pedophiles being doxxed... like Kevin Reynolds of East Hampton Babysitters. So, there is a double standard and there is no legal line.
If someone is doxxed, most people do nothing.
However, when @gothamgirl was doxxed, it was specifically to harass and allow people to call her kids school or something and, in the case of @kevdude, he was harassed with a lawsuit, specifically.
So, let me ask you... what is your understanding of what doxxing really is? A face picture? A name? An email address? Publicly available information? Private information? There is a spectrum of opinions on this.
But, to find all "doxxing" to be "disgusting behavior" you would havce to find Wikileaks to be terrible, as well. I'm sure you have a line, somewhere.
Memorexem ago
If you gather and publish information on a specific person, whether you are responding to being doxxed, whether you're threatening/harassing them yourself or simply enabling others to do it, you are doxxing. That's what it is, gathering and publishing information to identify a particular individual, generally to further ones own motives and not for a good cause.
All doxxing is disgusting and unethical behavior, that's all there is to that.
WikiLeaks does not, generally, point to John Doe down the street and say "He's a pedo, get em!". They usually stick to bigger things and do not make individuals who have a slight expectation of privacy a focus. Public officials, celebrities, etc, have a diminished right to privacy but not nonexistent. They're just under more scrutiny and while 'Did you know Harrison Ford has a house in TN?' wouldn't be doxxing because he is in the public domain, if you listed mine it would be because I, not being so, would have a higher expectation along with the hopefully added respect of any adult who came across it to ignore it.
Unfortunately, we do not live in a world of morals.
thewebofslime ago
I did not gather information about one specific person. I gathered information about a group of people who were harassing me and spreading lies. I did not post the information but I did ask Voat first about it and nobody bothered to respond. I posted one piece of information that is provided by the government that anyone can look up.
When I was doxxed, someone thought it was great to make a bunch of dating profiles for me all over the country. Fortunately, there aren't any recent pictures of me online that would make sense in an online dating profile, so the ruse was somewhat obvious.
I'm not sure if you are suggesting what I did was illegal doxxing, but it does not qualify as restricted information. The information I shared is public information and not restricted or private in any way. It is possible to make it private by having the records sealed, but that is not something @srayzie was willing to do because... lazy.
There is no federal law that criminalizes all of the conduct that may be called doxing, such as publishing someone’s contact information. However, there is a federal law against stalking that @srayzie is guilty of. 18 U.S. Code § 2261A.
I have to strongly disagree that all doxxing is wrong. In fact, I don't think there is a problem with doxxing, in general. Everything is already on the Internet and if it moves from one place to another there is no crime and there is no ethical conundrum. It is, indeed, what people do with the information that the law provides for.
I wanted to state my disagreement with a lot of what you said, but I also want to clarify to others, because of your wording, what @srazyie has done is illegal. What I have done is not. Being guilty of a crime is not a legal cause for "emotional distress."
So, in the absence of any action being taken for an actual legal problem that @srayzie was creating... where Voat was allowing a crime to repeatedly take place... the obvious choice was to expose a criminal for what she is. And, like magic, the problem solved itself.
But, again, I don't have a problem with posting criminal histories on state websites. I think it is very, very clear, in the eyes of the law and anyone with a reasoned approach that information posted by the government is perfectly within everyone's rights to share.
No one could do any decent reporting if they were limited to your standards. Not everyone is a politician and nobody should b e a protected class. The intelligence community has all your doxx, you should have theirs. It's that simple.
@srayzie played a stupid game and won a stupid prize.
SearchVoatBot ago
This comment was linked from this v/GreatAwakeningMeta comment by @Crensch.
Posted automatically (#62364) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here. (@thewebofslime: Click here to suppress your crosslink notifications from @Crensch)
Memorexem ago
Bro, that's three contradictions in your first like 3 sentences.
Yeah, we're all aware this information can be found with a simple court search. I see you're trying to quote some law like a lawyer, nobody said you did anything illegal.
I said it was amoral, unethical, and cowardly.
You set out specifically to identify and gather information on individuals you somehow believed were harassing you and then set about using said information in nefarious ways, or provided that information to other players whom you knew would engage in inappropriate conduct.
That is doxxing. It's that simple. Quit twisting my words. We've gone over this several times. Reporters already don't identify anybody beyond name, they most assuredly don't post their address and say "Hey. We think this guy might be guilty of something but we don't really have any proof, but hey. Don't do anything. *Wink.
And, really, that's the crux of the issue is the threats. If people could act like adults, this wouldn't be as much of an issue. You learn something about a neighbour, and you go 'oh' and file it away for your dealings later. Sure, you spread it around so other people know what's up. But you don't threaten their children, or post pictures of their house around town, that's fucking low.
thewebofslime ago
These people were factually harassing myself and others. You are suggesting that I don't defend myself, which is terrible advice.
It is not amoral to look up a criminal record, nor is it unethical. Megan's Law website exists for a reason. It isn't cowardly, as it levels the playing field of someone who was already engaged in doxxing. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
False.
I didn't post anyone's address... also a false accusation. Just regroup your thoughts... don't be dishonest.
The person in question is literally, factually guilty of many things. We have the court records to prove it.
"doxxing" is a neologism. It isn't illegal. It is what people do with the information... just like the Megan's Law website.
I did no such thing. Knock it off. I posted information from a state/website and I made no threats.