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.
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'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.
view the rest of the comments →
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.
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.
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.