My worries are that the doxing and minors section will be used to shut down /v/pizzagate and (more likely) the other pizzasgates. Reddit has already used those two to do that anything posted about Alefantis or anyone else (allegedly) involved is "doxing" and any photos are "sexualized content". I think that there has to be some explicit divider between "this guy sucks, here's his phone number" and "here's something I think is newsworthy, including that this person owns this business at this location" situations. (I also think the sexualized content thing is mind boggling. "There aren't any pedos here, but you can't post the photos that they've posted because they sexualize children." Wha?)
I'm down with the voting on rules and mods thing if we can finally do something about the vote farming / botting.
You him? Even if not, thank you. Many of us could give a shit what people do in their privacy of their homes but having shit like that here was too much. This is the first time I have ever pinged hecho. But I agreed with all those who did.
What happens if someone gets doxxed and then it's later discovered they're a Voater? If they get doxxed (or threatened with doxxing) and create an account to shield themselves?
We can only control what happens on this website. That means the only way this rule can work is doxxing accounts is banned. Tying a real person to an account the other way around would still be the same thing. If you're thinking of a news article, we can't control news. I've never seen "Steve Jobs, otherwise known as 420_blaze_it_xxxxx___ on reddit," on a news story.
Do we not assume many who are the unhappy subjects of Voat users' investigatory or editorial subverses are not also Voat users lurking here? If true, might it be important to clarify such a rule to allow publicly available info to be Voat published?
This. As long as what Voaters are doing isn't illegal, the rest of the Net can go fuck itself. Take care of our own house, and the rest of the internet can do the same. Reddit trying to play Savior of the Interwebz is part of the reason for their decline.
Who owns VOAT?... Who is investing in VOAT? Are there NEW investors? Is it considered DOXXing when there are no records iinvolved (legal definition). When a jackass has two personalities online is it DOXXing to reveal the connection?.. This removes a SHIT TON of journalism out of citizen journalism.
that is one of the many problems with laws against child porn in the first place. say your neighbor is fucking their kid and you see it though an open window. you take a picture to prove it. guess what? you are now guilty of manufacturing child porn. if you show that pic to the police there is a chance you spend over a decade in prison for having done so.
Voat strictly prohibits all doxing (posting of personally identifiable information) of a Voat user
The Doxxing rule only applies to other voaters. Not to politician's associates. You'd only get in trouble if you said @ILoveKids is John Podesta and here is his phone number. Just posting Podesta's number wouldn't break the rules.
public figures are generally exempted from privacy laws. that's where the line should be drawn, not investigations. info that people (anybody) willing post to the internet (e.g social media posts) is also generally exempt from privacy laws.
What is a public figure? A large number of people that might rightly end up part of community investigation may not be a public figure in most people's book.
And the, "public information posted by them" exception is essentially what doxing is. On one hand the public figures rule would be too strict, and the social media rule would be under strict to the point of making the rule moot and applied selectively.
It's just easier to forget any doxing rule and say we're allowed to discuss people on the internet. Which is pretty fucking reasonable. Also literally censorship in by pretty much the most obvious definition.
view the rest of the comments →
7584437? ago
My worries are that the doxing and minors section will be used to shut down /v/pizzagate and (more likely) the other pizzasgates. Reddit has already used those two to do that anything posted about Alefantis or anyone else (allegedly) involved is "doxing" and any photos are "sexualized content". I think that there has to be some explicit divider between "this guy sucks, here's his phone number" and "here's something I think is newsworthy, including that this person owns this business at this location" situations. (I also think the sexualized content thing is mind boggling. "There aren't any pedos here, but you can't post the photos that they've posted because they sexualize children." Wha?)
I'm down with the voting on rules and mods thing if we can finally do something about the vote farming / botting.
7590405? ago
V/pizzagate should work on stopping @hecho and his pedo shit. But nah, pizzagate like talking about pizzagate ....
7591508? ago
ive already stopped my pedo shit
7592086? ago
You him? Even if not, thank you. Many of us could give a shit what people do in their privacy of their homes but having shit like that here was too much. This is the first time I have ever pinged hecho. But I agreed with all those who did.
7587447? ago
He did stated that the rules are to protect voat users, and not people outside of voat.
7589220? ago
So long as it's only to protect other voaters, this rule is entirely fair and I will back it 100%.
7624659? ago
What happens if someone gets doxxed and then it's later discovered they're a Voater? If they get doxxed (or threatened with doxxing) and create an account to shield themselves?
7629893? ago
We can only control what happens on this website. That means the only way this rule can work is doxxing accounts is banned. Tying a real person to an account the other way around would still be the same thing. If you're thinking of a news article, we can't control news. I've never seen "Steve Jobs, otherwise known as 420_blaze_it_xxxxx___ on reddit," on a news story.
7598522? ago
Ditto.
7596069? ago
Do we not assume many who are the unhappy subjects of Voat users' investigatory or editorial subverses are not also Voat users lurking here? If true, might it be important to clarify such a rule to allow publicly available info to be Voat published?
7589681? ago
This. As long as what Voaters are doing isn't illegal, the rest of the Net can go fuck itself. Take care of our own house, and the rest of the internet can do the same. Reddit trying to play Savior of the Interwebz is part of the reason for their decline.
7587244? ago
Who owns VOAT?... Who is investing in VOAT? Are there NEW investors? Is it considered DOXXing when there are no records iinvolved (legal definition). When a jackass has two personalities online is it DOXXing to reveal the connection?.. This removes a SHIT TON of journalism out of citizen journalism.
7587088? ago
that is one of the many problems with laws against child porn in the first place. say your neighbor is fucking their kid and you see it though an open window. you take a picture to prove it. guess what? you are now guilty of manufacturing child porn. if you show that pic to the police there is a chance you spend over a decade in prison for having done so.
7586669? ago
The Doxxing rule only applies to other voaters. Not to politician's associates. You'd only get in trouble if you said @ILoveKids is John Podesta and here is his phone number. Just posting Podesta's number wouldn't break the rules.
7585307? ago
public figures are generally exempted from privacy laws. that's where the line should be drawn, not investigations. info that people (anybody) willing post to the internet (e.g social media posts) is also generally exempt from privacy laws.
7587001? ago
What is a public figure? A large number of people that might rightly end up part of community investigation may not be a public figure in most people's book.
And the, "public information posted by them" exception is essentially what doxing is. On one hand the public figures rule would be too strict, and the social media rule would be under strict to the point of making the rule moot and applied selectively.
It's just easier to forget any doxing rule and say we're allowed to discuss people on the internet. Which is pretty fucking reasonable. Also literally censorship in by pretty much the most obvious definition.