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.
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.
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.