Yes, change please, and we need to leave, seriously just a thread on any other forum would be much better than this abusive crap and being totally neglected by mods whose reason has clearly deserted them, even down to doxxing left up. I've never heard of any mods anywhere being fine with doxxing, violence, vigilante justice and calls for harrassment like they are for this forum.
Anyway upvoted too.
C'mon NO people - looking forward to seeing you : D
being fine with doxxing, violence, vigilante justice and calls for harrassment like they are for this forum
just because no one wants to adhere to your particular brand of censorship doesn't mean they advocate the opposite
As always, find a post that advocates those things, report it so it can be removed.
If you find a comment that 'doxxes' report it it will be removed.
If you find a comment that advocates "violence, vigilante justice and calls for harrassment" refute/downvote/ignore/troll - but the standing rules are comments do not get deleted unless they violate a rule.
Yes it can be upsetting for some to read comments that offend their sensibilities, but unfortunately, if we delete commentets that obviously inciting we get branded shills and killing free speech.
Damned if we do, damned if we don't.
and we need to leave
I was unaware that there were systems in place forcing you to be here......
In this thread, KevDude says "Doxxing is defined as information that is not public or information on a user"
VictorSteinerDavion says this in this thread in a reply to me -
"The current rules are meant to stop people from harassing people, at home or at work. Currently, posting the contact details of a private residence or the details of an individual at a workplace are not permitted."
So is KevDude in charge? Or VSD?
Also, it used to be against the rules to do ANY doxing on this forum, but KevDude evidently rewrote the rules specifically to allow doxing outside of the forum. Why? There used to be a rule against Violence as well, gone. Why?
I am not talking about that old argument about bigotry, hate speech etc...this is specifically about anti-doxxing and anti-violence, the last bastions of a reasonable forum.
considering kevude is not on the mod list, this one falls to me and @crensch
I've stated my position in previous comments and I'll communicate this to crensch so we can re-re-draft a rule to match the standard I have set and expect to be enforced.
For future reference, this rule change will only deal with the topic of editing the rules in regards to publishing information that identifies people, and any posts and comments that advocate, encourage or insinuate physical actions.
Sorry, you've lost me there. Not following what you're saying, so I'll respond with my own thoughts, but please clarify your position.
I'm of the mind that the people here need to be responsible for their own NetSec, and only non-public information is considered doxxing, while public info is a freeforall. Not because that's how I want it, but because of the backlash from the older goats that would destroy us for changing it.
because of the backlash from the older goats that would destroy us for changing it.
As an old goat, they can destroy me all they want.
The reason I said public information should be included in the definition is to deal with the case when someone calls for the harassment of "specific individual/group of individuals" at this "public address/number"
Posting public information with the intent to create nuisance and cause harm in the same way people do "SWATTing" is something I don't want this community to be accused of.
Posting of public information as a matter of fact and evidence for the record is safe as it is a simple fact without the threat of violence.
What I'm trying to do is craft a rule that permits the posting of public information as evidence, but removes the problem of people that want to cause violent actions by misusing the ability to post public information.
Allowing for violent actions thought this is a way outside forces can discredit the work done by this community.
As you and I are the owner mods I want to make sure we agree to even make this distinction, and then craft a rule if we do agree.
The reason I said public information should be included in the definition is to deal with the case when someone calls for the harassment of "specific individual/group of individuals" at this "public address/number"
That can be dealt with either by the authorities, the admins, or by having better NetSec. We can't protect everyone, and attempting to do so is a fool's errand.
Posting public information with the intent to create nuisance and cause harm in the same way people do "SWATTing" is something I don't want this community to be accused of.
It's not something the community cares about enough to make a rule, apparently. We just got through having the community discussion on the rules - it's not up to us to change them.
Posting of public information as a matter of fact and evidence for the record is safe as it is a simple fact without the threat of violence.
A threat of violence can be dealt with by police or other authorities.
What I'm trying to do is craft a rule that permits the posting of public information as evidence, but removes the problem of people that want to cause violent actions by misusing the ability to post public information.
That information can be posted anywhere on this site. Restricting it here is just silly.
Allowing for violent actions thought this is a way outside forces can discredit the work done by this community.
You can't operate by making a rule for every way this place can be discredited. They'll just keep bringing up shit for you to make more rules about.
As you and I are the owner mods I want to make sure we agree to even make this distinction, and then craft a rule if we do agree.
I don't. I've taken the bait on this before, ask @kevdude. I thought we needed to craft some rules to protect against violence before when everything was in upheaval. Through the discussions about it we found that it wouldn't work, and just looked like useless virtue signalling.
People are going to use information how they want to use it. Real threats can be dealt with by authorities.
Our job - our only job - is to make this place viable to post investigation information.
Edit:
Sorry, it just occurred to me that this rule would look something like a restriction of guns to prevent violence. (see Chicago and D.C.)
view the rest of the comments →
VieBleu ago
Yes, change please, and we need to leave, seriously just a thread on any other forum would be much better than this abusive crap and being totally neglected by mods whose reason has clearly deserted them, even down to doxxing left up. I've never heard of any mods anywhere being fine with doxxing, violence, vigilante justice and calls for harrassment like they are for this forum.
Anyway upvoted too.
C'mon NO people - looking forward to seeing you : D
VictorSteinerDavion ago
Where is this?, I'll remove it immediately
just because no one wants to adhere to your particular brand of censorship doesn't mean they advocate the opposite
As always, find a post that advocates those things, report it so it can be removed.
If you find a comment that 'doxxes' report it it will be removed.
If you find a comment that advocates "violence, vigilante justice and calls for harrassment" refute/downvote/ignore/troll - but the standing rules are comments do not get deleted unless they violate a rule.
Yes it can be upsetting for some to read comments that offend their sensibilities, but unfortunately, if we delete commentets that obviously inciting we get branded shills and killing free speech.
Damned if we do, damned if we don't.
I was unaware that there were systems in place forcing you to be here......
VieBleu ago
In this thread, KevDude says "Doxxing is defined as information that is not public or information on a user"
VictorSteinerDavion says this in this thread in a reply to me - "The current rules are meant to stop people from harassing people, at home or at work. Currently, posting the contact details of a private residence or the details of an individual at a workplace are not permitted."
So is KevDude in charge? Or VSD?
Also, it used to be against the rules to do ANY doxing on this forum, but KevDude evidently rewrote the rules specifically to allow doxing outside of the forum. Why? There used to be a rule against Violence as well, gone. Why?
I am not talking about that old argument about bigotry, hate speech etc...this is specifically about anti-doxxing and anti-violence, the last bastions of a reasonable forum.
VictorSteinerDavion ago
considering kevude is not on the mod list, this one falls to me and @crensch
I've stated my position in previous comments and I'll communicate this to crensch so we can re-re-draft a rule to match the standard I have set and expect to be enforced.
For future reference, this rule change will only deal with the topic of editing the rules in regards to publishing information that identifies people, and any posts and comments that advocate, encourage or insinuate physical actions.
Crensch ago
Sorry, you've lost me there. Not following what you're saying, so I'll respond with my own thoughts, but please clarify your position.
I'm of the mind that the people here need to be responsible for their own NetSec, and only non-public information is considered doxxing, while public info is a freeforall. Not because that's how I want it, but because of the backlash from the older goats that would destroy us for changing it.
VictorSteinerDavion ago
As an old goat, they can destroy me all they want.
The reason I said public information should be included in the definition is to deal with the case when someone calls for the harassment of "specific individual/group of individuals" at this "public address/number"
Posting public information with the intent to create nuisance and cause harm in the same way people do "SWATTing" is something I don't want this community to be accused of.
Posting of public information as a matter of fact and evidence for the record is safe as it is a simple fact without the threat of violence.
What I'm trying to do is craft a rule that permits the posting of public information as evidence, but removes the problem of people that want to cause violent actions by misusing the ability to post public information.
Allowing for violent actions thought this is a way outside forces can discredit the work done by this community.
As you and I are the owner mods I want to make sure we agree to even make this distinction, and then craft a rule if we do agree.
Crensch ago
That can be dealt with either by the authorities, the admins, or by having better NetSec. We can't protect everyone, and attempting to do so is a fool's errand.
It's not something the community cares about enough to make a rule, apparently. We just got through having the community discussion on the rules - it's not up to us to change them.
A threat of violence can be dealt with by police or other authorities.
That information can be posted anywhere on this site. Restricting it here is just silly.
You can't operate by making a rule for every way this place can be discredited. They'll just keep bringing up shit for you to make more rules about.
I don't. I've taken the bait on this before, ask @kevdude. I thought we needed to craft some rules to protect against violence before when everything was in upheaval. Through the discussions about it we found that it wouldn't work, and just looked like useless virtue signalling.
People are going to use information how they want to use it. Real threats can be dealt with by authorities.
Our job - our only job - is to make this place viable to post investigation information.
Edit:
Sorry, it just occurred to me that this rule would look something like a restriction of guns to prevent violence. (see Chicago and D.C.)