Title.
When is doxxing OK?
Title.
I don't think public doxxing really leads to much good. However, if you know or suspect that someone is or may be harming someone you should contact the proper authorities.
If you are dealing with a public corruption thing, where there really isn't a way to stop someone from abuse of power, "doxxing" this person by saying who they are and what they do would kind of be necessary.
Posting someone's address, phone number, that kind of stuff is wrong and I don't think much good could result from it.
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
When you're exposing Russian propaganda trolls
So powerful they can turn a presidential election but so inept they can be easily discovered by randoms on Twitter or wherever. The enemy is both strong and weak.Originally Posted by ouronis
Never.
When you're an motherfucker having a personal grudge with another person or group of people, or when you're a profoundly stupid motherfucker who's seeking validation from twitter mobs.
There's no OK nor a NOT OK, There's social instincts coupled with historical tendencies. It is commonplace to Doxx fat, unshowered and retarded guys on social media for talking to girls three years younger, yet when a rich and influential female celebrity admits to have raped someone everyone is supportive of her. Good and Evil are determined by social status and nothing more.
Last edited by RBRS; 01-28-2022 at 01:00 AM.
When you want to go to jail
FIRKikUWYAMItg0.jpg
Maybe in a situation like this?
Pretty much my opinion exactly. The only time it would seem justified is when it really isn't necessary. Let's stay away from Twitter mob shenanigans. No good ever comes of those
“Things always seem fairer when we look back at them, and it is out of that inaccessible tower of the past that Longing leans and beckons.”
— James Russell Lowell猫が生き甲斐
Is this doxxing? https://www.rollingstone.com/culture...s-1268801/amp/
While not malicious, I would definitely hate it if it happened to me. I'm sure he kept that account anonymous for a reason, but Reddit sleuths unsurprisingly don't care. I'd say it is doxxing, but just without ill intent
“Things always seem fairer when we look back at them, and it is out of that inaccessible tower of the past that Longing leans and beckons.”
— James Russell Lowell
I'd say next to never. I mean, I can imagine a scenario where that's the only way to win the game but that's me engaging in extremeterritory. Doxxing boils down to that dark impulse of wishing someone would do their own dirty work for them. If you hate them that much, and you want them dead or harmed somehow that badly, then why are you posting that shit online?
If you have their name and address, and you hate them enough to want to either ruin their life or kill them, then why the fuck aren't you doing it yourself? Why rely upon an anonymous mob when you can directly do things like put a few shots of bleach into the gas tank of their car, breed a plague of rats and unleash them upon their property, and other oh so very much fun things that while fun may lead back to you? I mean, it's worth the risk of it means screwing over the second coming of the funny mustache man right?
I'm a very strong believer in doing your own dirty work. If you want someone dead, kill them yourself. If you want someone to suffer, torture them yourself. If you must give into your most vile and dark desires in regards to others at least have the balls to do it to them yourself. This is one of the many reasons the PTB will fail to achieve their ends. For while their visions and goals are the darkest of them all, they haven't the guts to execute on it on a personal level until after they feel they've "won" as it were.
To quote Étienne de la Boétie (sorry for this discrepancy in font but I've not the time to type this out by hand):
"But O' good Lord! What strange phenomenon is this? What name shall we give to it? What is the nature of this misfortune? What vice is it, or, rather, what degradation? To see an endless multitude of people not merely obeying, but driven to servility? Not ruled, but tyrannized over? These wretches have no wealth, no kin, nor wife nor children, not even life itself that they can call their own. They suffer plundering, wantonness, cruelty, not from an army, not from a barbarian horde, on account of whom they must shed their blood and sacrifice their lives, but from a single man; not from a Hercules norfrom a Samson, but from a single little man. Too frequently this same little man is the most cowardly and effeminate in the nation, a stranger to the powder of battle and hesitant on the sands of the tournament; not only without energy to direct men by force, but with hardly enough virility to bed with a common woman! Shall we call subjection to such a leader cowardice? Shall we say that those who serve him are cowardly and faint-hearted? If two, if three, if four, do not defend themselves from the one, we might call that circumstance surprising but nevertheless conceivable. In such a case one might be justified in suspecting a lack of courage. But if a hundred, if a thousand endure the caprice of a single man, should we not rather say that they lack not the courage but the desire to rise against him, and that such an attitude indicates indifference ratherthan cowardice? When not a hundred, not a thousand men, but a hundred provinces, a thousand cities, a million men, refuse to assail a single man from whom the kindest treatment received is the infliction of serfdom and slavery, what shall we call that? Is it cowardice? Of course there is in every vice inevitably some limit beyond which one cannot go. Two, possibly ten, may fear one; but when a thousand, a million men, a thousand cities, fail to protect themselves against the domination of one man, this cannot be called cowardly, for cowardice does not sink to such a depth, any more than valor can determine the effort of one individual to scale a fortress, to attack an army, or to conquer a kingdom. What monstrous vice, then, is this which does not even deserve to be called cowardice, a vice for which no term can be found vile enough, which nature herself disavows and our tongues refuse to name?"
Couldn't have put it better myself. Better to die on your feet than live on your knees. Those who would Dox their enemies would rather walk about on bloodied and untreated stumps where their knees used to be than face the final judgement of death for they know exactly where they are bound...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote