Not disagreeing with any of that. Just pointing out that if doxxing serves no public interest purpose, then it becomes a form of discipline. You seem to agree with this. I’m just saying that we should be honest about it. I guess we will see which it is in this case
-
-
Replying to @J_RtheWriter
I’m not agreeing with you. It’s a completely separate issue but, as I have said many a time, I think everyone should be doxxed. I don’t think social media should allow any anonymous accounts.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RTodKelly
1/ If you think that anonymous accounts shouldn’t be allowed, then doxxing is, by definition, a disciplinary action. That’s not necessarily bad. We should just stop pretending it’s something else.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @J_RtheWriter
No it's not. I don't think you should be disciplined, or
@trumwill, or@burtlikko, any more than I think anyone who isn't legally allowed to get blackout drunk and drive down the freeway is being 'disciplined." Rules are not punishment. Punishment is punishment.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
I have my own reasons for preferring a semi-pseudonymous online presence. Why don't I get to decide if, when, and how to change that? N.b. I am not a public figure of any sort and if you're actually interested in me enough to doxx me, chances are you need a better hobby.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @burtlikko @RTodKelly and
There are legitimate reasons to want anonymity: you have a stalker, you are a confidential informant, etc. None of them apply to this case. He wants to remain anonymous because he wants to get paid for being a jackass without paying any of the costs.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @padraig2112 @burtlikko and
The thing is, though, that if no one were anonymous someone being stalked and harassed would know who was doing it and could report it to the authorities. My big picture: when consequences are cleaved from bad actions, people do monstrous things. Not everyone, but enough.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RTodKelly @padraig2112 and
I honestly feel this way prior, but if I hadn't my spending time with Sandy Hook families this past year would have cemented this for me anyway.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @RTodKelly @padraig2112 and
Not respecting the individual at issue here, but more generally: who decides when a person legitimately can use anonymity and when that person is abusing it? The police? Buzzfeed? Google? Donald Trump? Candace Owens? What criteria are to be used making that decision?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @burtlikko @padraig2112 and
On Twitter? I think it should be a blanket rule. I'm not proposing a select group get anonymity.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Out of curiosity, how would that work. Am I any more pseudonyms than you? This is my real name. Does changing your name to something funny for the day count as a pseudonym? This is all very slippery, which is why it doesn’t sense to deny the existence of necessary policing
-
-
Replying to @J_RtheWriter @RTodKelly and
Hm; I think your proposition is likely correct (Twitter should have only verified users), but also Twitter wouldn't be here with those rules. Which can have its own takeaway
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - 23 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.