Dame Judy TrenchVerified account

Leaving aside the fundamental problems inherent in encapsulating someone's abuse without the consent & involvement of the target

(Which can't be understated - not everyone wants the bad shit that happens to them put on blast in an effort to "help" them)

But beyond that, this stuff takes place publicly for a reason. It's performative. It's attention seeking. If it doesn't spread, it's dead.

"Exposing" doesn't work, even in the best case where there aren't a million ethical problems with that thought process in the first place.

It doesn't work even philosophically because you're still raising its value in the economy of attention, which is what the Internet runs on.

Privacy needs to be *strengthened* for people affected by online abuse if anything, not weakened by people ignorantly trying to help.

I know the names of my biggest abusers. They do it without masks. They monetize it. Privacy isn't the enemy it's what lets me hide from them

I wish I didn't see at least one person a week who I didn't wanna shake and yell "STOP HELPING" at

This is why I'm incredibly quiet on Twitter about what I do at Crash. Spreading people's abuse is quite often *not at all what they want*.

Anything that is public-facing at all has to be treated with privacy and consent as the two biggest guiding ethos or else it's crap.

@UnburntWitch Turns out trying to call out shitty people by being shitty people just creates two groups of shitty people. Whoda thunk?