Journal of Other Forum Analysis

[Uncle]

of course you made this exact post yourself shortly afterward

[HardcoreRetro]

Wow, I can't believe my youtube homepage is filled with fucking chuds.

My homepage:

[Gameboy Nostalgia]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/what-will-make-more-money-sonic-3-or-mufasa.839064/page-5#post-127816944

You guys think whoever makes the most money will pay the workers that much better? That the profits will be equitably shared? Or taxed and used to help society? Increase the quality of working conditions?

when you're THAT guy at the party

Wow, I can't believe my youtube homepage is filled with fucking chuds.

My homepage:

 How could you post this?!

[benji]

Second, you're doing the thing people do where they abstract out to obscure what's actually being discussed.

...

And yes, I think privacy is a real thing that ethics needs to deal with, and so do you, because you don't think the state (a powerful group of people) should have all your info whenever they want.

I didn't say what you did should be illegal, I said it's wrong. I am not suppressing your voice by advocating for a general respect for privacy, even for bad people until they reach some (very subjective, I acknowledge) threshold. I don't think they should dox you just because they think you're bad, either.

I think you're far more abstracting out by redefining "privacy" to include all public spaces everywhere and permit the retroactive withdrawal of consent from all public information willingly shared by anyone ever.

The only compromise I can offer you and everyone else at this time is that I will refrain from posting any Twitter/YouTube/etc. from now on but I will not police other people doing so. If the latter becomes a problem despite seeming unlikely, then I will grudgingly entertain the possible need for policing it if people can come up with clear standards that will not encompass things like the "arm up" banner.

edit: To clarify two points after toilet reflection:
1. The second aspect of this post and the prior one along similar lines are not responses to Pogi personally but Pogi as a representative for a position on an issue I know other members share. I am aware he was not asking for any specific action, but this is not the case generally.
2. My curt tone and language regarding forum management issues are not a desire to be dismissive towards those who raise such issues but rather to express I take the general topic seriously in terms of finding the community's opinion versus imposing my own. (I take a general interest in admin/mod/janny behavior as to their impact on the communities they oversee, you may notice a through connection to my general opinions about policing and the state.)

[Gameboy Nostalgia]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/hit-game-black-myth-wukong-faces-backlash-after-telling-players-not-to-discuss-%E2%80%98feminist-propaganda%E2%80%99-guardian.965667/#post-127817046

The same Guardian gave it a 5/5 from Patricia Hernandez (I didn't know she moved there now) someone I wouldn't expect to look past these issues so easily (even if I never cared for her style).
I guess you can still view the game as its own thing, completely separate from the people that made it. But there's still discussion to be had around supporting and buying games made by people that act/say these things.

[Snoopy]

There is zero value in comparing Helldivers to this in any way, the only similarity they have is being multiplayer games. Concord is competing with a lot of massive, directly comparable games, most of which are F2P, and there are still more coming out this year. Helldivers is a different genre and relatively unique experience, there aren't many games that do what it does, especially in the F2P space.

Truly, there is so little for Concord to learn from Helldiver 2's success

[Potato]

Also, doxxing isn't ethical, regardless of methodology. I've said it before, but most doxxing is dealing with publicly available info, not hacking. So saying it's publicly available doesn't make it not doxxing (which, to be clear, Benji never claimed; Benji never claimed it was ethical either, so what I'm saying isn't countering anything he said). Doxxing is usually the act of gathering and distributing info; it's an act of lubricating the path between the subject and those who hate the subject, whether that be for the purpose of pointing and laughing harder, or something more sinister like encouraging direct harassment IRL.

Again, AFAIK Benji never said otherwise, but I want to be clear: it being publicly available info doesn't make it ethical. There are very few circumstances I can think of where doxxing is ethical, and they all involve exposing terrible crimes. As much as my morbid curiosity sometimes gets a kick out of Benji, I really do wish he'd stop doxxing. It seriously bummed me out when him doxxing went from being a joke to being real. It's wrong, and we all knew kyuuji was a dude anyway.

I got no problem with Benji doxxing these cunts because every single one of them has participated in cancel fests and harassment campaigns, more than once. Live by the sword and all that...

If Benji was to doxx some innocent schmuck, I'd be pretty pissed off, but I do trust that all his targets have been thoroughly vetted as complete cunts by all of us in this thread.

[Gameboy Nostalgia]

3 million plus sold copies = backlash?

wipingtearswithmoney.gif

[Gameboy Nostalgia]

3 million plus sold copies = backlash?

wipingtearswithmoney.gif

the communist manifesto is one of the most popular books of all time, like half a billion copies in the world

clearly we live in communist paradise right now

I hope everyone on the bire has their copy. 

[D3RANG3D]

It makes for good butt wiping paper.

[benji]

3 million plus sold copies = backlash?

wipingtearswithmoney.gif

the communist manifesto is one of the most popular books of all time, like half a billion copies in the world

clearly we live in communist paradise right now

Maybe they read it. A difference with the complainers about Wukong I imagine.

Also, just to note, the CCP once printed enough copies of Mao's Little Red Book for the entire world. (Or so they claimed.) Half a billion copies doesn't sound like anywhere near enough copies for The Manifesto since all the Communist states did similar with it.

[Uncle]

I agree they rely on their made up image to be terrible forum people, but I don't think that rises to the level of justifying doxxing. They're wrong, but they're not criminal, and to me, that's what it takes to justify doxxing, severe criminality. Obviously you disagree, I get that, but I just gotta speak my mind, to push back against the cheering on of what I think is clearly wrong.

I don't get this weird fuzzy line in the sand where THEY obviously know who they are, and YOU know who they are, but for some reason you're not allowed to post it anywhere or acknowledge it unless they cross some sort of intangible line that makes their own information more public, and then it's kind of ok to talk about it? like if someone on era says "yeah I'm a reviewer for VentureBeat and just reviewed this game," then it's ok to link their username to something they actually admitted to and talk about it elsewhere? or are you saying it's still not?

if you say "I live in idaho and I hold the state record for most pies eaten in one sitting," do you consider it unethical to google this and learn your name? or just unethical when I post what I looked up? or not unethical at all because you posted that info yourself, knowing people might be able to find it? is there ever a point where it's a mea culpa and you can't really justify pushing back?

the idea that you could say "my name rhymes with BLUSTIN BLITH and I live in FLEEMTOWN IDAHO and if you want to fight me here's my phone number, but you can NEVER REPOST THIS INFO OR IT'S UNETHICAL DOXING"  

if that's enough self-admitted info to make it not unethical, where's the line?

[Besticus Maximus]

There's a half a billion copies of the communist manifesto, but how many have been read?  

Does anyone know what the CCU is for it

[DocWager]

Also, doxxing isn't ethical, regardless of methodology. I've said it before, but most doxxing is dealing with publicly available info, not hacking. So saying it's publicly available doesn't make it not doxxing (which, to be clear, Benji never claimed; Benji never claimed it was ethical either, so what I'm saying isn't countering anything he said). Doxxing is usually the act of gathering and distributing info; it's an act of lubricating the path between the subject and those who hate the subject, whether that be for the purpose of pointing and laughing harder, or something more sinister like encouraging direct harassment IRL.

Again, AFAIK Benji never said otherwise, but I want to be clear: it being publicly available info doesn't make it ethical. There are very few circumstances I can think of where doxxing is ethical, and they all involve exposing terrible crimes. As much as my morbid curiosity sometimes gets a kick out of Benji, I really do wish he'd stop doxxing. It seriously bummed me out when him doxxing went from being a joke to being real. It's wrong, and we all knew kyuuji was a dude anyway.

I got no problem with Benji doxxing these cunts because every single one of them has participated in cancel fests and harassment campaigns, more than once. Live by the sword and all that...

If Benji was to doxx some innocent schmuck, I'd be pretty pissed off, but I do trust that all his targets have been thoroughly vetted as complete cunts by all of us in this thread.

But we’re “The Bire”… ResetEra goes low, but The Bire goes high.

[benji]

the idea that you could say "my name rhymes with BLUSTIN BLITH and I live in FLEEMTOWN IDAHO and if you want to fight me here's my phone number, but you can NEVER REPOST THIS INFO OR IT'S UNETHICAL DOXING"  

You could have just used Alyssa Mercante instead of a hypothetical.

[Uncle]

no I couldn't, because it's unethical to post her actual real name here without her consent, that's private info

[Bootsthecat]

So, fair to say banana is a cop trying to ensnare Benji? That's wat I got out of all this

[Gameboy Nostalgia]

it's over for Benji now 

[BananaBlast]

Well since the doxxing conversation is still ongoing, here's what I think, using Crossing Eden as an example:

If Crossing Eden willingly connected his name, business venture, portfolio, etc. to his NeoGAF/Resetera/Youtube account (and vice versa), and people are simply reposting that publicly available information for a laugh = that's cool. Let's all have a laugh at the male feminist tough guy looking like a total dweeb.

If Crossing Eden's profiles were hacked by some asshat, had his IP logs leaked, had his login information stolen from an illegal mass data breach, etc. and this is how we're learning about his personal information = that's really fucked up and nobody should condone this, period.

Two different types of doxxing. All jokes aside, I hope everyone feels similarly about this, Benji included.

[Propagandhim]

I think sometimes the revelation of [publically available and legally procured] personal info can inform someone's ability to empathize with others.  For example, I was under the impression Nepenthe was struggling as a minimum wage lackey in a tiny, roach infested apartment in a bad neighborhood.  I've actually been there at one point in my life when I was broke, and it is stressful, so I could let her inane ramblings go.  But, no, she's living comfortably, probably rent free in a big suburban house with mom and dad.  Then there's the video of her dressed as a dog in the living room of her high-ceiling house.  I have measured the ceilings. Folks, the ceilings tell no tales! That house is spacious.   She is dressing like a dog in a spacious house, dancing, watching bluey with her discord buddies, and living w/ her parents into adulthood, while complaining about entire groups of people and economic systems degrading her.  She is telling me I'm not allowed to wear a durag because I'm not from the hood like her.  Bitch, I was born in the briar patch, let me wear the durag.  You literally have Rugrats bedsheets, why do you get the durag but not me. So the revelation of this information has affected my ability to empathize, in that it has made me unable to empathize.  So I guess what I'm trying to say is, without this sort of doxxing, I would think Nepenthe was a human being that's just stressed out and expressing the frustrations of her personal lot in life with a clumsy belief system.  But now that I know she's a racist dog dancing in a spacious house, it's egregious and we need to follow her to work to investigate more.  I can't stop.  I am unable to stop.  I am addicted to learning about Nepenthe.  I...I think I'm in love with her...and repulsed by her at the same time....this love for disgust...have I finally discovered my sexuality?  Am I Bire-romantic?  Has doxxing Resetera actually led to a self-doxxing discovery of my own making?  These are the questions we should be asking ourselves.

[PogiJones]

^ This is what too much spaghetti does to you

[Besticus Maximus]

The worst thing that's happened to any of them is being laughed at for being keyboard warriors, which I suppose is a kind of genocide

[Potato]

Mammamia!

[Gameboy Nostalgia]

My opinion doesn't matter on the subject of doxxing. Only the opinion of former and future President of the United States DONALD J TRUMP matters.  

[JoeBoy101]

Also, doxxing isn't ethical, regardless of methodology. I've said it before, but most doxxing is dealing with publicly available info, not hacking. So saying it's publicly available doesn't make it not doxxing (which, to be clear, Benji never claimed; Benji never claimed it was ethical either, so what I'm saying isn't countering anything he said). Doxxing is usually the act of gathering and distributing info; it's an act of lubricating the path between the subject and those who hate the subject, whether that be for the purpose of pointing and laughing harder, or something more sinister like encouraging direct harassment IRL.

Again, AFAIK Benji never said otherwise, but I want to be clear: it being publicly available info doesn't make it ethical. There are very few circumstances I can think of where doxxing is ethical, and they all involve exposing terrible crimes. As much as my morbid curiosity sometimes gets a kick out of Benji, I really do wish he'd stop doxxing. It seriously bummed me out when him doxxing went from being a joke to being real. It's wrong, and we all knew kyuuji was a dude anyway.

I got no problem with Benji doxxing these cunts because every single one of them has participated in cancel fests and harassment campaigns, more than once. Live by the sword and all that...

If Benji was to doxx some innocent schmuck, I'd be pretty pissed off, but I do trust that all his targets have been thoroughly vetted as complete cunts by all of us in this thread.

But we’re “The Bire”… ResetEra goes low, but The Bire gets high.

Fixed that for you.

[Snoopy]

High Femme is not amused

[PogiJones]

Second, you're doing the thing people do where they abstract out to obscure what's actually being discussed.

...

And yes, I think privacy is a real thing that ethics needs to deal with, and so do you, because you don't think the state (a powerful group of people) should have all your info whenever they want.

I didn't say what you did should be illegal, I said it's wrong. I am not suppressing your voice by advocating for a general respect for privacy, even for bad people until they reach some (very subjective, I acknowledge) threshold. I don't think they should dox you just because they think you're bad, either.

I think you're far more abstracting out by redefining "privacy" to include all public spaces everywhere and permit the retroactive withdrawal of consent from all public information willingly shared by anyone ever.

The only compromise I can offer you and everyone else at this time is that I will refrain from posting any Twitter/YouTube/etc. from now on but I will not police other people doing so. If the latter becomes a problem despite seeming unlikely, then I will grudgingly entertain the possible need for policing it if people can come up with clear standards that will not encompass things like the "arm up" banner.

edit: To clarify two points after toilet reflection:
1. The second aspect of this post and the prior one along similar lines are not responses to Pogi personally but Pogi as a representative for a position on an issue I know other members share. I am aware he was not asking for any specific action, but this is not the case generally.
2. My curt tone and language regarding forum management issues are not a desire to be dismissive towards those who raise such issues but rather to express I take the general topic seriously in terms of finding the community's opinion versus imposing my own. (I take a general interest in admin/mod/janny behavior as to their impact on the communities they oversee, you may notice a through connection to my general opinions about policing and the state.)

Cool, thanks man.

I agree they rely on their made up image to be terrible forum people, but I don't think that rises to the level of justifying doxxing. They're wrong, but they're not criminal, and to me, that's what it takes to justify doxxing, severe criminality. Obviously you disagree, I get that, but I just gotta speak my mind, to push back against the cheering on of what I think is clearly wrong.

I don't get this weird fuzzy line in the sand where THEY obviously know who they are, and YOU know who they are, but for some reason you're not allowed to post it anywhere or acknowledge it unless they cross some sort of intangible line that makes their own information more public, and then it's kind of ok to talk about it? like if someone on era says "yeah I'm a reviewer for VentureBeat and just reviewed this game," then it's ok to link their username to something they actually admitted to and talk about it elsewhere? or are you saying it's still not?

if you say "I live in idaho and I hold the state record for most pies eaten in one sitting," do you consider it unethical to google this and learn your name? or just unethical when I post what I looked up? or not unethical at all because you posted that info yourself, knowing people might be able to find it? is there ever a point where it's a mea culpa and you can't really justify pushing back?

the idea that you could say "my name rhymes with BLUSTIN BLITH and I live in FLEEMTOWN IDAHO and if you want to fight me here's my phone number, but you can NEVER REPOST THIS INFO OR IT'S UNETHICAL DOXING"  

if that's enough self-admitted info to make it not unethical, where's the line?

The topic of fuzzy lines is actually interesting, because I find people usually misuse the concept. I've found that virtually every line is a fuzzy line if you zoom in close enough/add enough parameters. People often mistake the inherent fuzziness of lines to mean the line doesn't exist, but that's not true. What constitutes old? 30? 40? 60? Health? Who knows exactly, it's fuzzy, but we can all agree that Biden is old. The fuzzy parts of the line don't suddenly make the clear cases nonexistent, nor does it mean the category is unusable.

You are clearly right that what constitutes "unethical doxxing" can be shown to be fuzzy, as you just demonstrated, but that doesn't mean we have to pretend the clear cases aren't clear. Posting the real name, home address and picture of an anonymous forum person to people that hate that person because you also hate that person is clearly doxxing in virtually every person's definition. I already made my stance on the ethics of doxxing clear, so I won't go into that again, but it's clearly doxxing, while saying the name of a public journalist who goes by her real name in public is clearly not doxxing. The presence of fuzziness in some cases does not necessitate the turning off of our brains. What it does mean is that when we DO encounter fuzzy cases, we can argue over those. But clear cases are still clear. Benji never claimed what he did wasn't doxxing, he just seems to hold that he doesn't find it unethical.

Where fuzzy line hypotheticals are useful is when drafting legislation, or interpreting legislation or opinions or what have you in a way that will have lasting impact on the future. When operating in slow moving, long lasting mechanisms like that, you have to acknowledge the fuzziness and try to eliminate as much of the fuzziness as is reasonable, because you've basically only got one shot at it. You can't eliminate all the fuzziness, but you do need to think about hypotheticals, just like you did there, in such cases.

[Uncle]

what are your lines, though? the questions weren't rhetorical

also I don't think anyone here is posting addresses. is it unethical to post someone's name where it's then possible to google that name and find the address quickly? what about posting a picture without a name attached, which can be right clicked and "search with google'd" which then leads to that info? how many layers removed before it's still within ethics?

intent is what matters, right? because there are a bunch of white pages sites listing peoples' information which are clearly intended as an informational resource, which people consider different from finding that same info on kiwifarms

and no one is posting info here for the intent to actually intimidate, manipulate or scare people off the internet, because if they leave we don't get to watch them anymore, no one actually wants anything to happen to these people irl, it's all just "ok this person is so weird I have to find out more about them"

is it unethical to google a username and learn all that info for yourself, but not post it anywhere? also not a rhetorical question, I really want to know

is it unethical to then say "ok I googled this person and if the info I found is correct, lol wow," because that potentially intimidates, and constitutes instructions to others to do the same to find that info

[EaldNarche]

I'll condemn benji's doxxing if Kyuuji will sign my permission slip saying I can buy hogwarts legacy and still be a trans ally.

[Propagandhim]

^ This is what too much spaghetti does to you

Mammamia!

lol see this is what im talking about.  Like this is exactly what I'm talking about.  lol.  The inability to empathize.    Like, it's actually insane how the bore, and by extension, the world at large, runs on anti-Italianness.  It's everywhere.  It's in every aspect of our lives.  You may not think about Italians but we're ubiquitous fixtures in your minds, modes of being, and subconscious biases.  We wash our pasta before putting it in water to get the preservatives off that the Northern White has attached to our food in order to commodify, package and sell our not-for-profit products in capitalismo.  Durrr the starch and preservatives gets cooked off durrrrrr, durrrr why are you washing it if you're gonna put it in water anyway, how bout fuck you nigga?   They say the World Runs on Dunkin, i say it runs on Anti-Italianness since the Industrial Revolution.  All of our shit gets taken and reappropriated for the northern european to profit from without any accreditation to my people.  It's what the French call the Sbarro-fication of Italianness that produces a kind of, lets say "whiteness vis a vi ontological darkness" or what the French call, "Socio-Culturelle Oppressivisme" of the European South.  

Let's look at the evidence:  The Punisher, a highly regarded film from the cultural institution the French refer to as "Marvél" from 2004: Who played the Punisher?  Thomas Jane.  

Exhibit A: Thomas Jane 



Now take a look at Exhibit B:  

Now to Exhibit C:

Why is the entire collective nation of Jewish people dressing up, CLEAR AS FUCKING DAY, as an Italian man with the dago necklace (i can say it, you can't*) and exposed chest hair?  Why would a Jew wear a crucifix if not to mock our strong genetic inclination to wear crosses atop a bed of chest hair in an open shirt? You might be asking yourself, "What are you talking about?" or "This guy represents all Jews?" or "aren't you the bigot for assuming all Italians look like this?" or "what's your point?".  My point?  Let's take a look at the evidence.  The Punisher is actually a man of Italian descent.

Exihibit D:



Exhibit E:



So, through these Bayesian prior proofs I have presented, we have successfully deduced A) The Punisher was intended and developed as a realistic depiction of an Italian, not unlike the prestigious Mario from the Mario saga of games that span both time and space.    And B) Northern Whites and the entire collective nation of Jews is both appropriating our identities as costumes and are taking acting work from us.  You can see how the World Runs on Dunkin On Italians because they had to Anglify his last name.  Our people and our culture constantly have to hide, we're constantly told to be ashamed.  We're constantly running, and fam, I'm tired.  Nobody can know that Frank is of Italian descent.  That's a HUGE secret.  Anne Frank Castle in the attic.  An open depiction of a hot-blooded Italian man beating the shit out of people with no regard to a moral code or empathy in fiction?  You'll never see it.  Only the N. Whites and the Jews have access to that kind of privilege. 

Now you might think this is a coincidence.  Yeah, you're right.  I'm generalizing.  I'm over extrapolating.  I'm getting ahead of myself and I need to calm down.
 
OH wait, they did it again in 2017????  Ladies and gentlemen of the systematically anti-italic jury, I present to you exhibit F:



Yes, it's The Punisher again.  
Surely they won't make the same "mistake" of subjugating and stomping a boot on our faces again?  Surely these crackas must have slipped from their inability to dance and got their dirty little eichmann boots all over our face by accident?





OH YOU MOTHERFUCKING JEW RAT ZIONIST FUCKS.


I PRESENT EXHIBIT F: FULL CIRCLE TO THE SBARRO-FICATION OF OUR PEOPLE.

  

Am I supposed to believe this is a fucking coincidence???  They just magically dress up as us like little magical fucking hermit crabs using us as a fucking costume?




Here's an image of him getting pissed off that someone is honking at him, getting out of his car in the middle of rush hour traffic, shirtless, yelling and ready to hit the guy honking at him with a baseball bat which IS WHAT WE DO.  They're going to put this move in Fortnite tomorrow.  You'll be able to buy The Bad Impulse Control for $4.99.  They feed the children anti-Italianess.  The clothe the children in a makeshift costume of our skin.  And what recompense do we get?  What rebuff is there in this deranged, hellscape of a world?   Until we can abolish capitalism, and establish a post-scarcity society and return to non-profit pasta, we'll just continue to be used, mocked, and predated upon.   Northern Whites and The Collective Nation of Jews run this well olive oiled machine.  And this forum is the last space where I can spend hours of my day discussing this, and working on a solution.  And yall just fucking laugh at me?  "Mama Mia" you fucking bitch?  Talk about fragility.


*reclaimed vernacular