Google cancels meeting about gender controversy due to harassment and doxxing

[Calligraphette_Coe]

21 minutes ago, CaptainYesterday said:

Who did Milo dox?

https://www.thecut.com/2016/12/milo-yiannopoulos-harassed-a-trans-student-at-uw-milwaukee.html

[Yatogami]

24 minutes ago, CaptainYesterday said:

Who did Milo dox?

I believe he called out a trans person at one of the universities he was speaking at. 

 

From what I read, they were not actually doxxed (releaseing phone number, address etc), but put in the spotlight of the event? I just skimmed it though. I could be wrong.

[ChillaKilla]

15 minutes ago, Yato said:

I believe he called out a trans person at one of the universities he was speaking at. 

 

From what I read, they were not actually doxxed (releaseing phone number, address etc), but put in the spotlight of the event? I just skimmed it though. I could be wrong.

He released her name and photographs to his supporters. She was a student at the university, 100% unaffiliated with them, and he singled her out for no other reason than to goad his supporters into attacking her.

[Yatogami]

3 minutes ago, ChillaKilla said:

He released her name and photographs to his supporters. She was a student at the university, 100% unaffiliated with them, and he singled her out for no other reason than to goad his supporters into attacking her.

I was more calling into question the use of "dox". Doxxing is leaking info online of someone (and not just their name and face). Releasing someone's name and face in real life isn't doxxing, otherwise the media doxxes many people every day. 

[Guest]

Quote

Doxing (from dox, abbreviation of documents),^[1] or doxxing,^[2][3] is the Internet-based practice of researching and broadcasting private or identifiable information (especially personally identifiable information) about an individual or organization.

Quote

Personally identifiable information (PII), or sensitive personal information (SPI),^[1][2][3] as used in information security and privacy laws, is information that can be used on its own or with other information to identify, contact, or locate a single person, or to identify an individual in context

Names and photos are enough for it to be considered doxxing.

[Guest]

Just knowing someone's first and last name is enough to be able to find a lot more information on them also (I just checked this myself and it's disturbing)

 

[CaptainYesterday]

[deleted]

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, CaptainYesterday said:

Milo didn't dox that person.  That person was on the news with their full name and face, openly trans, talking about trans issues.  Sharing a news story that someone willingly participated in is not doxxing.

Did you read the article in the link you just quoted?

 

even if you say it's not doxxing I don't see how you can justify what he did.

[CaptainYesterday]

[deleted]

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, CaptainYesterday said:

Yes.

 

I'm not sure what you're asking.  Justify it how?  It was a mean thing to say, but that doesn't mean it was doxxing, which is the only stance I've taken on it in this thread.

It wasn't just mean, it was harassment, transphobia, drawing attention to an individual so they can be targeted further by hateful people, and public humiliation (from the article it seems like she was actually in the room when it happened

Quote

“You’re as embarrassing as the people who wear a safety pin and think that counts as being an ally — patting yourself on the back for a job well done — all while you stand silent as fascists attack your students,” she wrote. “Do you know what it’s like to be in a room full of people who are laughing at you as if you’re some sort of perverted freak? Do you know what this kind of terror is? No, you don’t.”

 

[Calligraphette_Coe]

1 hour ago, CaptainYesterday said:

Milo didn't dox that person.  That person was on the news with their full name and face, openly trans, talking about trans issues.  Sharing a news story that someone willingly participated in is not doxxing.

Sooooo, it wouldn't be doxxing if I quoted what Twitter had to say about his  being permanently banned for, quote:

Quote

"...inciting or engaging in the targeted abuse or harassment of others".

 

Nor would quoting him about his views about pedophilia?

 

Quote

In the gay world, some of the most important enriching, and incredibly life-affirming, important, shaping relationships are between younger boys and older men. They can be hugely positive experiences very often for those young boys.

Or this:

 

Quote

We get hung up on this child abuse stuff… This is one of the reasons why I hate the left, the one size fits all policing of culture, this arbitrary and oppressive idea of consent.

Imagine that.... those damned leftists at CPAC banned and disinvited him from their soiree for just speaking his mind!  The nerve! Quote:

 

 

 

Quote

 

“We continue to believe that CPAC is a constructive forum for controversies and disagreements among conservatives, however there is no disagreement among our attendees on the evils of sexual abuse of children.”

 

Blatant censorship! Silencing dissenting opinion! First Amendment Crisis! The predatory Left! Libertarian Paradise Lost! Petard, hoisted by, own.

[CaptainYesterday]

[deleted]

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, CaptainYesterday said:

Your characterization of everyone who attended that speech as "hateful" is indicative of your bias in this discussion.

That's not something I said, since it's apparent that the victim attended it would make very little sense for me to have said that.

 

Also yes, I do have a bias that transphobia is a bad and hateful thing though.

[Calligraphette_Coe]

6 minutes ago, CaptainYesterday said:

Well, certainly wasn't harassment.  Harassment, by definition, must be a repeated action.  Transphobia has become a useless term used to describe things as simple as disagreeing with a trans person.  Milo would probably agree that he is what someone on the left would call transphboic, but he would disagree that this is a relevant insult.  To him, it would be like calling someone "greenphboic" because they said they didn't like the color green.  It's just a nothing accusation to them, they don't care in the slightest.  Your characterization of everyone who attended that speech as "hateful" is indicative of your bias in this discussion.

 

No, that wouldn't be doxxing.  That's not anywhere near doxxing.  None of that is anywhere near doxxing.  You clearly have no idea what doxxing is or what this discussion is about.

Nor you, the ironical.

[CaptainYesterday]

[deleted]

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Moonman said:

What is Milo fighting against here? Does he not like it that he's not allowed in women's toilets? Do most men grow up wanting to be allowed in there? I don't understand this, you can always use the cubicle if you're precious about somebody seeing something explicit.  Am I missing the mark here? I have no issue with transgenders (I am not schooled up on this kinda thing) or anybody that identifies as male using the men's room, we all have to pee, we all have to take a shit from time to time, what's the deal here?

His problem is that he's a transphobic bigot and wants to be popular with other bigots

[Calligraphette_Coe]

8 minutes ago, CaptainYesterday said:

No, I pretty clearly know what doxxing is.

So, do you agree that Milo's public statements about pedophilia are fair game? And if so, doesn't it seem a little awkward for him to be a standard bearer for the alt-right? Silly me, but it seems a little like strange bedfellows. Even a little like informed consent? They know what he believes, can they turn a blind eye while they tar trans people with the Big Lie while the same time their champion has willingly poured it all over thimself? Or is it the moral expediency of 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend'?

[CaptainYesterday]

[deleted]

[CaptainYesterday]

[deleted]

[Calligraphette_Coe]

1 hour ago, CaptainYesterday said:

Milo doesn't believe that Trans people should be able to use the bathrooms of the gender that they transition to.  He believes that men will use this as an excuse to to use women's restrooms to be able to harass them.

 

As an aside, I feel like people here are assuming I'm a huge Milo fan.  If you know anything about me, you'd know that MIlo's assumption that men are predators (and thus would be the ones to attempt to infiltrate women's bathrooms) is something that I greatly disagree with.  I "defend" Milo because he's a lightning rod for the kind of slander that left-leaning people and publications tend to perpetuate to anyone who they disagree with.  It's the slander that I disagree with, not necessary Milo that I agree with.

Who's 'slanderng' him here? By his own admission he condones pedophilia as beneficial under some crazy circumstances. He got kicked off Twitter for harrassment. He became an embarrasment at Brietbart, and no doubt got asked to resign in lieu of being fired. I doubt that you can make the case that Breitbart has one iota of left-leaning sympathies. I doubt that his book deal was cancelled by leftists at Simon and Shuster, either. Ditto for CPAC.

 

He did this all to himself.  JMO, but I think you could find a more worthy 'victim' to 'defend' if you insist on being a leisure societal word lawyer. 

[CaptainYesterday]

[deleted]

[BionicPi]

Quote

dox

däks/

verb

informal

gerund or present participle: doxxing

1. search for and publish private or identifying information about (a particular individual) on the Internet, typically with malicious intent.

Eh...?

[CaptainYesterday]

[deleted]

[apatrickwsu]

On 8/11/2017 at 8:33 PM, Yato said:

I don't condone doxxing, or leaking of information. I said that in my original post. I do however, think that their censorship and discrimination resulted in people acting against them. This being the result of their actions. I think you guys are just misunderstaning me. 

 

I mean, I wonder how many of you spoke out against the White house leakers... Or perhaps the Media spreading leaked documents. 

You might actually not condone doxxing, but only if you accidentally typed a bunch of things condoning it and totally didn't mean to. Because you did type things condoning doxxing. Here is that original post, which you mentioned saying you don't condone doxxing in. Where exactly do you say you don't condone it?

On 8/11/2017 at 5:37 PM, Yato said:

Google fired a guy who had leaked information about how Google discriminates against non-leftists ideology, and censors information. Which is within their right as a private corporation, but it still is morally wrong seeing what position they hold in everyday life, and how it impacts everything.

 

http://gizmodo.com/exclusive-heres-the-full-10-page-anti-diversity-screed-1797564320

 

As a result, the people in Google are feeling the effects of what it is like to be "Protested" against by the masses. Which it itself, has set upon the Right many many times over. 

 

To me, it just looks like a bunch of complaining about them being the victims of their own tactics. Tumblr is just as bad in that regard. I say they are reaping their just desserts. 

You don't say it there, but to be fair you do say you don't like it later. Here is that part. However, while you don't condone that it happened you lay the blame at anti-trump people. It isn't their fault they are radicalized, hacktivists are not to blame. Why would you not just blame the people doing the doxxing? It sounds like you want to blame anyone that isn't on the side of misogyny.

On 8/11/2017 at 6:17 PM, Yato said:

I'm not acting like anything, I'm saying that is the world we live in now. I'm actually against doxxing and leaking all together (unless its a matter of national betrayal). I think it is poor behavior, and anti-professional. 

 

If you want to get angry, get angry at all the leakers who normalized the practice after Trump got elected. All these people leaking to the media, inspired everyone else to try to leak because they think it is ok now. I think that the Mainstream media's aggressive Anti-Trump, Anti-Conservative rhetoric has pushed many Right wingers into political activism, and hacktivism as well.  It is not their fault they are being radicalized, because of discrimination and biases in representation in the media.  

Here again, you are condoning it saying they are getting their just desserts. Like it or not, that is condoning and encouraging a behavior. You are sending mixed messages saying you "didn't say it was justified" but it is their just deserts. I noticed you still didn't say it wasn't justified here, you squirmed again and just said you hadn't said something instead of making a definitive statement. You are absolutely different than a police officer wanting to see a criminal in jail. You are more like a terrorist who thinks that a group of people you don't like deserves punishment not for breaking a law, but for simply existing.

On 8/11/2017 at 8:29 PM, Yato said:

Once again, I didn't say it was justified. I said it was the result of Google's actions that they received negative actions against them. Do you not know what just desserts is? It is wanting people to receive punishment for their crime. I am no different than a police officer who wants to see a criminal put in jail for committing crimes. That is literally it. 

I don't think you should be a moderator if you advertise that people who were doxxed got their just desserts, that they reaped what they sewed, they had it coming, or any other turn of phrase which all mean that you consider it justified. If either you or the people who say you are being misrepresented want to please feel free to tell me how I'm wrong here.

[CaptainYesterday]

[deleted]

[Calligraphette_Coe]

1 hour ago, CaptainYesterday said:

Question for the people here: are you also against the doxxing that the Left has done with people who attended the Charlottsville rally?  Does them being Nazis make it okay to dox them?

"The Nazis, the KKK, and white supremacists are repulsive and evil, and all of us have a moral obligation to speak out against the lies, bigotry, ant-semitism, and hatred that they propagate. Having watched the horrifying video of the car deliberately crashing into a crowd of protesters, I urge the Department of Justice to immediately investigate and prosecute this grotesque act of domestic terrorism" - Senator Ted Cruz, who last time I checked wasn't someone from 'The Left'.

[CaptainYesterday]

[deleted]

[apatrickwsu]

millenial_matt and fearwilliam are public figures that had talked about going in tweets to large audiences. I also don't think saying "hey, is that richard spencer" is even close to doxxing. I am against publishing their phone numbers or addresses of course, some of that happened and I do condem it. I also would condemn the implication of joeysalads being there using a couple month old footage of him in some nazi clothing. I would add that doxxing is about making or enabling unlawful harassment or attacks at a person. Trying to identify a person who is committing a crime or inciting harassment themselves (not referencing  alt-right protesters here, thinking of the people that said CNN was blackmailing with threats to doxx that guy who did hit piece memes against journalists) to give the info to the police or something is not doxxing. Did you ever even say if you condemn doxxing? You have been avoiding saying it like Yato avoided saying that the doxxing wasn't justified. Is that calculated or just an oversight?

3 hours ago, CaptainYesterday said:

Question for the people here: are you also against the doxxing that the Left has done with people who attended the Charlottsville rally?  Does them being Nazis make it okay to dox them?

 

[CaptainYesterday]

1 minute ago, apatrickwsu said:

Did you ever even say if you condemn doxxing? You have been avoiding saying it like Yato avoided saying that the doxxing wasn't justified. Is that calculated or just an oversight?

I thought I had already condemned it.  Haven't I called it bad?

 

The doxxing I'm referring to is a concerted effort to identify people in random pictures taken from the rally.  One person has already been identified and has been fired from his job.

[apatrickwsu]

6 minutes ago, CaptainYesterday said:

I thought I had already condemned it.  Haven't I called it bad?

 

The doxxing I'm referring to is a concerted effort to identify people in random pictures taken from the rally.  One person has already been identified and has been fired from his job.

First, no I don't see you having called it bad or condemning it. The closest you came was that you said the left doesn't care when it is done against the right. You seem to dance around condemning it and haven't said you disagree with Yato although earlier it looked like you claimed I misrepresented them.

 

The doxxing I saw was the people I mentioned plus a person who had already been arrested at an alt right rally in Berkley (even though he was already known and I think all the "who are these people, let's doxx them" images were low hanging fruit that people knew who the people were before posting) and a univesity employee wearing a shirt for his department in the university. What were the odds that the pics would be someone whose mugshot was around from the Berkley stuff, a couple twitter and youtube personalities, and the only one that didn't match up being the university guy? I agree noone should be harassed or doxxed at all, but the university guy clearly represented his employer in a negative way and could be fired for that. If noone published his details but a coworker or even an unaffiliated person contacted the school and said it was terrible someone was representing the school badly they could have fired him.