"Doxing" in 2025

The problem is that if the gubbamint wants, they can make any term offensive.

You can say you are documenting, and show receipt that the retards post their real names online. You can prove that they did this to themselves and it is all legal.

It doesn't matter. If the glowies want you, they get you.

This is just realism. The US government does not abide by any rules anymore than CHYNA or the Soviets did.

I feel sorry for Null, but if the glowies want to Trump up charges, they will do so. The feds got a sitting head of their elected government tried* for kangaroo court charges.
All the "rule of law" stuff is just window dressing for normies and doesn't ack-ually apply.

I want to help Dear Feeder and say I got a solution, but I don't.

*Edit: I'm not just shitting on the US. Germany and Romania are going balls deep too, Romania just invalidated an election because they didn't like the result.
 
I think journoscum and breadliners will try to turn any distinct common alternate term into a boogeyman term too, since semantic trickery is their main thing. So I'd say no fancy alternate words, I'd just call it something plain, like 'info'.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Alan Shore
Here, especially since threads are adversarial to their subject, makes it tricky and is where the line blurs into REAL doxing.
I think that becomes a bit of a semantic argument, purely because to lolcows any archiving of their behaviour is criminal in their eyes, and even if it's not actually illegal as we've seen repeatedly the courts are set up in a way that they can still create problems for Null even when their case or blatantly frivolous/malicious.
 
I am skeptical it will make a difference. Changing the language won't stop the most damaging version of it being the one people use against you.

I can get from a legal standpoint you can claim " well we never dox". I just can't imagine anyone even in a court to give a shit. Surrendering language is like sucking cock. It isnt a one and done thing but the path to future compromises that make so much sense at the time.
 
Sunshine on my shoulders makes me happy, sunshine in my eyes can make me cry.
Sunshine on the water looks so lovely, sunshine almost always makes me high.
If I had a tale that I could tell you, I’d tell a tale sure to make you smile.
If I had a wish that I could wish for you, I’d make a wish for sunshine for all the while.


I've changed my custom title from "Doxhund" to "Local John Denvering Expert" accordingly.
 
As much as I don't like changing terms, I can see the reason why this is being considered. I'm going to pitch a far-fetched idea mulling about my head for discussion's sake. Probably not a good idea, but just to get it out there.

I think everyone should just pick the words or terms they like the most and use them, or have the word dox/doxing be randomly switched to another alternate term, then make a rule against "doxing/unmasking", but not any of the alternatives. We can all infer what the alternates mean based on context, but it makes it harder for anyone to point at the website and slander it as a doxing forum if we now have a rule against it. Imagine articles popping up saying Kiwi Farms' userbase is responsible for all these activities such as "sunshining" or "phonebooking". It would be like an trying to write an article on the Sharty using it's own language; it would look like schizo babble to anyone out of the loop, which is the ideal case. On top of that, it would be easy to poison Brickface's well by responding to any allegations of doxing and correcting them to say "unmasking and doxing" isn't allowed on the website.

Or I'm just being overly optimistic and this would never work due to it being too complicated or otherwise retarded. Like I said, I just figured I'd throw a different idea at the wall. In that case, "republishing" or "republication" would be my choice (as in: "I am republishing this information I have found", or "this is a republication I've made of the following public information"), because that's the simplest way to put what this website is for; republishing something that was already available to the public. Nothing more. Simple, effective, undeniable.
 
Call it LampShading so we can piss off the ADL
Lampshading is already a fan term for some fictional work pointing out that it's doing something kind of dumb.
Sunshining sounds gay but on the other hand positive.
Got some weird connotations for me. Not terrible, but still.
aren't we already using the word "archiving"?
If contact info is freely available online that's all it is anyway
An example of a failed archive due to current wordfilters:
Some L. Cow said:
1) I'm a retard
2) Take down my dox
3) I'm a retard
4) I'll dox you
5) I'm a retard
6) Take down my dox
7) I'll dox you
8) I'm a retard
9) I hate doxing
10) It's doxing not doxxing, dox not doxx
11) I'm a retard
Note the number 8 of the list, causing confusion to the intention. If there's a filter on any of the dox words, it makes it worse and highly inaccurate. Possibly to the point of generating annoying/hard to defend against complaints.

See here for an example of changing it to phonebooking:
Some L. Cow said:
1) I'm a retard
2) Take down my phonebook
3) I'm a retard
4) I'll phonebook you
5) I'm a retard
6) Take down my phonebook
7) I'll phonebook you
8) I'm a retard
9) I hate phonebooking
10) It's phonebooking not phonebooking, phonebook not phonebook
11) I'm a retard
@Null see especially on number 10 of the second quote block. Really removes all meaning from the statement.

Edit: well, I guess the retard filter is gone now? Or was it the retarded filter? I'm retarded. I'm a retard. Test. Test.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: The Cunting Death
Back