- Joined
- Jan 18, 2021
It's interesting how so many people seem so oblivious as they give their opponents ammunition.
Obviously we all agree here that, let's say, some pedo's anonymity isn't gonna be sacrosanct, and he wouldn't want all of his info and misdeeds documented somewhere by his opponents, and we understand that one could call this some sort of "real-world harm". In some sense, the fallback always has to be to the bailey that is "but it's legal" (as it should be).
Yes, this is a proper strategic move, but people here should be more cognizant of the language they use all the time. No point in giving the bad guys what they want, so that they can point to it and say "look, they are the bad ones! Evil, scary! Destroy KF!!"
As an anecdote I've seen a lot recently: everyone seems to love the game Palworld. Nintendo, from my understanding, is trying to sue them. These people who love this game, though, seem to talk incessantly about the similarities between Palworld and Pokemon. Look, fools: you're giving Nintendo everything they need to destroy you. Instead, talk about all the ways in which these two games are different, the ways in which this new game is clearly its own vision completely detached from Nintendo's IP, or how Pokemon is similar to other properties and isn't unique.
But nah, the fools can't comprehend that they cause their favorite game damage. "Look, their own players admit the similarities!"
But in that way: is there a better term even than those, that somehow stresses how it is unlikely the malicious, criminal "doxxing"? Instead of just avoiding using the terms that cause us harm, is there any possible positive spin on it at all?
We've gotten to an era where everyone hates journalists, after all... but maybe that is the path we should take.
I'm not sure it would change much in the long run, as KF will always be a target. But I guess every bit helps.
Obviously we all agree here that, let's say, some pedo's anonymity isn't gonna be sacrosanct, and he wouldn't want all of his info and misdeeds documented somewhere by his opponents, and we understand that one could call this some sort of "real-world harm". In some sense, the fallback always has to be to the bailey that is "but it's legal" (as it should be).
Yes, this is a proper strategic move, but people here should be more cognizant of the language they use all the time. No point in giving the bad guys what they want, so that they can point to it and say "look, they are the bad ones! Evil, scary! Destroy KF!!"
As an anecdote I've seen a lot recently: everyone seems to love the game Palworld. Nintendo, from my understanding, is trying to sue them. These people who love this game, though, seem to talk incessantly about the similarities between Palworld and Pokemon. Look, fools: you're giving Nintendo everything they need to destroy you. Instead, talk about all the ways in which these two games are different, the ways in which this new game is clearly its own vision completely detached from Nintendo's IP, or how Pokemon is similar to other properties and isn't unique.
But nah, the fools can't comprehend that they cause their favorite game damage. "Look, their own players admit the similarities!"
But in that way: is there a better term even than those, that somehow stresses how it is unlikely the malicious, criminal "doxxing"? Instead of just avoiding using the terms that cause us harm, is there any possible positive spin on it at all?
We've gotten to an era where everyone hates journalists, after all... but maybe that is the path we should take.
I'm not sure it would change much in the long run, as KF will always be a target. But I guess every bit helps.
