"Doxing" in 2025

[Vecr]

My previous attempt was unclear and didn't work because the word filter changed, so I'll try again.

If a cow says "that site doxed me!" we can still post that, right?

Otherwise all the excuses about archival go out the window.

Just use a different fucking word that doesn't have a criminal definition to it! Do you not fucking get it?

No, we can't. If a cow (or anyone else reacting to the site, really) says we dox people, we need to be able to quote and discuss that using the words they use. Even though they're not using the "correct" criminal definition, and we wouldn't be either.

I can try to write out a fake example if you want me to.

 

[DiscoRodeo]

The amount of autistics in this thread who think we need to band together to choose an official replacement word is unreal, there's like two dozen things you can call it and they're literally all fine for communicating what you mean without being the name of an actionable criminal offence. Just say whatever.

Just take it as a warning from Josh, honestly.

Didn't know that doxxing was being taken seriously as a crime now, so its good to know in general to be careful around it.

Dunno about changing the word, but going to be a bit more cautious around the term and if there is any information out there, going to be very careful that it lands in the publicly known category

 

[Orange Rhymer]

I need a word filter.
It's human nature - I'm gonna slip up and get B&

but personally, I'm using 'powerword'
(keeping 'nigger' as a personal favorite, though)

 

[Vecr]

I need a word filter.

It can't happen unless Null goes farther than he should.

Didn't know that doxxing was being taken seriously as a crime now, so its good to know in general to be careful around it.

I knew that, but not only do we still need to be able to report on accusations of crimes, we need to be able to report on accusations of non-crimes. "Lolcow A alleges us to be criminal doxers" isn't the same thing as "Lolcow B (that knows we aren't doing illegal things) calls us doxers, because under Lolcow B's definition of doxing we are doxers".

 

[AnOminous]

It can't happen unless Null goes farther than he should.

If we can have wordfilters just because a particular word annoys Null or just as a joke, why not for something for site survival. I don't personally think it will help a thing, but hey, not my site.

I do think it might be a more substantive thing to consider, before doing it, whether someone's home address even adds anything to a thread. Some threads where it's actually important: monkeyfuckers. Some threads where it's actually funny: Dax Herrera boasted for years about being some rich fucker living in a mansion and he lives in a completely unremarkable shitbox. Some threads where it's unavoidable: Chris-Chan or Tomlinson, where much of the drama centers around a specific irl property.

 

[The President of Nintendo]

I submit the term demographics for consideration.

"Hey, does anyone have the  demographics for Dwight Power?"

"Can you get the demographics for Judy Tester?"

"Here are the  demographics for Nate Higgers."

I know the term typically refers to statistical information about groups of people, but I have heard the term used casually to refer to collecting basic info about individuals as well, such as name, sex, birthrate, address etc.

I think the term has the dual advantage of sounding far less ominous than "doxxing" as well as being a term already widely used.

 

[Vecr]

If we can have wordfilters just because a particular word annoys Null or just as a joke

I'm not sure he can have those either. If a cow comes on here and posts, or we quote a cow post from off site, we aren't archiving anymore if the words are changed. You need to delete content that is illegal to host, but changing the record as a joke isn't that at all.

 

[Hooked on phobics]

I do want to say to an extent this is a treadmill problem, people redefine shit all the time, and I bet this will be attempted AGAIN.

But If I had to suggest a new word, I'd say ascertained / ASCI'd. definition is (currently) clear enough, it can be shortened easily enough, ect.

 

[Diggus Bickus]

I don't have any problems with banning doxing on the site entirely. It would help keep the site on the Clearnet, and I've never felt that having someones address and phone number at the top of the thread made anything much funnier.

Lolcows are funny because they do stupid things in real life and on the Internet. Having archives of the dumb shit some people say and do online across their various accounts is enough to keep me entertained. I don't need their address and phone number to keep laughing. I have zero need to know how to contact them.

The only thing different I can think of is when farmers are genuinely doing good work. Like when we post dox of people committing horrible crimes like in the zoosadist/MPB threads. Expose and dox them all. Sending their info to LEOs helps, but also having their info posted can help have enough public pressure to get authorities to actually do something.

I feel like there's already some sort of quality control when it comes to performing the nasty voodoo act that's the D word (because we can't say it now). I've seen jannies ban people or specific parts of threads being purged because some retard decided to get someone's address & phone number to post it.

Mainly, the quality control part of it should be that it's legally and publicly available information, as getting it through dirty means immediately gets you banned off the website. I don't really disagree with that, we don't need this forum to get more scrutiny as is.

 

[Rozzy]

How does backtracing sound as a replacement?

 

[Null]

No, we can't. If a cow (or anyone else reacting to the site, really) says we dox people, we need to be able to quote and discuss that using the words they use. Even though they're not using the "correct" criminal definition, and we wouldn't be either.

What is your contention? Are you complaining I'm banning the word altogether? Because that's not what the post says! I never fucking said that!!!

 

[Null]

I do want to say to an extent this is a treadmill problem, people redefine shit all the time, and I bet this will be attempted AGAIN.

who gives a shit? as I've said twice: we have to constantly change hosts, domain names, software, payment processors, etc etc etc. So why do I have to 100% change everything on the fly continuously, but asking people to align themselves with contemporary definitions is too much? I don't get a fucking choice! Yes it's real fucking bullshit that things are just taken from you all the time but I have to just deal with it!

 

[Max Caulfield]

@Null Why not put it to a vote and do that auto-replace words thing for dox/doxx/doxxxing, etc for the winner. Give it a few weeks and re-run the poll. Sounds like it could be fun as well as piss off frozen peach tards.

 

[lil retard]

I'm calling it cow sleuthing.

 

[Null]

BECAUSE
THE WORD
STILL
EXISTS

 

[RandyMiskatonic]

BECAUSE
THE WORD
STILL
EXISTS

And
It
Always
Will.

No amount of backbending and cuckery you do about this is going to change the fact that your enemies will still use the law against you. I bet this brings back flashbacks of Jim Watkins threatening to feed you to the pig.

 

[Sneedfully and Peacefully]

I think the retards would understand it better if you did it in the condescending Nick Rekieta voice.

"I. Want you. To stop. Saying. Dox.
I don't, like, that you have to use a different word. I don't want to wear the balldo make you use different vocabulary. But that's, just, how, it is." Maybe lick a bottle or eat some cheese after to get your point across.

I get it I do from both ends that retards and trannies will still call it DDDOOOXXXING (the criminal term) when it isn't, and that for the sake of showing that you don't acknowledge aggregating publicly available information as such (and it isn't criminal) you ask that the culture changes to reflect that. It's all really shit. As such I'm partial to unmasking/"has been unmasked as" because of LFJ and that it'd be a funny day in court when LFJ has to reconcile what he does and calls unmasking with what the Farms would call unmasking as being two totally different things.

 

[Vecr]

What is your contention? Are you complaining I'm banning the word altogether? Because that's not what the post says! I never fucking said that!!!

I'm going to try to be careful when writing this.
I have multiple contentions:
1) wordfilters should not alter posts. They can delete posts or make them unpostable if you need to do that, or hold them for moderator review, but doing more than that is too close to TikTok legal case style editorializing. This includes pozloading my negholep ( or pozload my negholep ? What one triggers now? ) and
2) If a cow says we are doxers, we need to be able to use both definitions of the word in actual use to discuss what they mean. Remember that non-cows also discuss the site, if someone somewhat friendly calls us doxers we need to be able to use the word in the non criminal sense to quote them and discuss what they mean.

Example

some guy A, off site: KF are doxers, I found this guy's dox on there.
site user X, on site: some guy A calls us doxers, we are but not in the criminal sense (inserts full off-site quote using BBcode)
site user Y, on site: responding to site user X: I think he means in the non-criminal sense

Example the second

Cow A here is a new cow, transformed from a media thread. Quite common recently.

cow A, off site: KF are doxers, they've got my dox! I want it taken down!
site user T, on site: cow A calls us doxers (inserts full off-site quote using BBcode)
site user U, on site: responding to user T: What does cow A mean by "I want this taken down"? It may depend on the definition of doxing cow A is using. Maybe cow A is just mad and is using the first definition of doxing where it's not (normally) a crime, or maybe cow A is using the second (criminal) definition and the site (A Website, lol)/the LLC/Josh/any individual without tight opsec/individual users if a subpoena comes in could get into a resource and time draining process.

Basically, I'm asking if users X, T, and U are fine, or if at least one of them is not, could you clarify the new rules and post them somewhere prominent?

 

[Untrue and Dishonest]

Why do kiwicels pretend doxing people and obsessively stalking their social media isn't a form of intimidation?
Everyone knows people are using the doxes for illegal purposes. There wouldn't be such a demand for it if people didn't. It's just not talked about here.

 

[Satan SoJoe]

Would changing the terminology achieve anything meaningful beyond legal implications? It's clear that the "people" who "report" on Kiwi Farms often do so with malicious intent, deliberately misrepresenting facts, misusing terms, and repeating debunked claims. They rely on bad-faith arguments to portray the site in a worse light than it truly is, Even if we stopped using the term "doxxing," those who hate the website would likely continue labeling it as a hub for "doxxing and harassment." or the "tranny killing website"


For your average person, sharing private information like home addresses or phone numbers, (even if publicly accessible) is universally regarded as a bad thing.
Realistically, there’s no valid justification for having the home address on a thread—it almost always serves malicious purposes, and even if we are not the ones fucking with people, they can always point finger at us because we are the ones that have their addresses on the website, i have always wondered, if we are not gonna fuck with people, why do we need to know where they currently live?