Lolcow Derek Smart

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
CatParty said:
Caps?
Click to expand...
upload_2017-1-18_18-2-56.png
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: mrdk_04 and Super Collie
Derek Smart said:
Please post the following for me, in its entirety. Then please send me a link to the post so that I can quote and respond when I show up there tomorrow at some point.
Click to expand...
=== official statement ===

I have reviewed everything.

I am satisfied that some of the results were in fact inflated and inflammatory - and which, I hate to say - appeared to be intentionally misleading (on the part of at least two SA Goons) to cause conflict.

I still have issues with some of the doxxing aspects, but I have made notes about 1 or 2 things I need to research (in both KF and SA threads) before I comment on them.

Regardless, my sole purpose in this, is to ensure that if ANYONE on KF doxxes ANY member of SA, I will retaliate in nothing short of a scorched earth doctrine which leaves NO room for reconciliation.

EVERYONE involved with get unmasked and will no longer be anon.

If you have read any of my blogs, social media posts, media articles etc, you should know that I am exceptionally thorough. Which is pretty much the same reason my games are overly complex and detailed. It's how my brain works. So when I embark on something like this, it's not some half-assed attempt to win points or chest thump. I take my crusades very seriously.

As to doxxing, I know the law inside and out. I also know that it's 100% illegal. So when I refer to that, I'm NOT talking about putting peoples court records (e.g. those guys with open arrest warrants), private info (where they live etc) in the public domain. NO, I'm talking about "outing" and "unmasking" them so they can't continue their illegal activities under the guise of anonymity. Then I will turn that material over to my contacts in law enforcement.

And it's 100% legal to do that.

Heck, every single day sites and social media sites turn over subscriber data to the authorities when there is clear evidence of illegal behavior. CDA Section 230 doesn't cover that. And Free Speech has NOTHING to do with private or public communication - it's a government standard. So those clowns screaming Free Speech, should go to http://www.eff.org and brush up on that.

Further reading:
http://dereksmart.com/2013/11/doxing-a-primer/
https://www.eff.org/issues/cda230
 

Attachments

  • upload_2017-1-18_18-59-57.png
    upload_2017-1-18_18-59-57.png
    32.8 KB · Views: 256
  • Informative
  • Winner
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Nigero, mrdk_04, drain and 8 others
Hey Derek if you're going to come here will you answer support questions for Desktop Commander in between shitting incorrect dox info about random Kiwis? It's kind of important, I can't copy my files into the Coke machine anymore.

edit: Also my avatar is a real life picture of me, just to help you out.
 
  • Winner
  • Informative
Reactions: Nigero, mrdk_04, zedkissed60 and 5 others
Okay, some serious real questions for Derek Smart.

Derek said:
I am satisfied that some of the results were in fact inflated and inflammatory - and which, I hate to say - appeared to be intentionally misleading (on the part of at least two SA Goons) to cause conflict.
Click to expand...

Could you elaborate on this? Specifically, could you elaborate on what exactly you were told about us that incited you into threatening us on twitter? What did you think we were doing when you decided to come after us, and how has that evaluation changed? Do you think the SA Goons responsible for intentionally misleading you were attempting to do so with malicious intent towards us, perhaps to use you as a pawn in their dispute?

Derek said:
As to doxxing, I know the law inside and out. I also know that it's 100% illegal. So when I refer to that, I'm NOT talking about putting peoples court records (e.g. those guys with open arrest warrants), private info (where they live etc) in the public domain. NO, I'm talking about "outing" and "unmasking" them so they can't continue their illegal activities under the guise of anonymity. Then I will turn that material over to my contacts in law enforcement.

And it's 100% legal to do that.
Click to expand...

Okay, you are making a clear distinction between "doxxing", which you claim is illegal, and "exposing", which you claim isn't, which would lead me to believe your distinction is made solely on methodology involved in obtaining the data. As far as I can tell "doxxing", in your view, is exposing data obtained illegally and "exposing" is simply collating publicly available data. Okay, I'm with you so far, although I'd have to squibble with your semantics and suggest that the colloquial use of 'doxxing' has no legal basis and in fact refers to the releasing of anyone's personal information for the purpose of ruffling somebody, which is for the most part entirely legal.

My question is, what exactly do you think we've done that fits your definition of "illegal doxxing" instead of your definition of "exposing"? We put nothing in the public domain that was not already in the public domain. Nothing we've done is illegal. Aren't you really just making a distinction based on morality and motive, because you feel you're doing it for the great and noble cause of shutting us down while we're doing it for kek and upsetting your friends?

Derek said:
Heck, every single day sites and social media sites turn over subscriber data to the authorities when there is clear evidence of illegal behavior. CDA Section 230 doesn't cover that. And Free Speech has NOTHING to do with private or public communication - it's a government standard. So those clowns screaming Free Speech, should go to http://www.eff.org and brush up on that.
Click to expand...

Don't you think that if you told us what law we're supposedly breaking and when and where it was broken instead of just linking us to some kind of libertarian free-speech webzine and telling us to read it (nowhere in particular, mind), people might take you with the barest modicum of seriousness instead of just laughing at you for being an impotent crazy person?
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: mrdk_04, cwcproquo, Meowthkip and 7 others
I can boil down his argument on two points:

1. Doxing as a form of harassment is a crime, but the crime is harassment. Whitepaging people is not.
2. If you do break a law and I am court ordered to hand over IPs / delete posts / etc I have to do it.

So he's right on both accounts, but I've never seen arbitrary phonebooking alone make it to a criminal harassment case. If you're stalking some girl on facebook and republishing her dox on whores-r-us.net, yes, you're going to get in trouble for it.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Nigero, mrdk_04, BlueSpark and 3 others
Null said:
I can boil down his argument on two points:

1. Doxing as a form of harassment is a crime, but the crime is harassment. Whitepaging people is not.
2. If you do break a law and I am court ordered to hand over IPs / delete posts / etc I have to do it.

So he's right on both accounts, but I've never seen arbitrary phonebooking alone make it to a criminal harassment case. If you're stalking some girl on facebook and republishing her dox on whores-r-us.net, yes, you're going to get in trouble for it.
Click to expand...

Oh, he's just talking about harassment law? So there's basically zero distinction between what we do and what he's threatening to do except that we're doing it to his friends and he doesn't like it? Got it.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: mrdk_04, Cthulu and Kilted Gentleman
OwO What's This? said:
I will retaliate in nothing short of a scorched earth doctrine which leaves NO room for reconciliation.

EVERYONE involved with get unmasked and will no longer be anon.
Click to expand...
He realizes some spastic makes this threat, and fails to deliver on it, almost every day here, right? Stop with the internet tough guy shit and just do it already, faggot.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: mrdk_04
Null said:
I can boil down his argument on two points:

1. Doxing as a form of harassment is a crime, but the crime is harassment. Whitepaging people is not.
2. If you do break a law and I am court ordered to hand over IPs / delete posts / etc I have to do it.

So he's right on both accounts, but I've never seen arbitrary phonebooking alone make it to a criminal harassment case. If you're stalking some girl on facebook and republishing her dox on whores-r-us.net, yes, you're going to get in trouble for it.
Click to expand...


Even SA mods and admins have made this point. Even CON makes this point. Randi constantly makes this point.

I'm not sure why Derek Smart thinks he knows better than them.
 
  • Feels
Reactions: mrdk_04
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back