Should doxxers be doxxed?

[Juristonia]

A privatised revenge police force with no oversight or training.
I don't see any way that could possibly go wrong.

[The Ice States]

No.
People should not be harassed and placed in danger.

Unless of course they're harassing people and putting them in danger. In which case, yes they should. Bullies should be bullied, terrorists should be terrorized. It's the only language they understand.

While trolling some obnoxious internet troll is one thing, bullying is another. And there's no excuse for bullying.

[Wallowis]

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

[Gallia-]

A privatised revenge police force with no oversight or training.
I don't see any way that could possibly go wrong.

Posting people's public information like their name and address on the Internet is a "police force"? Lol.

I guess since phone books disappeared this is rare now though.

[Sordhau]

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

Most people have two eyes so that really doesn't track.

[Wallowis]

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

Most people have two eyes so that really doesn't track.

If you take someone's eye, and they take your eye, you take their other eye, and they take your eye. Then you're both blind.

[Sordhau]

Most people have two eyes so that really doesn't track.

If you take someone's eye, and they take your eye, you take their other eye, and they take your eye. Then you're both blind.

It's "an eye for an eye", not "an eye for an eye for an eye for an eye".

[Side 3]

I agree. Who cares if some innocents are harmed as long as justice is served.

Yes, that's the point. If you find someone who is uncooperative and engages in some negative behavior, returning the behavior at them will (generally) get them to become cooperative, by stopping that behavior. If it doesn't, you slowly escalate until they come around. This is pretty basic stuff that you learn in school when you realize that "telling the teacher" doesn't work, but having a scrap about it (whatever "it" is) makes friends from enemies.

Doxxing a doxxer will probably get them to stop once they realize it's putting their family "in danger" by putting their private information out in public. If they don't, then I guess it will need to escalate to something more dramatic, like a civil suit, or even making a complaint with their ISP or local PD about that particular person harassing you. As long as you have their private information you'll be fine.

If you can't be sure it's them then maybe some people can start a small business or worker's coop built to dox people for payment.

So let's say someone in your friend circle doxxes someone. Would you be alright with yourself and your family being doxxed just to punish the doxxer?

[Wallowis]

If you take someone's eye, and they take your eye, you take their other eye, and they take your eye. Then you're both blind.

It's "an eye for an eye", not "an eye for an eye for an eye for an eye".

But ultimately, if a criminal takes your eye and you take their eye due to the logic of an eye for an eye, if the person who's eye you took as revenge also follows that logic, then they'll take your eye, and then you'll take their eye.

Do you really expect that if you dox someone who doxes someone else, that they won't dox you? Or any other example. If someone punches you and you punch them back, if they agree with your logic they'll punch you again.

[Juristonia]

Posting people's public information like their name and address on the Internet is a "police force"? Lol.

I guess since phone books disappeared this is rare now though.

Let's not pretend this is just posting some random harmless information online.
This is an active group abuse effort and nothing less than unverified mob justice against people who, according to people on the internet, may or may not have done something wrong.

Even outside the moral aspect, it's just flat out a stupid idea, because we've already seen cases of mistaken identity leading to innocent people getting doxxed and harassed, and yet you somehow seem to think it's a good idea to have more of that, but like, worse.

[Sordhau]

It's "an eye for an eye", not "an eye for an eye for an eye for an eye".

But ultimately, if a criminal takes your eye and you take their eye due to the logic of an eye for an eye, if the person who's eye you took as revenge also follows that logic, then they'll take your eye, and then you'll take their eye.

Do you really expect that if you dox someone who doxes someone else, that they won't dox you? Or any other example. If someone punches you and you punch them back, if they agree with your logic they'll punch you again.

I frankly have never believed in the concept of a slippery slope, simply because I've yet to see an instance in which one holds true.

[Side 3]

But ultimately, if a criminal takes your eye and you take their eye due to the logic of an eye for an eye, if the person who's eye you took as revenge also follows that logic, then they'll take your eye, and then you'll take their eye.

Do you really expect that if you dox someone who doxes someone else, that they won't dox you? Or any other example. If someone punches you and you punch them back, if they agree with your logic they'll punch you again.

I frankly have never believed in the concept of a slippery slope, simply because I've yet to see an instance in which one holds true.

Someone punching you if you punch them is a hardly a slippery slope, regardless of who punched whom first. You seem to be under the impression that people think in a way that is completely logical and devoid of emotions, but that simply isn't the case. Do you really think a doxxer is going to just back down because they've been doxxed themselves? More likely they're just going to get angry and dox you back. And what the hell are you going to do after that? You've already doxxed them, you can't dox them again.

[Washington Resistance Army]

No.
People should not be harassed and placed in danger.

Unless of course they're harassing people and putting them in danger. In which case, yes they should. Bullies should be bullied, terrorists should be terrorized. It's the only language they understand.

More or less sums up my view.

[Vistulange]

I'm not sure if I ought to laugh at the folks who seem to think "tit-for-tat" is a good justice system, or if I should weep at those who think "justice" is synonymous with "revenge". There's a big overlap between these categories, so really, laugh or weep?

Eh, it'll be "laugh" today.

[Gallia-]

Most people have two eyes so that really doesn't track.

If you take someone's eye, and they take your eye, you take their other eye, and they take your eye. Then you're both blind.

If you take my eye, I take your head is a bit less justifiable.

Certainly swatting doxxers or whatever would send a pretty dramatic message, mainly because it would just encourage doxxers to go to swatting as a rule though. I think everyone here can agree that encouraging people to make fake bomb threats to the local PD and potentially getting Twitteratis or whatever killed over the funny comment chain is a bit of unintended blowback (unless...).

If someone doxes someone, they should be doxxed.
If someone sends complaints to someone's job that gets them fired, do the same to them.
If someone complains to your ISP, do the same to theirs.

Reciprocity and proportionate response is the most effective method of escalation to force cooperation. It works more often than not. OTOH, calling the police on someone for googling your pseudonym and finding your real life Facebook profile is absurd. If you don't want to be doxed, dox people who dox you, don't put information that's private (like your name and employment and such) on the public Internet where it can be found with a Google search, and try to make sure that you can't be found on public search engines.

OTOH if the dox is done for the purpose of expressly enabling harassment, or bypassing a restraining order, or something similar, then yeah it should probably be met with more force, since that's a targeted attack. Complain to their ISP as a first point, if you start getting weird threatening emails or the like, instead of just doxing them. If that doesn't work, go to the local sheriff or police department with a restraining order and attorney and say "this person is harassing me over the Internet". That's a pretty normal reaction and ordinary escalation, but also really quite rare.

Almost all doxes are done less for purposes of actual, real life, tangible harassment and more for amusement or the shock value needed when one-upping someone in an Internet argument. That's rather less severe and a reverse doxxing is a suitable response, with an immediate mutual agreement to not use your real life names or leak actual information once it becomes clear that both of you are aware of each other's IRL identities being the mutual agreement.

It may not stop the doxxer from doxxing someone else in the future, but that's neither your responsibility nor your problem as an individual to handle. If someone is a serial doxxer who just likes replying to people's first names in Internet arguments, that's rather low on the scale of potential harm doxxing can do, and there's no particular reason to be any harsher on that person since they haven't shown any evidence that they're going to go down a "slippery slope" of doxxing into full blown swatting.

[Blackhawk Realm]

No. "An eye for an eye" is outdated in many cases, and this applies.

[RedBrickLand]

No, if you dox a doxxer they will stoop you down to their level and beat you with experience. Plus, it would only encourage more harassment and doxxing. "An eye for an eye" does not work here and would certainly just make everything worse. However, I do think there should be some sort of way for law enforcement to track these doxxers but otherwise, people should just be really careful of getting themselves doxxed.

[Katganistan]

A privatised revenge police force with no oversight or training.
I don't see any way that could possibly go wrong.

Same crappy ideas as always. This poster loves the idea of a police state with 24/7/365 surveillance and a boot on everyone's neck.

[Gallia-]

I am basically Felix Dzerzhinsky and Lenin rolled into a fluffy calzone.

[Nipponkyo]

A privatised revenge police force with no oversight or training.
I don't see any way that could possibly go wrong.

Same crappy ideas as always. This poster loves the idea of a police state with 24/7/365 surveillance and a boot on everyone's neck.

I guess that explains the Chinese flag.

[Ifreann]

36 million people endorsed that statement by not distancing themselves from it.

What bizarre nonsense.

[The Two Jerseys]

Only as a legal remedy following a civil trial, I do not approve of internet vigilantes.

[GuessTheAltAccount]

A privatised revenge police force with no oversight or training.
I don't see any way that could possibly go wrong.

Same crappy ideas as always. This poster loves the idea of a police state with 24/7/365 surveillance and a boot on everyone's neck.

You've mischaracterized my worldview before. Why should anyone believe anything you ever say?

36 million people endorsed that statement by not distancing themselves from it.

What bizarre nonsense.

'Twas slight hyperbole, but my point remains. The public didn't react as vocally against that sort of rhetoric as they probably should have. There are all kinds of reasonable disagreements on the tradeoff between the risk of a misuse of privacy and the risk of a misuse of surveillance powers that need not require "siding with the child pornographers" and people should've pushed back a lot harder.

[GuessTheAltAccount]

Same crappy ideas as always. This poster loves the idea of a police state with 24/7/365 surveillance and a boot on everyone's neck.

I guess that explains the Chinese flag.

Actually, the Chinese flag in my avatar means something else altogether.

It means I worked in a country that, however wrongfully and unfortunately, has a lot more significance in this world than my rural hometown. It means I, if only for a short while, lived overseas while gainfully employed, and the fact that critics of my worldview continued to assume I was a basement dweller discredits those critics, and in turn, vindicates my worldview.

I never claimed said worldview was perfect. Even now I don't know if, as noted earlier in the thread, it's my anger talking. It's just frustrating seeing these people get away with swatting and slander and doxxing and feeling desperate for a crackdown. ANY crackdown.

But at least I know who not to listen to.

And frankly, your own assumptions about my choice in avatar are only slightly better.

[Existential Cats]

No. Certainly not if the person they doxx is a Nazi.