Suppose you have a fediverse admin, perhaps one of the several who are oppressive, and they are roaming around somewhere like Twitter or Reddit. One day they spot someone on there they don’t like, maybe someone they know from the fediverse or maybe not, and they give the person a hard time. Are we allowed to talk about those activities, especially considering the barrier is already crossed the other way?
I think you might be the drama at that point.
Removed by mod
You say that like he’s me or that either of us have been doing as you say just because it’s easy to attribute things to others without proof. None of that is true, heck your sources claim I’ve been banned from this place out of spite, which is verifiably false.
Removed by mod
You don’t know how a place works if you are only going to undermine the difference between a community ban and a total ban out of spite. You also misunderstand me if I’ve said anything you claim I am. You and your co-targeters have been told many times you don’t speak for what others mean when they say or do something, especially when the main defense to someone actually thinking critically about everything is to go after them too.
Removed by mod
Because you can’t speak for another’s intentions. And this (along with me being banned from there; that’s only one half of their domain) is reiterated as many times as it has been for the very reason that it has to be. It’s not anyone acting like a “broken record” when it’s in response to something just as repetitive. This was also my point when talking about Elon Musk who you refer to as a Nazi, as well as the things after that you accuse me of, with the slur against trans people having been apologized for two years ago (with the person I said it to being on good terms with me still) because I didn’t know the name of a fictional race from One Piece could ever be a slur.
Removed by mod
Does it involve you (and as such would violate rule 1)?
I believe following someone outside of here officially qualifies as Doxxing.
But doxing is exposing private information, so if their account is public it’s stalking at worst and that’s stretching it.
Are you seriously using the defense “it’s stalking at worst”?
Yeah, that’s not going to stand up in court
Nobody’s talking about defenses in court here but basic definitions.
My county has my name publicly attached to my address, but it doesn’t mean I want people to tell folks (who knows my name) my address!
I don’t follow. OP is talking about referencing online comments on a public forum and not airing someone’s personal details like their home address that could endanger them. My point is that referencing those conversations is simply not doxing when it’s all publicly available. Can you explain what you mean while taking into account the rest of the thread?
I’m comparing telling people who know my name my address which is technically “publicly available” to telling people who know my Lemmy username my other usernames which are technically publicly available. It’s a shitty thing to do.
I am not comparing giving people someone’s address who only knows my Lemmy username (but that would still be shitty, just not related to anything being discussed).
I don’t see a problem if it relates in a way to the fediverse, and it’s not doxxing someone (ie: the usernames are identical or similar enough, and the behavior makes it obvious it’s the same person behind both accounts).
If it’s on twitter or reddit, it’s not really fedi drama.
I think you are the drama.
You can talk about whatever you want here, there even was even a case of an admin from another instance going nuts and putting up links to CSAM “as proof” and they allowed it to remain up.
