I hope people condemning the former also condemn the latter.
When Musk does it:
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1858916546338590740
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1858914228624924963
When others do it:
https://www.reddit.com/r/ParlerWatch/comments/1igw3cs/elon_m...
https://x.com/jessesingal/status/1886479301081522599
(The names it includes are already in the Wired article)
This is reporting in the public interest. Nothing they revealed isn't available already as verifiable public information.
But then again... these are people outright breaking the law and I sure do want to know who's potentially tampering with my data. If the courts won't do it, someone has to put names and faces to this.
They're acting in official capacity. I've lived in towns where the mayor is not elected. They're still public figures.
They chose this approach. No one is under any obligation to abet and protect them.
This might be true, however...
> Nothing they revealed isn't available already as verifiable public information.
... collating publicly available information and publishing it in one place would still meet my definition of doxxing.
(In this case, the doxxing _might_ be entirely justified and be in the public interest. I don't know.)
Sometimes HN really confuses me.
When it comes to these people specifically, they need to be publicly called out. What's happening is unprecedented and possibly illegal. I know most of the press has been bought off or strong-armed to look the other way by the new administration, but at least someone is still doing reporting.
Mocking != doxing.
Musk was horrid to do that, but it's a different thing.
"This community has been banned
This subreddit has been temporarily banned due to a prevalence of violent content. Inciting and glorifying violence or doxing are against Reddit’s platform-wide Rules. It will reopen in 72 hours, during which Reddit will support moderators and provide resources to keep Reddit a healthy place for discussion and debate."
Why? Its ok when our betters engage in such behavior and who could be better than the rich?
When some poors like "journalists" try to do this, they're just upending the system for their own gain. It would really be tolerating corruption if you just tolerated them ripping up our current system of governance just because they preferred a different set of rules. Elections have consequences and its just gauche to ignore the results like this.
That doesn't mean it's OK to call for violence against them! But Wired isn't doing that. It does mean that news outlets need to report on who they are and what they're doing, even if they fear (even if they know) that third parties might issue death threats.
It’s a fundamental matter of opinion driving the discourse - not the misappropriation of some objectively correct morality.
