Doxing on the forum

Charles Morris4 said:Basically, in an attempt to not drag things out or just keep repeating the same old info—which is why we were all using code words—I wasn't being super specific about what I meant when I called you out, and honestly, I wasn't totally clear either about what I thought you were getting at 😁
So we ended up just guessing, and well, here we are with a whole new thread.

Look, arguing over ownership, what can be said about whom, where, how, who’s responsible, or what actually counts as private... in my book, debating that shouldn't strip away any basic human decency. When I say that, I mean people should be able to look at the bigger picture instead of just clinging to the rulebook (even if I've been acting a bit thick lately regarding following the rules).

What I mean is—technically speaking—someone might actually have the right to post something about someone else, but that doesn't mean it's something we should just tolerate if you step back and look at the context. Rules are fine and all, but without context, they're pretty much useless.

Edit: mistywolf17 — props to the mod move (just so it's not like every single comment is negative 😬)

I couldn't agree more—this forum is a living, breathing community of actual people.

Lisa Hernandez3 said:You’ve brought up that situation involving N'dugu more than a few times now—I’m honestly not quite sure why it sticks in your mind so much. If I recall correctly, that whole thing only blew up because voices were being raised during an argument, right after he was stripped of his moderator status? He had been warned for calling Brodarac a "fat slob," if memory serves. It might serve as a decent case study regarding the leaking of private information—or perhaps they were just vague insinuations—but I feel like you're circling back to this same point a little too frequently.

When it comes to this forum, you’ve got the email address you registered with—though I guess things are a bit chaotic. You have Lastan sporting that blue color, then there are those people who insist on forcing their own specific fonts, and one user who actually wrote everything centered—which was a choice, to say the least. As for fra Hell, well, she was a total menace in every single incarnation. Those are just some of the quirks around here. Traces..

I wasn't actually trying to call him out by name. Honestly, I was being neutral on purpose—totally intentional. It’s pretty clear even Aisling didn't catch my drift. 😁 Man, he really just reminded me of myself. If he hadn't popped up here, I probably wouldn't have even given him a second thought.

I didn't really get my act together until I got a certain PM. Doesn't even matter who it was from.

darksailor2 said:Nothing in this life is ever truly free. ☕

Look, they might not own the rights, but if you’re the one posting a photo on a forum, you can't suddenly start crying about privacy later—especially when your own post contains a link to some third-party PDF! I don't get what's supposed to be funny about that. 🤷

Look, I agree that it’s rude, ugly, and honestly just plain idiotic, but you can't exactly go around suing someone over it. 🤷 Look, you posted that picture yourself for everyone on this forum to see. Nobody is stopping anyone from saving it and then using it to call you out somewhere else later. That’s just how it works, I guess.
If he just grabbed an image from your Facebook profile and hit paste, then that’s basically a whole different set of posts right there. I guess.

What does that have to do with anything? 😁

I guess we're talking about JPK again. Maybe it's worth looking into. kaže:
Well, there you have it. Google's logo is officially owned by the forum now. Huge congrats to Anderlon!

Congrats to you.

The thread is still here! It hasn't been deleted from the forum! 😁

I don't know what to tell you. I guess people just want to believe whatever makes them feel better about their own choices. Maybe that's the problem. It’s all just noise at this point. kaže:
Of course there are. She posted that photo under specific privacy settings, which basically means only her friends—the people she actually gave permission to see it—can access it. I mean, why else do you think Facebook statuses don't just show up on Google searches? It's pretty obvious.

I mean, look, I’m all for an open internet and free software in general. But just because something is technically accessible online doesn't mean it belongs to everyone. Ownership matters. It's only "everyone's" if the owner actually allows it. Your Facebook is basically your own digital living room—you should have the right to decide what stays inside and what goes out.

Let's talk about Severina and that video Index posted a few years back. 😁
Severina lost that lawsuit because Index basically filmed someone who wasn't even authorized to distribute that footage to anyone!
Suppose Severina posted that video to her Facebook profile, but she set the privacy settings so only her friends could see it. Would she actually have grounds to sue Index if they went ahead and published the same video themselves? I guess it really comes down to how you look at it, maybe. 😁

Oh yeah, I totally forgot about this one!
I managed to dig up some old off-topic threads using Google searches! They were deleted a long time ago, but I found them. They're all available for everyone to see now. 😁

So, long story short! I don't think it breaks any rules if someone just takes that xy image he posted on Reddit and copies it over to MK.
If that thread got nuked, but someone saved a screenshot to their hard drive just to go around posting it all over the forum later... I mean, honestly, that’s just low-class behavior. It’s petty. But even then, I don't think it actually breaks any rules. Just like how people's posts don't get deleted just because someone asks, I don't see why images should be any different. Once an image is posted here, it belongs to the forum. That's how it works.
If a mod just ripped an image from a deleted thread and posted it somewhere else—which I guess they can do since they hold all the power—then yeah, they're acting like a total jerk. But honestly? The owner put that picture on the forum themselves. They basically handed over their privacy the moment they hit upload.

I'm not sure. I guess she might if it was on a private profile rather than a public fan page. I mean, the news outlet could potentially be forced to reveal which friend gave them access, and she could sue over that. Plus, there's always the copyright issue, since ownership exists the moment the work is created.

Say you take pictures of your zucchini (the vegetable) and they end up in a cookbook where someone makes money off them (😁 yeah, I'm talking about you), I don't think you'd feel like they were acting all legal and ethical, even if you didn't explicitly put a copyright notice on it. Especially if the person making money was one of your Facebook friends or sold it further along.

Eric Newman75 said:I couldn't agree more—this forum is a living, breathing community of actual people.

I wasn't actually trying to call him out by name. Honestly, I was being neutral on purpose—totally intentional. It’s pretty clear even Aisling didn't catch my drift. 😁 Man, he really just reminded me of myself. If he hadn't popped up here, I probably wouldn't have even given him a second thought.

I didn't really get my act together until I got a certain PM. Doesn't even matter who it was from.

I did understand, though you had mentioned it before, so I just assumed you were referring to that same example again. As I mentioned in my message, I didn't quite grasp the second part. I guess my previous point was sort of that those were unique circumstances—the guy isn't posting anymore, so he can't really give you an answer anyway.

boldwalker12 said:Look, regarding Grazio, it’s not even about an uploaded photo; it’s just a link to the specific thread where she used to post them. So, if that thread actually got nuked, then all of us moderators are basically flying blind without our badges on. 😬

The only way this becomes an issue is if there's some rule against linking back to archived threads... 🤷

What link are you talking about? I was referring to an actual photo posted by a moderator—someone who isn't even on the team anymore after being kicked out (though that wasn't because of my photo or anything related to the issues I had with them there, among other things). I mean a photo, not a link to a thread.

Also, people were being handed out certain IP addresses that they shouldn't have cared about, all while the moderators were debating the reasons behind someone's ban and so on (and I'm just now realizing all of that is considered forbidden practice here).

The guy just blew a fuse and short-circuited his own system

sadly.

and honestly, he’s not the first one to pull a stunt like that and burn himself out😁

if you think we're being malicious... well, we are😳 but you could argue we even have some resident virtuosos here who specialize in triggering these little digital meltdowns😳😁 😁

Susan Price30 said:What link are you talking about? I was referring to an actual photo posted by a moderator—someone who isn't even on the team anymore after being kicked out (though that wasn't because of my photo or anything related to the issues I had with them there, among other things). I mean a photo, not a link to a thread.

Also, people were being handed out certain IP addresses that they shouldn't have cared about, all while the moderators were debating the reasons behind someone's ban and so on (and I'm just now realizing all of that is considered forbidden practice here).

I'm honestly just hijacking your thread to say that Mortitia has incredible legs. No offense intended, I'm just sitting here watching the game with a drink in my hand. Hopefully she isn't watching it either. 😍

Eric Newman75 said:I'm honestly just hijacking your thread to say that Mortitia has incredible legs. No offense intended, I'm just sitting here watching the game with a drink in my hand. Hopefully she isn't watching it either. 😍

🤣 Morticia won because she has the longest legs—she's nearly 6'3", so that's why. We actually ended up deleting some photos that were pretty stunning back when those "fan clubs" were starting to form on Reddit 😉 and things like that...

On topic—what I'm actually wondering about is whether mods are allowed to give out a user's IP address to someone else. Is that even something that's permitted?

Alright, let me ask you this—do you actually have a single instance where a moderator handed out a user's IP address? Or are you just throwing that out there as a hypothetical?

So what if someone actually gets hold of your IP address? You should realize there’s practically nothing they can do with it... unless they have some massive influence at an ISP or a federal warrant in their hands.

Susan Price30 said:🤣 Morticia won because she has the longest legs—she's nearly 6'3", so that's why. We actually ended up deleting some photos that were pretty stunning back when those "fan clubs" were starting to form on Reddit 😉 and things like that...

On topic—what I'm actually wondering about is whether mods are allowed to give out a user's IP address to someone else. Is that even something that's permitted?

It doesn't pass. Seriously. One of the first things they told me when I stepped up to be a moderator was that we never, ever hand out IP addresses to anyone. Period. If it's true that some mod actually leaked someone's IP, that's a massive breach of privacy. In my book, that's grounds for getting kicked out of the role immediately.

Kate Foster12 said:So what if someone actually gets hold of your IP address? You should realize there’s practically nothing they can do with it... unless they have some massive influence at an ISP or a federal warrant in their hands.

Unless they get total control over your computer. Like, full access, including your mic and webcam 😬 ....

Susan Price30 said:Don't think I'm falling for those obvious tricks of yours,🤣 don't you worry 😉 :not jealous:

What do you mean by control over the computer??? If that's how it starts, we'll have to move. To a different continent.

What are you even talking about? I said what I said. Period. 🤷

Let’s just stick to the actual issues being discussed here on the forum rather than wandering off
we all have that one acquaintance who is...
yet somehow nobody ever specifies who this "someone" actually is or which specific group we're talking about
and honestly, how exactly do you expect people to react when you won't even say who the target is?

Look, as long as you aren't explicitly blurring the line between the person and their work—or at least until it becomes dead easy to point a finger at someone specific—I’d argue this falls more under the category of provocation or just straight-up trolling rather than a privacy violation. If that's the case, we don't need to ban it; we just need to steer the conversation back on track.

I get it, though. Posting on a site like Reddit always carries that risk of being identified. Everyone is out here venting about their own lives, talking about people they know, sharing personal anecdotes. If someone happens to recognize themselves in a story, well, shit happens. It’s probably just an unavoidable part of the game.

Oops, posted this in the wrong thread. 😁

So, yesterday I ended up owing Lisa Hernandez a follow-up; it’s about copyright issues, so I’ll just touch on that briefly. I’ve polished the wording of the response I received, but the actual substance remains exactly the same:

"Copyright doesn't need its own special category of protection; any work is protected the moment it’s published. That means that one user over at Lineage—whose text was shamelessly lifted by The New York Times (who then had the nerve to credit it as being taken from the Lineage forum in their digital edition, much like how they used to foolishly claim in print that photos were pulled from Flickr)—actually has a solid case for a lawsuit.
Basically, the forum maintains certain rights so it can keep posts publicly accessible, but that doesn't give the site owner carte blanche to do whatever they want. For instance, when editors from Cosmopolitan were picking stories based on what Šupendar wrote, they actually made sure to get permission from every single individual author."

Reddit isn't the owner of what you post there.

I appreciate you and Lastan—I think we’re definitely on the same page here.

Technically, a forum might be the owner of some specific post or manifesto, but they don't actually hold the copyright
I think it’s pretty easy to wrap your head around why things work that way without us having to dive into the weeds of every single individual case

Nah. I see where you're coming from, but unlike you, I actually use the word "owner" in its literal sense. Let’s try this again.

Under U.S. copyright law, the creator always remains the owner of their work, while they merely grant the publisher the right to exploit it.

Honestly, even most American journalists don't grasp this, so they end up signing contracts that hand over their entire copyright to publishers. That makes those kinds of deals incredibly easy to overturn in court because, by definition, the author is the copyright holder. It's their intellectual property.

hollowtrucker77 said:Let’s just stick to the actual issues being discussed here on the forum rather than wandering off
we all have that one acquaintance who is...
yet somehow nobody ever specifies who this "someone" actually is or which specific group we're talking about
and honestly, how exactly do you expect people to react when you won't even say who the target is?

Personally, I was addressing two specific points—first, protecting user data from problematic moderators (and we’ve already established there are plenty here), and second, the unequal application of the rules between mods and users. If users aren't allowed to comment on moderator actions or other people's warnings and bans because it violates policy, then the exact same standard should apply to them.

Regarding the leaking of private information, that matter is settled for me, which is why I didn't name anyone; both moderators have been replaced and are former staff now, and the damage done can't be undone...

As for the other issue (scenarios where a moderator discusses someone's ban, warning, or persona, etc.), I can't post certain Prime Minister's messages publicly here since, as far as I know, that isn't permitted. Those messages explain quite clearly what is happening and why the moderator acts the way she does (why she's being subjective, rude, or unprofessional). However, I can find the posts or comments I'm referring to and send them to you via DM, or you could forward those DMs you still have saved that relate to this...

P.S. Some people on this thread felt it was necessary to bring up N'dugi for whatever reason, so I'll just take this opportunity to say that, in my opinion, he was an okay moderator (for a while, at least) and an exceptional debater...

The fact that things ended up the way they did happened for other reasons and is unrelated to the moderator misconduct I am discussing here....

Yeah,
the thing is, once you drop a post on a site like Reddit, you can't suddenly claim ownership and demand they delete it, try to charge you for using it, or start banning people from quoting you...
that post belongs to Reddit.
but, if I or anyone else actually published a book or ripped off your post and passed it off as our own work, you’d have every right to sue us for copyright infringement, because at the end of the day, it's your creation.