-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Letting Racists Be, or Exposing Them in Their Private Lives?
- Thread starter AlteredBeast
- Start date
- Status
CrispyBoar
Banned
I agree. I certainly wouldn't want to be friends with racist people.
Frozenprince
Banned
lol for fucking realMinority: Hey, I deserve to be treated with dignity and respect.
Racist: Nah.
Minority: OK, fuck you then.
Racist: Hey, I deserve to be treated with dignity and respect.
Minority:
Minority: Hey, I deserve to be treated with dignity and respect.
Racist: Nah.
Minority: OK, fuck you then.
Racist: Hey, I deserve to be treated with dignity and respect.
Minority:
ok this made me laugh in a tense thread. Good post to go to sleep on. Thanks.
CrispyBoar
Banned
Minority: Hey, I deserve to be treated with dignity and respect.
Racist: Nah.
Minority: OK, fuck you then.
Racist: Hey, I deserve to be treated with dignity and respect.
Minority:
LOL, so true. Why should we show respect to people who won't show us respect?
Regardless of the form of bigotry, I don't think we should "let them be". Exposing them for what they are is necessary for progress. They should never be coddled or allowed to fester. And frankly speaking they deserve to be held accountable for their fuckery.
That said, it's not my job as a minority to get them to realize people besides them have humanity. I've tried way too long. And already deal with enough of that shit from fellow minorities/supposed allies who have "fuck you got mine" attitudes already. There's already an onset of exhaustion and we're not even factoring in trying to educate the other bigots. I don't exist for you to just step all over when you want to finally join the rest of us in giving basic respect to others.
Because they want us to be beneath them. They view it in themselves as a sign of weakness to "give" respect in the first place.
That said, it's not my job as a minority to get them to realize people besides them have humanity. I've tried way too long. And already deal with enough of that shit from fellow minorities/supposed allies who have "fuck you got mine" attitudes already. There's already an onset of exhaustion and we're not even factoring in trying to educate the other bigots. I don't exist for you to just step all over when you want to finally join the rest of us in giving basic respect to others.
Because they want us to be beneath them. They view it in themselves as a sign of weakness to "give" respect in the first place.
Cindi Mayweather
Member
I agree with people being accountable but like, the original thread title did say doxx, which is assumed to be an unveiling of private information including name, address, phone numbers, or other information. Obviously, people should be accountable but not in a way where it allows them to be abused. Which I think was Jdstorm's point. Because once you start doing that, as far as I'm concerned you betrayed your own humanistic agency and basic level of dignity and have fallen to their level. Right or not, it comes off as vindictive. How do you address shaming without doxxing like the original thread title said?
I'm specifically talking about people who are asking for something legislative, like reparations.
I would largely say many white people, personally, either believe that they already do treat PoC equally, or at least try to do so and are somewhat aware/ashamed when they don't but strive to do better. Some don't, but I don't think the number of people that treat PoC poorly, on purpose, is really very large.
If that's true, and I think it is, saying "just treat me equally" doesn't really help those people figure it out, because they can't see the problem.
Similarly most people don't "revel" in privilege, because they think this is how the world is supposed to work for everybody. And many think it does work that way for everyone.
What you're really asking for is something with the force of law to equalize outcomes somehow, in which case you need to start thinking about how to frame that argument.
OP is about doxxing?
Can a mod update the thread please.
I read about someone outting themselves as a racist as well as sharing their employment and information in an online profile, in the op. But clearly I missed something as what's described above is doxxing.
But that's doxxing? Officially? Is this also some how cucking?
So, doxxing = reading information a person puts on their public profile. Right? Someone help me out here.
Things can get out of hand so quickly nowadays. If you're gonna do any of that doxxing shit (or whatever the hell kids call it nowadays, I'm old), at least own up to it.
Yeah so inevitably when something awful happens, because it always does.
Yeah so inevitably when something awful happens, because it always does.
KonradLaw
Member
Can be. Just an example. And even if you're going to mail somebody's boss with info from public profile with real name, also don't do it anonymously. If you're going to be digging through somebody's past history of posts also show your identity just to make sure people will be able to do the same with your posting history.
How can it be, when op specifically says using info they posted themselves?
What about what the thread is about, and not speculatives. Like for example:
A person is posting racist content. And that same person also posts where they work via their profile.
You know, like the one in op.
Who mandated anonymity? Did I miss a set of rules in the op? Where are all of these alternative mindsets coming from to some how paint the person giving info to an employer as some scumbag sleuth, you know "digging" through a person's records or other trigger language, the sort of things that aren't in op?
Op says a racist person, who posts where they work as well. What are your specific thoughts on that?
As far as heeding your warning to make sure that you too don't have blatant racist material on your profile, well, I think it's abnormal to be a racist. So most won't have a problem with that? Are you thinking an employer, like say twitter who recently fired their head of VR for shit he said about homeless people in 2013, are going to back trace the source of the revelation then see if they too said mean things about things once, because that whataboutism matters due to reasons?
KonradLaw
Member
You're already pushing the definition further than OP did. You write about people posting their employment info on public profile, but nothing like that is in OP. Somebody could post under his real name, but not reveal his employment information or home adress on that profile. If you go all internet detective and dig it up to make it public, that's still doxxing.
And even if you don't do real doxxing and are just ratting somebody out based on for example..facebook post where that facebook profile has all the employment info..also don't be wuss and do it under your real name.
"Is it fair game to use information that they post about themselves to expose them to their bosses"
I believe that includes posts on employment as most people tag where they work online, esp in context of facebook. I'm not sure where being a wuss come into play, as for Internet detective work, you mean literally scrolling up to see employment.
I'm glad that you've come to the conclusion that even if you're not doxxing and are just ratting that you want ratting to be done under your real name...to avoid being a wuss..somehow masculinity is coming up..
Inherently, you're not making anything public that wasn't already stated publicly, as the person is posting it publicly on their public profile.
Or do we have to ignore what op wrote, having solid information. Then assume that op is talking about a private profile, without employment, so that op has to dive in a trashcan to find out the information, then make a guess as to whose trash it is in, to only throw guilt at Richard kimble? --- which I don't believe anyone is promoting.
which episode?
KonradLaw
Member
"use information that they post about themselves to expose them to their bosses"
This doesn't mean only information in the same place you post your racist opinion. You can write on twitter where the only info is your own name. But then somebody will use that name to look up on LinkedID where you work, or find your Facebook profile and then dig through all your photos to find one where they can get idea where you work and look you up on employment lists etc.
And yes, if you're going to be exposing somebody's online activities on the net to real world then you should do it under your real name. Can't take a moral highground when you're not willing to face the scrutnity of the same thing being done to you
Crash Station
Member
Implicit, but not absolute (except in some cases) due to context and depending on who you ask, intent.
An example. Let's say someone works at Mcdonalds. They recount a clearly racist joke told by Louis CK on Twitter. Their Twitter profile has their employment information including the location of the Mcdonalds. Should that be grounds for termination?
Sure. However a key aspect of accountability is that a punishment should be relitive to the injustice committed.
Should typing racist drivel on the internet get you banned from GAF? Probably. Should it get you fired from your job? I dont think so.
If there are limits as to what an appropriate response to racism is. Who decides what that is?
That is all information that you post online, willigly and publicly, This isn't doxxing. That's googling public information, not hacking an email and posting it online, or medical records, or any private information.
You keep saying dig, as if that makes any difference. Lets say, this desperate sjw has done all that, googling. If you have "rock solid" information, like op states, of open racism, you fwd it to an employer. They verify it then shit can the person. This happens often in life. Like Twitter firing their vr head for shit he said in 2013 about homeless people. After a day of work.
Rarely do employers say "and thanks to Bob Jones from 444 hate street, we were able to find out we hired an asshole." So I don't see where manhood comes into play with letting an employer know they are hired an asshole that will make them look bad as a company.
Rarely do you have wrongful termination lawsuits where a racist wins because "what about someone else." Because it's direct quotes from the racist idiot who decides to be a racist and use their personal information to do so.
Again with this Louis CK bullshit?
Yes you'd be fired for doing that if you were associated with McDonald's and someone ratted on you.
What world do you live in to where some giant corporation line McDonald's wouldn't fire you for saying how much you liked using the word faggot while being associated with McDonald's?
Why on earth do we have to do all of these back flips and tumbles of hypotheticals when op is about racist people posting racist shit online, when you can verify with solid information where the work? People are fired for this. It happens all the time.
Like at twitter, recently. For shit someone someone said in 2013.
A cop was even fired for suggesting his bosses wear body cameras. You get fired for your words online. This isn't some alien concept that needs Stephen hawking to decipher. You say offensive shit, you'll likely be fired once hr gets wind of it. As it's a liability to the company to get bad press for hiring a racist.
I know a lot of you have to defend this, because it's just jokes, or, you're just drunk or, a myriad of excuses used in this thread. Racism isn't an opinion or something that slips up when you've had a few wine coolers. Don't say dumb racist shit online, and you won't get fired. It's amazingly simple.
No apologies for breaking the news to you.
Sunster
Member
Should typing racist drivel on the internet get you banned from GAF? yes. Should it get you fired from your job? yes.
If there are limits as to what an appropriate response to racism is. Who decides what that is? me. just now.
Where do you draw the line, though, on what is the proper amount of racist drivel that would warrant someone getting fired from their job?
I mean, would a comment like "Why is it mostly middle aged men from xxxx who commit xx amount percentage of rape and sexual assault in our country?" be reason enough to fire someone from their job?
Would it be comparable to "I hate black/hispanic/asian people!" ?
MistakenMobius
Member
Is criticizing a religion racism?
Seraph_Nicholas
Member
It's a lesser of two evils situation for me. Doing the work to make sure antisocial behavior is met with resistance and repercussion sucks, and it makes you a shitty person to do it, but the alternative is that these people do as they please, and others who might not otherwise be inclined to be vile follow their example, spreading the problem.
Eventually, social media will progress to an inescapably integrated state, and the load will be taken off vigilantes by the ease and commonality of investigating people's online behavior. Until then, every racist dragged into the light is at least a cautionary tale to others, and at most a revelatory moment for the individual under the lens.
It's not a good thing for anyone involved, though. Ever.
(Ideally education would make this a nonissue, but it's not mandatory or universally successful. I think it's fair to assume a racist adult with access to a global information network has decided to forego educating themselves without significant motivation.)
Eventually, social media will progress to an inescapably integrated state, and the load will be taken off vigilantes by the ease and commonality of investigating people's online behavior. Until then, every racist dragged into the light is at least a cautionary tale to others, and at most a revelatory moment for the individual under the lens.
It's not a good thing for anyone involved, though. Ever.
(Ideally education would make this a nonissue, but it's not mandatory or universally successful. I think it's fair to assume a racist adult with access to a global information network has decided to forego educating themselves without significant motivation.)
KonradLaw
Member
You keep focusing on that doxxing part and definitions. But it makes zero difference to me. If you're going for such "online activsm" you should do it publically and under your own name, no matter if you commit actual dox or not. Even if there are no grounds for possible civil suit. It doesn't matter to me. You still should do it under your real name.
Sunster
Member
When I feel it's harmful to other employees or customers
Sunster
Member
no. hate speech, fear mongering and generalizing it's followers is though.
EDIT: sorry. should have combined into 1 post.
KonradLaw
Member
Well..to be honest it's not like he can force somebody to get fired. At most he can inform the employeer, who will then decide. He might just as well think "This Sunster dude is a nuts, I won't fire my guy for something like this".
Sunster isn't the one who will make the decision in the end, so it's not like he can take full ownership of the eventuall blame for the result either.
Do you buy ad time on a network to say you're going to out someone?
Or, like the case of the twitter gentleman, do you just post an article under your name about them on a website? Or tweet/Facebook information to customer service with your real name, and a link. All of this is done by the way. And it results in getting people fired. Companies do investigations, you know?
If thats your sole concern, and not googling, we can't call it doxxing, because it literally isnt, then rest well my friend. The wheels of due process and private companies are working.
Sunster
Member
get outta my scenario. I'm the employer in this situation.
The propping up of racists by defending them in that way is exactly what is meant by systemic institutionalised racism. it's amazing that so many people lack the self awareness to realise that.
Crash Station
Member
The question wasn't about whether it happens or not as it absolutely does, but whether it should happen.
Should someone get fired for telling an off-color joke with no malicious intent? Should they get fired for provocative opinions that may be perceived as hateful about other countries or religions? Should they get fired for posting racially-charged statistics that have no basis in reality? Should they get fired for voting Trump?
If you said yes to most of those, we'll just have to agree to disagree. Edit: Though I'll admit it's a case by case thing for some. Saying something along the lines of "Muslims suck and we should bomb the middle east!" is very different from "X is a widespread belief in Islam that is incompatible with progressive values."
That being said, I can absolutely understand why it happens when it does in some cases like with Allison Rapp or the Twitter VR guy, but rarely do I agree with it especially when what's being referenced is years old. But speaking about it from a moral perspective and speaking about it from a PR perspective are entirely different beasts.
You say amazing. I say expected.
Amazing,
Expected,
Amazing,
Expected,
Let's call the whole thing off.
MistakenMobius
Member
In my dad country, most people say that criticizing islam is blasphemy and racism.
Are u ok with people being fired over it?
Sunster
Member
nope, that's why I said no.
The thread is about racist statements online. Stop immediately with your off color nonsense. You've tried multiple times to steer it into something it isnt, by literally saying "what if Louis CK was a normal guy, saying blah blah blah blah blah blah."
Racism is very specific, as was the op. If you want to discuss make believe about comedians being normal people, you should make a thread about it.
If you tell an off-color joke, I assume that's code for a racist joke that you don't want to be held responsible for. Yes, shit canned. You don't decide whether or not someone feels it was malicious or not. You have a choice of not telling racist jokes.
If you say anything offensive to others in an online world, that can get you fired. You will be fired. It should, and does happen because as a business owner, I don't want some moron who can't keep things to themselves without getting my company a hash tag and BLM boycotting me, and bringing my business down.
You can't fire people for being a republican.
Racism, As suggested in OP isn't case by case.
You want to explore all of these fantasies about what should and shouldn't happen due to reasons. that's on you for not having the temerity to discuss op. But don't try to agree to disagree with this, do not insult my intelligence.
Business doesn't give a damn about morals. You're out if you threaten a companies image. It's been that simple. The easy solution Is to not be a racist idiot. And seeing as how you feel your queries are honestly thought provoking, id be careful how you post online. As you'd be fired for every point minus voting. As they would all alienate customers.
Crash Station
Member
You know what, you're right. I can see the cracks in my own logic here.
I still don't think I'd do it as I have a few people in my life that do make those kinds of jokes about my race both online and off, but I won't begrudge anyone for making their own decisions on the subject.
i guess it is the norm rather than the exception
what a disappointing world we live in :/
Audioboxer
Member
After sleeping on it it would be good Cyan if you could further elaborate. You don't need to, I'm just asking politely. It seems it's possible NeoGAF staff are split on this, which is fine as individual opinion is normal amongst people. Yes even mods lol. However you made it quite clear "if you try to do this here you will be banned". Is the logic behind that due to doxing? What is a bit uncertain is the fact you were talking about wrecking people's lives. That has been shot down unanimously in this topic saying it's a fair consequence of how they acted. Your thoughts?
If you were worried about legal ramifications for GAF that's fine, that's exactly what I spoke about at length. On the last page I posted information directly from legal sites, first to show it as we all know to be fair its okay for a job to be fire you. The 1st amendment is about protecting you from government not a private firm. Which let us be happy for as this is why GAF can ban whoever they want. And more seriously why Twitter and FB can too. It's not infringing on your freedom of speech. People get that wrong all the time. However the second lot of what I posted about defamation murkys the water just a little. I think it would be tested based upon what you could potentially report with the aim of causing financial and reputation loss. I know most GAFers will absolutely 100% shoot this notion down, and I get it. It appears as sympathising towards a racist. However a court or law does care about intent and severity and in a topic that has had a question about going after someone for supporting Trump I think you have to put your fingers in your ears to completely ignore that seeking justice can be in the eyes of the beholder. Especially in America where hate speech law isn't a thing. Many people say to support Trump is to be a racist, and no shit why that is said. However on the last page people are potentially protected by law for political beliefs. It's a valid question to ask psychologicaly what is person A going to report and what is person B going to report? As this topic is about hypotheticals people are all coming at it with different "imaginary" scenarios. As opposed to the GAF topic that had the GAFer say explicitly what he reported.
I've already asked GAFers to come forward and give me that anecdotal evidence by telling me of the jobs they have emailed. Whether it was private or anonymously. However I still only have evidence of 1 GAFer doing it so it's hard to say anything meaningful about that. For everyone else having their say on what they could report or be happy for someone else to report its not quite the same as gathering actual data. I mean I wish every asshole would be put in a rocket and sent to space. I guess them all being fired is the next best thing. However what I want and what justice is actually being carried out aren't always in line. It's one thing to agree with and support a concept, but another to actively actually engage in it. Words are just words, and understandably have emotions attached to them, but actions and following through on your words is different than just saying them. There is a lot of noise in here as a catch all to call racists deplorable which is understandable, they are. However the topic was started to discuss what is guessed to be the morality around taking justice into your own hands and going after people on FB. Importantly how you go after them. I think 99.9% are accepting challenging them, reporting them and blocking. The debate really happens around emailing employers and aiming to get people fired. As I've pointed out in that last GAF topic on this issue there has been a large GAF topic going since 2014 that aims to out people for posting stuff on FB http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=887204 There isn't much conversation in there though about people emailing employers. It seems to more be a topic about calling out shitty people. Which is what the majority of us agree with is absolutely fine. As I said just there the debate in here is not so much about calling out or challenging people but seeking to see them get fired.
AccurateMinority: Hey, I deserve to be treated with dignity and respect.
Racist: Nah.
Minority: OK, fuck you then.
Racist: Hey, I deserve to be treated with dignity and respect.
Minority:
perineumlick
Member
Wtf is this?
Yes, but it's not like these tools can only be used by the right people. Isn't one of the tactics of Gamergate people is to dig up someone's past that they can use to get a feminist/liberal/whatever internet commenter fired from their job? You get hundreds of people being faux-offended just to ruin someone's livelihood.
Ray Wonder
Founder of the Wounded Tagless Children
Who gets to choose what the justifiable amount of racism needed is to ruin someone's life?
How about we just leave people be unless they break the law. That's what the law was made for. It's supposed to be a free land, even for the shitty people too. I know people have some family members that have said something that would be classified by people in this thread as "Ruin their lives and their families." When it's not warranted at all. Also, there's perceived racism on both sides, so do they get to choose who they think is racist and ruin their lives too?
If someone's like "I'm going to lynch me a nigger today" on facebook. Yeah, expose him. But some people in here are classifying saying nigga as enough to ruin someone's life. It's not. And it's scary that there are people vindictive enough to want to do that.
How about we just leave people be unless they break the law. That's what the law was made for. It's supposed to be a free land, even for the shitty people too. I know people have some family members that have said something that would be classified by people in this thread as "Ruin their lives and their families." When it's not warranted at all. Also, there's perceived racism on both sides, so do they get to choose who they think is racist and ruin their lives too?
If someone's like "I'm going to lynch me a nigger today" on facebook. Yeah, expose him. But some people in here are classifying saying nigga as enough to ruin someone's life. It's not. And it's scary that there are people vindictive enough to want to do that.
Tangled Up in Blue
Banned
Yup. When you say shit like this:
Don't expect sympathy when you get shit like this:
I'm only halfway through this thread, but Jesus, it's depressing. It's fairly easy to tell who in this thread has to deal with racism on a daily basis and who doesn't. For an example, see whoever it was upthread who said that white people casually using the n-word on social media is just "mild" racism and NBD anyway, and thus shouldn't have to face "real world" repercussions. Fucking ugh. ONLINE IS THE REAL WORLD AND SHIT YOU SAY ONLINE DOES AND SHOULD CARRY REAL CONSEQUENCES. PERIOD.
Also, doxing is gross, but if you're posting racist shit on social media next to your name and picture, than you've already doxed yourself, so there's nothing wrong at that point in sending a screencap to your boss since you're already broadcasting your ignorance in public anyway. It's the digital equivalent of standing on the sidewalk and screaming the n-word and black people as they pass: whatever consequences befall you are your fault and yours alone, not the fault of the person who filmed you screaming and then sent the video to your boss. The twitter moron quoted above got exactly what she deserved.
perineumlick
Member
Why would white people feel the need to say ANY version of the word nigger? Do you know how many people died so that the word wouldn't be said to denigrate black people? Never mind that some blacks use it as a term of endearment amongst themselves, their ignorance doesn't excuse white people from knowing any better. I don't allow black people to say it to me, I'll check them just as fast as I'll check a white person. Amazing that you are more worried about "ruining someone's life" instead of stopping that behavior altogether. If you don't want to deal with consequences then don't do stupid shit; simple as that.
Dr. Benton Quest
Banned
Hey, how about you take your 'reverse racism' bullshit back to stormfront?
Before you go, get some education.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked