CNN Doxxes a gif maker

[The Big Dog]

We differ on the definition of tu quoqque since I never made the claim your hypocrisy invalidated your argument.....whatever that was. I simply asked how you found one outrageous and the other fair play.

Oh well c'est la vie!

hacked emails have nothing to do with this subject in anyway shape or form, and everything you have said about them in this thread is false.

 

[The Big Dog]

In what way is he the wrong guy?

See CE's posts from up above (and argumentum's (well some of them anyway) as well) explaining that the doxxee was not the source of what Trump tweeted

 

[Belz...]

I'm trying to deal in facts we can know or not know.

How long is the GIF ? How long is the Video ?

What resolution is the GIF ? What resolution is the video ?

I've checked both in order to compare them. If you want to claim that the lack of exact measurements somehow makes the principle invalide, be my guest, or better yet, check them yourself rather than parroting what CNN says.

Political loyalty to ? CNN ? hahahhahahahaha

I'm really getting my fill of dealing with stupid posts like this. CNN is not a political party or view. So obviously that wasn't what I was saying.

The point is, obviously, that you are apparently unable to give any point to the right because, beign on the left, you MUST disagree with them on all things.

Obstinate resistance ? I'm just curious. CNN made a claim. It's not unbelievable prima facie.

If you know anything about computers, as they obviously don't, it's entirely unbelievable right off the bat.

If there claim is false, I want to know the alternative explanation is.

I've already told you: the GIF was made FROM the video, not the other way around.

 

[Belz...]

See CE's posts from up above (and argumentum's (well some of them anyway) as well) explaining that the doxxee was not the source of what Trump tweeted

While you're at it, see my posts from up above explaining that this does not constitute doxxing.

 

[The Big Dog]

While you're at it, see my posts from up above explaining that this does not constitute doxxing.

and while you are at it, see my several posts explaining that it most definitely is, particularly given the fact they have the wrong guy.

Shame on CNN

 

[TheL8Elvis]

I've checked both in order to compare them.

Yet you couldn't answer my questions. Will wait for actual facts, thanks.

Hey, how about a link to the original GIF so I can check myself then

 

[cantonear1968]

hacked emails have nothing to do with this subject in anyway shape or form, and everything you have said about them in this thread is false.

So you don't think releasing Podesta's emails was fair?

I'll be happy to take this to the thread where you reprinted a lot of them.

 

[The Big Dog]

Podesta's emails

CNN did not release Podesta's emails.

unbelievable......

 

[Minoosh]

It is extremely unethical, obviously.

Why?

ETA: As I explain below, I can see why you think CNN is being unethical. It wasn't obvious to me until I double-checked your statements vs. what CNN actually said.

 

[BobTheCoward]

See CE's posts from up above (and argumentum's (well some of them anyway) as well) explaining that the doxxee was not the source of what Trump tweeted

But is the generator of the image that inspired the GIF?

 

[Minoosh]

Further the dopes at CNN claimed they were not releasing the information "for his safety" but were reserving their rights to release in the future when i guess his *********** safety does not matter anymore or something?

Can you quote where CNN said that? I am just going by the link you posted in your OP:

After posting his apology, "HanA**holeSolo" called CNN's KFile and confirmed his identity. In the interview, "HanA**holeSolo" sounded nervous about his identity being revealed and asked to not be named out of fear for his personal safety and for the public embarrassment it would bring to him and his family.

CNN is not publishing "HanA**holeSolo's" name because he is a private citizen who has issued an extensive statement of apology, showed his remorse by saying he has taken down all his offending posts, and because he said he is not going to repeat this ugly behavior on social media again. In addition, he said his statement could serve as an example to others not to do the same.
CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change.

You may think I'm splitting hairs, but I am really not trying to, nor trying to appear obtuse for rhetorical reasons. Safety is one reason this guy cited for wanting to remain anonymous. It's not among CNN's stated reasons for not revealing his name. This kind of conflation is very common and IMO it is part of the reason people on different sides of an issue talk past each other so much of the time.

If CNN really thought the guy's "safety" was threatened, then reserving the right to reveal his name would be a threat (if, that is, he continued to make bigoted statements anonymously). But that was not CNN's stated reason for not revealing his name. Personally, I think he feared personal embarrassment, not violence, but that's not my point. I couldn't understand your posts based on what CNN said. If you think CNN withheld the name to prevent physical attacks, I understand better what you are saying.

 

[The Big Dog]

Can you quote where CNN said that? I am just going by the link you posted in your OP:



You may think I'm splitting hairs, but I am really not trying to, nor trying to appear obtuse for rhetorical reasons. Safety is one reason this guy cited for wanting to remain anonymous. It's not among CNN's stated reasons for not revealing his name. This kind of conflation is very common and IMO it is part of the reason people on different sides of an issue talk past each other so much of the time.

If CNN really thought the guy's "safety" was threatened, then reserving the right to reveal his name would be a threat (if, that is, he continued to make bigoted statements anonymously). But that was not CNN's stated reason for not revealing his name. Personally, I think he feared personal embarrassment, not violence, but that's not my point. I couldn't understand your posts based on what CNN said. If you think CNN withheld the name to prevent physical attacks, I understand better what you are saying.

http://www.newsweek.com/cnn-blackmail-deny-reddit-632274

 

[Minoosh]

deleted

 

[Minoosh]

http://www.newsweek.com/cnn-blackmail-deny-reddit-632274

OK, got it.

“CNN decided not to publish the name of the Reddit user out of concern for his safety,” the statement reads, according to BuzzFeed. “Any assertion that the network blackmailed or coerced him is false. The user, who is an adult male, not a 15-year-old boy, apologized and deleted his account before ever speaking with our reporter. CNN never made any deal, of any kind, with the user. In fact, CNN included its decision to withhold the user’s identity in an effort to be completely transparent that there was no deal.”

I prefer to quote text rather than just posting a link, which I thank you for providing. CNN made things worse for itself by making that statement. Apart from the "threat" angle, it denies making a deal with Mr. Hole, but it makes a fairly intricate deal with itself, out of some tortured sense of ethics.

Now: Why do people post this crap anonymously? Because they're afraid someone will beat them up if they show their faces. This wasn't a good look for CNN, but it's not a good look for Mr. Hole, either.

ETA: Sorry, yes, I am a pedant, but the original meme was Mr. Hole's original intellectual property, co-opted for release in a different file format by a different user. This stuff about whether you can add to a GIF or improve its resolution or add music is a side issue, and pedantry of its own sort.

 

[cantonear1968]

CNN did not release Podesta's emails.

unbelievable......

When did I say they did?

Next Straw Man please.

 

[Belz...]

and while you are at it, see my several posts explaining that it most definitely is, particularly given the fact they have the wrong guy.

Your demonstration has been found wanting, particularily given the fact that having the wrong guy doesn't make it more doxxing.

 

[The Big Dog]

You are welcome at any time to decline from participating in anything you consider "frolic". That you wished to "detour" is not my fault.

But perhaps you'd like to offer why you think CNN investigating a news story, but ultimately not publishing the name of said gif maker, makes them "pussies" but releasing hacked private emails is ok.

When did I say they did?

Next Straw Man please.

Unbelievable. as was your claim that your posts were related to the posted article.

smfh

 

[The Big Dog]

Your demonstration has been found wanting, particularily given the fact that having the wrong guy doesn't make it more doxxing.

'k.

 

[Belz...]

Yet you couldn't answer my questions. Will wait for actual facts, thanks.

Actual facts? What part of "you cannot add information by converting a file" do you not understand? This is aking to asking me for evidence that a man cannot fly by flapping his arms. It's impossible. The evidence is that it is impossible.

Your position is looking more and more one of wilful ignorance or ideological commitment.

 

[Belz...]

'k.

You forgot to make an argument, here. As usual.

Do you contend that the definition of doxxing somehow includes having the wrong person?