CNN Doxxes a gif maker

[The Big Dog]

here is another source demonstrating that doxxing does not require that be broadcast, but can be used for extortion and the like:

Doxxing is an effective tool for extortion

 

[d4m10n]

here is another source demonstrating that doxxing does not require that be broadcast, but can be used for extortion and the like:

Doxxing is an effective tool for extortion

What are the nefarious folks at CNN extorting from this poor fellow?

 

[Belz...]

here is another source demonstrating that doxxing does not require that be broadcast, but can be used for extortion and the like:

"Here's another source that agrees with me!"

We've already been through this, TBD: sources disagree on that point. The dictionaries seem to show that it DOES require it.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

here is another source demonstrating that doxxing does not require that be broadcast, but can be used for extortion and the like:

Doxxing is an effective tool for extortion

It also demonstrates that the term does not apply to what CNN did. Thanks !

 

[NoahFence]

So do we have this guy's name yet?

Just checking.

 

[BobTheCoward]

What are the nefarious folks at CNN extorting from this poor fellow?

A public apology. Not involving himself in public Trump promotion.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

A public apology. Not involving himself in public Trump promotion.

That's correct.

Now we just need any evidence that CNN extorted the apology, instead oh HAS calling CNN and apologizing and begging them not to publish his name.

Anyone have some ?

 

[d4m10n]

A public apology. Not involving himself in public Trump promotion.

The apology was taken down, as I recall.

There is nothing whatsoever to stop HAS from promoting Trump, under his own name or any given pseudonym.

 

[Belz...]

That's correct.

Now we just need any evidence that CNN extorted the apology, instead oh HAS calling CNN and apologizing and begging them not to publish his name.

Anyone have some ?

Standby while we argue on the definitions a bit more.

 

[BobTheCoward]

The apology was taken down, as I recall.

There is nothing whatsoever to stop HAS from promoting Trump, under his own name or any given pseudonym.

Nothing stops people from not paying blackmail....except the consequences of it being revealed.

 

[d4m10n]

Nothing stops people from not paying blackmail....except the consequences of it being revealed.

What has HAS to fear if he continues promoting Trump under his real name? I don't recall CNN saying he shouldn't do that.

 

[BobTheCoward]

What has HAS to fear if he continues promoting Trump under his real name? I don't recall CNN saying he shouldn't do that.

If he becomes a public figure and runs for office as a trump booster or joins the white house comm team, that does seem like a situation cnn hinted that they would release.

 

[The Big Dog]

If he becomes a public figure and runs for office as a trump booster or joins the white house comm team, that does seem like a situation cnn hinted that they would release.

The fact that the CNN fans in this thread write things like "I don't recall CNN saying he shouldn't do that" shows just how far out of touch they are.

CNN is not the arbiter of what people should or should not be saying, and to back up that kind of coercion with the threat that if he posts things they don't like (under his own name or any other) they will expose him as "HAS" is "extremely unethical."

 

[d4m10n]

If HAS runs for mayor of his (tiny, mostly white) town, do the voters there deserve to know about his history of virulent online racism?

EDIT: Of course they do.

 

[BobTheCoward]

If HAS runs for mayor of his (tiny, mostly white) town, do the voters there deserve to know about his history of virulent online racism?

EDIT: Of course they do.

A) voters don't deserve anything other than to have their vote tallied.

B) a person asked what they were extorting, not whether that extortion was justified.

 

[d4m10n]

CNN is not the arbiter of what people should or should not be saying...

Are you the arbiter of what the people at CNN should not be saying?

 

[johnny karate]

CNN is not the arbiter of what people should or should not be saying...

I agree. And they're not. HAS is free to spew his bile as much as he wants. No one is preventing him from doing that.

... and to back up that kind of coercion with the threat that if he posts things they don't like (under his own name or any other) they will expose him as "HAS" is "extremely unethical."

No such coercion or threat occurred.

 

[d4m10n]

...voters don't deserve anything other than to have their vote tallied.

I'd say they deserve to be well informed prior to casting a vote.

Freedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government, when this support is taken away, the constitution of a free society is dissolved, and tyranny is erected on its ruins.

 

[NoahFence]

A) voters don't deserve anything other than to have their vote tallied.

B) a person asked what they were extorting, not whether that extortion was justified.

Voters don't deserve to know who they're voting for?

 

[The Big Dog]

A) voters don't deserve anything other than to have their vote tallied.

B) a person asked what they were extorting, not whether that extortion was justified.

It is simply a totally made up hypothetical to distract from the actual facts and CNN's extremely unethical conduct in this case.

Keep in mind, after CNN threatened HAS, they claimed they were withholding the information for his safety.