Pages:
Author

Topic: Should speculation about satoshi's identity be subject to doxxing rules? - page 4. (Read 897 times)

legendary
Activity: 3724
Merit: 3063
Leave no FUD unchallenged
Satoshi is more likely a public (but still unknown) figure, isn't he (or they)? Millions of people use Bitcoin, isn't it their right to know who created the coin that they use? I think there is a difference between collecting evidences about a regular user and about satoshi.
I think his identity will always be a subject and I think everyone has a legal right to know who is the original author, a real person who created the product that they use. So, satoshi might be an exception in this case not only on Bitcointalk but everywhere.

You're merely attempting to justify that your curiosity is somehow more important than someone else's safety.  Don't you care that you could be endangering someone?  Seems a little selfish to me.


Because none of it lead to doxxing satoshi himself. Have anyone ever been able to post a complete doxxing for satoshi on this forum? I have not seen any.

And I suppose we can also fire guns in the general direction of people as long as we don't actually hit them?  No, pretty sure it doesn't work like that.
legendary
Activity: 2702
Merit: 2645
Farewell LEO: o_e_l_e_o
So why do we allow rampant probing and scrutiny regarding the identity of satoshi?  I don't see any justification for them to be an exception to the rule.
Because none of it lead to doxxing satoshi himself. Have anyone ever been able to post a complete doxxing for satoshi on this forum? I have not seen any. If it was then it would take the internet as a storm by now.
hero member
Activity: 854
Merit: 772
Watch Bitcoin Documentary - https://t.ly/v0Nim
Satoshi is more likely a public (but still unknown) figure, isn't he (or they)? Millions of people use Bitcoin, isn't it their right to know who created the coin that they use? I think there is a difference between collecting evidences about a regular user and about satoshi.
I think his identity will always be a subject and I think everyone has a legal right to know who is the original author, a real person who created the product that they use. So, satoshi might be an exception in this case not only on Bitcointalk but everywhere.
legendary
Activity: 3724
Merit: 3063
Leave no FUD unchallenged
I feel like there's a prevalent double standard when it comes to protecting identities of forum users.  

If topics existed where lots of users were posting theories and collecting evidence in an attempt to unveil the real-world identity of another forum user, I don't think such threads would be tolerated.  As per the rules, doxxing is only permitted in the case of legitimate scam accusations:

here are some new rules on doxxing:

1. Personal information must be confined to the new "investigations" board (under Scam Accusations), which is only visible to Members and above. Personal information is defined as anything which links a user's online identity (username, email, etc.) to their meatspace identity

So why do we allow rampant probing and scrutiny regarding the identity of satoshi?  I don't see any justification for them to be an exception to the rule.  There's no way people would accept it if it were their own account subject to such investigations.  If someone did ever successfully identify satoshi and published it here on the forum, then they would have clearly violated the rule.  Ergo, users are attempting to break the rules every time they publicly try to link:
Quote
a user's online identity (username, email, etc.) to their meatspace identity
This should not be happening.  There are inherent dangers in revealing someone's identity, particularly if they are considered wealthy.  The user in question, or even their family, could be at risk of falling victim to burglary, kidnapping, torture or other crimes (and I'm certain there are few potential targets more tempting for criminals than someone as flush with BTC as satoshi is perceived to be).  There are very good reasons why attempting to dox someone is frowned upon.  

I propose it's time for this rule to be applied properly, to end the double standard and to ensure no one is attempting to dox anyone else when there is no valid complaint of a scam.
Pages:
Jump to: