So you've generally agreed that people do not want to be doxed, regardless of if they've done anything wrong or not.
Yeah, I'd generally agree that people do not want to be doxed. The people that are doxed are generally those accused of scamming. Every scammer says they are innocent, those wrongfully accused can generally clear things up pretty easily.
And then answered the point of doxes on here - to be malicious. Has there even ever been a non malicious dox on here that wasn't designed to cause harm and to do anything helpful? And when those malicious doxes have been proved to be malicious, you guys still leave them up.
So looping round again, would the policy chance if the doxes of every staff member were subsequently accumulated? ...The point of that question is to provoke some sensible thinking on the issue, rather than to threaten. Buuuuut if that question could even be remotely be perceived as a threat, the answer is yes and the policy needs to be changed.
Are lawsuits anything other than malicious? Should they still happen even though they are "attacking" someone? Its not a black and white question. There are certain cases I've seen where the people very obviously deserved to be doxed. Generally if you commit a crime, (Scamming is the major one here) people dox you. I'd say fair is fair.
Nope, there is a meta thread in meta named something along the lines of Staff Member information, or Staff Dox, and it has info about 3 or 4 staff members, including volunteered information. Again, that thread has Theymos' dox in it as well. Even though people can't find these threads, I've posted in them personally, so they weren't just threads I've seen in passing.
Not that I necessarily disagree, but there isn't a screening process. Who should be in charge of fact checking to make sure the right person is doxed, and that the information is accurate? If you do post inaccurate info, I suppose you lose credibility? Thats something of a consequence.
And there the problem is:
1. The person posting the said dox is fully responsible.
2. A throw away account doesn't suffer much consequence. Somewhere around 0%.
Tricky one, again that comes back to a plethora of other issues. I don't really have a solution for that one, all ideas that I can think of would be far worse than just how it is now.
I understand your point about account selling saltyspitoon, i have seen it a few times but im still skeptical about it, i understand the forum cant stop people from selling accounts but forbidding it would make it way harder for people to sell accounts and im sure less acounts would be sold. A lot of accounts are sold without anyone knowing even here in the forum. I understand that people, almost everyone that invests in ponzi schemes know what they are dealing with but that doesnt mean it should be allowed.
Again, this is another issue, but Bitcoin in general is about financial freedoms. We don't feel the need to tell people what they can or can't spend their money on. If you want to put your house as collateral in a poker game with a pair of twos, maybe I personally would advise against it, but anyone is welcome to make whatever stupid payments for anything that they want. The ponzi section got its own section because "legit" dice/poker sites and such said that the ponzi listings were flooding the section and they couldn't get in any discussion over the flood of ponzi spam. Nothing more, nothing less.