Ninjastic
PostEdited versionsQuotes to this post
Post
Topic
Board Reputation
Re: #1021758 “hacker1001101001” = #304376 “poochpocket” = rude, uncouth ingrate
by
suchmoon
on 28/02/2020, 17:27:36 UTC
Quote from: nullius on February 28, 2020, 04:42:18 PM
Quote from: suchmoon on February 28, 2020, 03:26:40 PM
Doxing over something this trivial is unnecessary.

The logical cases of suchmoon:

  • “Damned if you do...”  Lauda hypothetically drops dox:  “Doxing over something this trivial is unnecessary.”
  • “...damned if you don’t.  Lauda actually acts in good faith to try to avoid dropping dox, even if it is justified due to being evidence (which you say must be publicly disclosed) to support a flag:  She is flagging without evidence, and threatening people.

Quote from: suchmoon on February 28, 2020, 03:26:40 PM
You being (potentially) doxed doesn't make it right either.

Red herring.  Nobody can actually dox Lauda, except maybe the NSA (who may or may not be able to dox anybody).

Her hypothetical statement clearly illustrated the hypocrisy of people who object to her actions of avoiding disclosure of “hacker’s” dox, whereas the rabble would cheer if she were to be doxed.  Anything else you read into it is just that.

Quote from: suchmoon on February 28, 2020, 04:05:49 PM
Even if the reactions are not "uniform", it still doesn't make it right. For example despite Quickseller's (speaking of puppet masters) repeated attempts to dox me I wouldn't dox him unless there is an actual reason.

More red herrings.

Please refrain from making shit up. Thanks.

Quote from: morvillz7z on February 28, 2020, 04:58:20 PM
Would you consider it abuse/unethical if both accounts controlled by hacker1001101001 applied in the same signature campaign (SIGMA POOL)?

What do the campaign rules say? I don't see anything about alts so I'm guessing it's fine?

Quote from: hacker1001101001 on February 28, 2020, 05:08:28 PM
~

You should confirm it from the other account, LoyceV makes a good point:

Quote from: LoyceV on February 28, 2020, 03:24:46 PM
The Flag is on poochpocket, not on hacker1001101001. I didn't read all the details, but it doesn't seem right hacker1001101001 can confirm this on behalf of poochpocket. Anyone can claim the exact same thing about my account, that doesn't mean it's true. So it shouldn't count as evidence.

It doesn't change anything for you anyway.