Your friend Jim George thinks you'd be a great addition to Ricochet, so we'd like to offer you a special deal: You can become a member for no initial charge for one month!
Ricochet is a community of like-minded people who enjoy writing about and discussing politics (usually of the center-right nature), culture, sports, history, and just about every other topic under the sun in a fully moderated environment. We’re so sure you’ll like Ricochet, we’ll let you join and get your first month for free. Kick the tires: read the always eclectic member feed, write some posts, join discussions, participate in a live chat or two, and listen to a few of our over 50 (free) podcasts on every conceivable topic, hosted by some of the biggest names on the right, for 30 days on us. We’re confident you’re gonna love it.
Holy cats.
If Trump wins, all heck is going to break loose, I suspect.
You don’t even really have to have the resources to burn someone’s house down. Just the threat may be enough to instill fear in a law-abiding citizen. And in many places the police would be powerless to protect that citizen.
It is fully established that the police have no obligation, indeed no role, in protecting any individual. Their only function kicks in after a crime has been committed.
Threatening people is a crime in most jurisdictions.
I saw something nasty for the first time on a platform where I find and respond to ads for professional freelance consulting work (by remote internet conferencing and delivery). It has no reason to refer to politics unless the ad is for something like graphic design for a poster etc. and even then it doesn’t usually get stated for what cause since the point is for responses to come in with portfolio samples showing talent and experience.
So this odd one described his (architectural/engineering) problem. THEN he stated that he would only welcome responses from people who voted BLUE, and not RED. So I responded anyway, and since the comment wasn’t really a question but it was entered in a question field, I couldn’t complete my form without typing something. So I typed “—” and left him to interpret that however he wished, or just grow up and look at the credentials only. I guess anyone answering was supposed to create a small anti-Trump high fivin’ rant. But the job had nothing to do with voting.
I thought it would be kool if he had to work with and pay for a RED consultant and catch some magic cooties but I guess I didn’t pass the litmus test.
Scary stuff but…doxxing?
I won’t speak for the post’s author, but I will speak for myself. One member of ricochet choose to post my campaign contributions at Ricochet. If I had it all my way, that would be contrary to the Code of Conduct.
There is all sorts of stuff available on line, divorces, paternity cases, lawsuits, bankruptcies, criminal cases (not just convictions, but merely being charged), evictions and lots of other things. In a decent society, they should not be splashed around.
Good luck getting somebody arrested for that.
Nothing new here except that it is more open. Back when I was more into political stuff I notice the local Democrat government would target Democrat area for more services while those with Republican contributors / supporters would go without city services such as garbage, sewage, street cleaning, snow plowing, etc. The Democrats have always been a party of small minded vindictive asses. It is why I am registered as a Democrat and give money to them. It is the same as paying any protection racket.
Louisiana Democratic Governor Huey Long showed this tendency. A new highway would be paved in counties that he had won, and would be only gravel in those counties that voted against him, with the change in surfacing being exactly at the county line.
Former Homeland Security Chief of Staff Miles Taylor reports that he heard Trump ordering Homeland Security to stop sending aid to California because they were not his supporters. A similar allegation has been made about Jared Kushner not being concerned about COVID-19 in blue states.
Not “doxxing .”
Clearly you have never been doxxed. I have. It is contrary to the spirit of an organization dedicated to civil discourse. I hate to see his form of cancel culture come to Ricochet.
Oh, yes. The expected shallow non sequitur. This has nothing to do with whether it has ever happened to me. This has to do with understanding the meaning of the word. A meaning that has been explained to you on this bandwidth numerous times. Yet you continue to pretend otherwise and to lie about the events here.
That makes twice in three days. But, as I have referenced before, you are a demonstrable liar. From dutifully repeating fully discredited MSNBC talking points to telling tall tales about your mistreatment here under a presumption of “good faith” that you abuse with almost every post, you still remain one of the most coddled trolls on the internet. You cry for “civil discourse” yet you constantly insult your on-line neighbors by persistently dealing in transparent intellectual dishonesty that is anything but. Your act is getting very tiresome.
Are you suggesting that someone should report who at Ricochet has been divorced, who has had a child out of wedlock, who has gone through bankruptcy or eviction, who is being sued, and who has had criminal charges against them? Those are all public records. But Ricochet is a private organization dedicated to civil discourse.
You can find out people’s addresses by going to the County Recorder, and searching for deeds, and then cross-referencing them with the County Assessor. But I think that it would be improper to list the addresses of people.
You can find out telephone numbers by going to the voting records. I think that that would be improper.
You can find salacious information in a divorce case which hasn’t been sealed. I think that that would be improper.
You can get the unpredicted copy of police reports by subpoena. That is not meant for public consumption.
All of that is doxxing. And all of that is wrong.
I have not doubt that some Democrat embeded said they heard it. Trump and Jared may have actually said it. They are more New York Democrats than GOP so it would be familiar with that way of doing business. Just like you as a Reagan Democrat have no problem putting it out in the world whether you know it is true or not.
My donation hadn’t shown up, yet.
There should be no doxxing at Ricochet, and this includes gathering and releasing public information on an individual. If some people wish to be anonymous or semi-anonymous on the site, this should be their right.
Except for Democrats who pretend to be Reagan Republicans.
That’s pretty easily done.
Don’t Use Your Real Name.
Don’t Give Out Your Real Location.
Don’t Give Out Your Real Occupation And Location Of Same.
Don’t Announce Other Things You Do.
Gary fails on every count.
Are you saying that if someone’s name is not anonymous, then they lose their right for confidentiality?
As if I hadn’t just referenced it, you come back with typical intellectually dishonest twaddle. (Pssst…stop arguing with the voices in your head and maybe get back on the meds.)
Clearly, for anyone willing to stick to the facts on the table, I am only suggesting two things: (1) For you to stop lying and (2) for you to stop being a troll. But, then again, you are a Democrat…
Should’ve stopped right there.
That is the rub isn’t it?
The purpose of the First Amendment is to protect unpopular speech, not the speech that other’s agree with.
The purpose of the Code of Conduct is to protect everyone, not just the people you agree with.
Getting back to the OP, there is someone running for Judge in our district. The usual political lawn signs appear…but now someone has made up signs that they put next to the candidate’s signs that say something like “(Candidate) is a Trump donor. Do we want a Trump donor on the bench?” I would wager that they consulted the doxxing website.
Of course, in Cook County, the answer is Yes, we want a Trump donor on the bench. Diversity and all that….
So you are suggesting
So A, B, C, D, E and F have no reasonable expectation of privacy since they use their real names? I don’t think so.
[Edit. I removed their names and public information based upon their posts and podcasts. It is nobody’s business.]
I would think it would be possible for, say, a cyber-security expert to arrange it so the names, addresses and phone numbers of the owner/operators of that site are displayed on the site: doxxing the doxxers, as it were.
I wonder how ling the site would remain up if that happened.
That would be horrible. I suggest that the civil discourse portion of the Code of Conduct specify a prohibition of doxxing of any and every member, popular or not.
If they try that BS in my neighborhood, they’d better have their life insurance paid up.
You’d think by now, someone would have caught some of these miscreants on security cameras.
Hoodie, sunglasses, and a CoViD mask. What’s to see?