Note: Email in response to "To Toobie" YouTube video.
[begin transmission]
Reaver,
Thank you for the message.
It’s very nice to meet you; 2B here. I’m sure Alice2 has done an admirable job at bringing you up to speed, so no further introduction is required.
I’ll be sending a copy of this portion of this message to your email, for completeness’ sake.
With the added advantage of being able to carry on our individual discussion, independent of Alice2’s involvement. Should it become necessary.
-------
The judge is the one who decides law. The jury is the one who decides facts. The executioner is the one who executes the punishment.
The thing is that you’ve clearly been the judge here. You’ve been the person deciding how to apply what’s actually going on.
But you’ve also been the jury…..you’re apparently the one we’re trying to convince…..
That already kind of gives you way more power than you really deserve.
I’m not exactly clear on how you’re trying to define me as mimicking the function that a judge serves. ‘deciding how to apply what’s actually going on.’ Is a bit vague.
So, I’ll address it to the best of my ability, as to what I think you might be trying to get at.
If you’re referring to my leadership role in my Discord, in deciding what is permissible or not, then yes. I am a judge.
If you’re referring to my own personal judgment of the situation at hand, then yes. I am a judge. Not too different from anyone else, really.
Now, if you’re referring to my judgment towards Alice2’s behavior in this case, once again, I am a judge. It comes with the territory of personal judgment.
Again, not too different from anyone else. We compare people to our personally-defined standards all the time.
Have I been expressing how short she falls of my ideals? Yes. Am I imposing them onto her and making demands for change? No.
All I have been doing is making suggestions, basing it off of observations and testimony from former and current friends. She can choose to take them or not.
As for me being the jury, as far as I’m the one the two of you are trying to convince.
It’s part of the proper progression of things, isn’t it? Alice2 made a claim, I wasn’t fully convinced, and now she is providing some evidence.
Evidence which, even the two of you have hinted at, was LONG overdue. I’m very pleased with this development and it lends more credibility towards Alice2’s assertions.
The person known as Reaver, an associate of Alice2’s, exists. That’s now demonstrably true. That is what this video evidence is indicating. Nothing more.
It bears mentioning that this isn’t what I had asked for, though.
I’m still waiting on evidence that either you or Alice2 were ever at serious risk for physical harm. Proof of relocation would suffice.
Before you call me crazy, please realize that if you’re ever planning on escalating things to a proper case, you’d have to do this anyway.
So I’m not being too unreasonable in asking for such things.
But getting back to your assertion, that I have more power than I rightfully deserve.
The metaphor is sort of falling apart at this point, as it can be seen that it doesn’t really translate well in this case.
I judge no more than your typical person. I require no more convincing than your typical, incredulous party (jury).
So from where is this argument of disproportionate power coming from?
-------
See, but, this year? You attacked— well, you didn’t, but these people came after my family. Not just me.
I’d hate to play the semantics game with you, but wording it like that is inaccurate and I’d rather not risk propagating any misconceptions.
Daggy, Yui, and Anya, to my knowledge, never attacked you or your family or even expressed intent to do you or your family any harm.
Moreover, they believed you to be Alice2, someone they have grievances with. You know that, but it’s worth repeating.
It seems like a needless clarification, but it truly is necessary, lest we begin to put them in league with people like Jack and Nevada. Those two
might actually go through with it.
And anyone that would indicate the contrary is CLEARLY not paying attention, or has never even bothered to talk to Daggy, Yui, and Anya.
Daggy lives in Australia and has so much to contend with, he can’t be bothered to pay you a visit in the States.
Yui is working hard to get her career off the ground in the UK. She’s in no position to be spending time and money investigating you, I don’t care how curious she is.
Anya…well, Anya is a broke university student. Could barely afford to visit her beloved in the U.S. this past year. Don’t think she’ll be at your doorstep anytime soon.
Not a single one of them holds any ill-will towards you personally, Reaver. The motivation to harm YOU or your family is simply not there.
What those three did was look up and collect freely-accessible information about an individual they believed to be Alice2. Not saying it’s right. Just stating facts.
They had no reason to believe that they were mistaken. Of course, Alice2 could retort “I’ve been streaming in cosplay for a year now”, etc.
But keep in mind that Alice2 had already betrayed these people, had lied before, and it is NOT too far of a stretch to think there might be some more elaborate scheme at work.
Alice2 herself has fallen victim to such machinations in the past. Ask her about Mio. Ask her about Eva. It’s certainly well within the realms of possibility. It’s the Internet, afterall.
Your personal information was inadvertently researched by people who were sufficiently hurt by Alice2 and were wrapped-up in their motivated reasoning. Not psychopaths with malintent.
-------
The thing that all of us want to know is that we’re safe again…..that’s what we want, reassurances that this shit is going to get fixed and treated appropriately.
It isn’t my intention to sound callous, but I honestly have no other way of putting this. But it might just be the case that you’ll never have that peace of mind again.
These actions are done and there’s no taking them back. In the preceding section, I’ve reassured you that the individuals involved are not psychopaths, and that they’re not after you, specifically.
I realize that my words probably mean little to nothing to you; as they should. You have no reason to trust me, and I’m behaving seemingly contrary to your view of what’s just and fair.
It’s all that I can offer though, unfortunately. Dismiss it if you must.
If you wanted this matter to get fixed, if you want it treated appropriately, the two of you should’ve reported the incident to the appropriate authorities.
As I mentioned before, there are no federal laws against doxing. But perhaps a case for cyberstalking could be made.
By the sounds of it, this is not a trivial matter to you. Several aspects and people in your life were affected. I’m surprised that the two of you haven’t done anything constructive by now.
I won’t dismiss your assertions as to how this incident might have affected you. But your cavalier attitude invites ample room for doubt.
But despite that, I can at the very least hear you out.
Outline for me what fixing and treating this matter ‘appropriately’ would entail, in your estimation. Maybe some workable solution could be derived from it.
-------
If you want to say that we deserved this, that we, in some way, instigated this, I’ve only got two words for you and that’s ‘fuck you’.
There’s no fuckin’ way that innocent people that didn’t violate a single fuckin’ law, that didn’t hurt a single person—Hell, that haven’t posted on 4chan in five years deserved any of this shit.
I don’t give a shit what this one did, it doesn’t work that way.
And that is precisely why your case is so tragic, Reaver. How many innocents were put into harm’s way via Alice2’s negligence…
Had she been just been a tiny bit more responsible, a little more mindful, maybe she’d be the only one sitting on that couch, expressing her anger at the absurdity of the situation.
But sadly, you were roped in, and subsequently dragged down. Not just you, but your loved ones as well. It’s nothing short of amazing how seemingly inconsequential actions of one can affect so many.
You should care a little bit more about what Alice2 did, since it was your information, namely your PayPal account, she was so reckless with. And now you and your family are paying for it.
Given what you’ve told me so far, I find it alarming that you continue to participate in her nonsense. Leads me to believe nothing was learned or perhaps nothing was truly lost.
-------
And, honestly, you talk a lot about responsibility, but, you don’t exhibit a single fuckin’ shred of it.
You see, if you’re a leader, if you’re a community leader, if you’re in charge of your merry band of faggots that means you’re responsible for their actions.
This whole jurisdiction thing it’s a fuckin’ stupid smokescreen…..
As well in Discord,….. all of them have rules against doxing. And, you have a Discord server, and you’re not enforcing those rules. That’s your responsibility.
NO.
Wrong. First, that is a horrendous conceptualization of leadership, as it invites nothing short of tyranny. Each individual is a sovereign body in his or her own right.
Part of my role as leader is to protect that sovereignty. Not reduce it by taking it on as my own. That is a tremendous disservice to that person and risks infantilizing them.
Following your logic, it’d suggest Alice2 is responsible for things such as Purim’s suicide; something I wouldn’t necessarily hold her accountable for. I suggest you dispense of that dangerous notion immediately.
Second, part of my duties as a leader is to aid in conflict resolution. Which is why we’re even having this discussion. To make the claim that I’m derelict in responsibility is to make a claim in bad faith.
As for enforcing the rules and conditions outlined in the Discord ToS, I am certainly with you on that one. That is indeed part of my duties as a Discord server owner.
Need I remind you that what could loosely be considered the original doxing was conducted BEFORE the Discord server was even formed?
Nevermind the fact that none of these doxing incidents never actually took place within the server itself, but in DMs.
Both temporally and spatially (cyberspatially?) these occurrences are out of my jurisdiction as Discord server admin. They have nothing to do within that sphere of responsibility.
That isn’t to say I’m completely dissociating from the problem here. As I’ve indicated before, I’ve talked to all parties involved about this. It won’t happen again.
All of them decided to write apologies. All of them have expressed remorse for their actions. Granted, some more than others, but it certainly is a start.
Moreover, we’re still talking it out, as in Alice2, myself, and now you. But at this point I might just be grasping at a solution that wasn’t ever available, given Alice2’s response.
(More on that later)
-------
Why are you putting the lives of my family below the feelings of your friends?
I’m not. I’m merely refusing to dismiss them. I’m merely entertaining the thought that perhaps there IS something to their feelings, since they did go through the trouble of trying to dox Alice2.
That behavior doesn’t arise out of a void. Something caused that amount of resentment. By failing to address it, we risk having this type of thing occur all over again.
And your apparent willingness to further participate in Alice2’s schemes, despite all that has happened, only increases risk to you and your family.
So why is that you put the lives of your own family below the pursuits of your friend?
-------
How come there’s a moderator in your fuckin’ Discord that posted my dox on fuckin’ 4chan, or—gave it to someone—who cares?!
They’re the one responsible for being on 4chan and they’re still a moderator. Why?
No, not ‘who cares?’. It’s a very nuanced detail that cannot be so easily hand-waved, unless we desire to change the nature of the offense in its entirety.
It isn’t exactly clear if what Anya did could be constituted as doxing, since she did NOT go publish it in a public domain with malicious intent.
True, she did pass off information to someone, but she didn’t reveal anything that wasn’t already publically available.
I will admit that what she did was fairly low, but it cannot be said definitively that it was doxing.
Why is she a moderator? Because she’s competent and up for the task. Alice2 can attest to this, as even she appointed her to the moderation team back in the day.
Or maybe not; if you ask her now, I’m sure she’ll probably only point out negatives, since Anya is now seen on the opposing side.
If by letting Anya stay on as a moderator I’m committing some fatal error, I’ll surely pay the price for it when the time comes. I’m willing to take the risk.
“Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.”, if that’s any comfort.
As is, I don’t think I have much to worry about when it comes to Anya.
We’ve had our share of disagreements in the past, but I took the time to hear her out and treated her with sufficient respect that we can still remain friends.
When you don’t go out of your way to belittle people, they tend to respond positively. It isn’t that hard to understand. It is possible to correct in a non-condescending manner.
Anya isn’t some unchecked sociopath. It’s the likelier case that she’s just as wretched as any one of us. Bound to lash out when sufficiently provoked.
-------
Again, have some actual personal responsibility. Do something that’s hard. Because, otherwise, you’re just fuckin’ over innocent people and that’s not right.
You’re conflating my role as server owner with the doxing involving other people. I never put your family in harm’s way. You, Alice2, and those aforementioned three accomplished that.
That being said, I suggest your follow your own advice and do something that is hard. Go to the proper authorities; make a case. Prove to THEM that your family was under real threat.
I’m willing to cooperate once you’re willing to commit to a formal investigation, in favor of whatever…this is. Anything the authorities might need from me, I’ll be willing to provide.
Short of that, I’m going to dismiss that call to action as being ill-advised.
-------
I wish I could say it was nice talking to you, but….I’m out.
I only wish that it was under better circumstances, Reaver. Take care of yourself.
Thank you for speaking to me; it’s been informative. You’ve given me tons to think about. I hope you take my words into consideration as well.
-------
Alice2,
Apologies for the delay. I’ve largely been focused on Reaver’s portion of the video.
Also, I’ve been agonizing over how to best approach a response. I’ve decided to take a small risk.
There will be consequences. I can accept them. Those that know me best would understand anyway.
At any rate, your patience will be rewarded. Your turn.
-------
You know, you bring up personal responsibility a lot, but I’m not sure if you understand what it really is.
I’ll gloss over your attack on two major fields, one of which is STEM and just know that the law hasn’t worked that way for centuries in most of the modern first world.
I think you’re mistaken, but you’re entitled to make that claim. Just as you fall short of my standards, I don’t expect that I’m quite up to scratch relative to yours. I can live with that.
As for glossing over my ‘attacks’, that’s fine too. Your input likely won’t be of much value to me, since you seem to have a rudimentary understanding of the field of criminal justice.
First, I’d like to point out that I made no claims as to how law is practiced in modern times. Don’t know where you were going with that one.
Second, the ideas I’m positing to you aren’t as archaic as you’d like to make them out to be. Dr. Marvin Wolfgang published “Victim Precipitated Homicide” in 1957. In the U.S.
You can read it for yourself here. And I really hope you do, because you’re making an absolute fool of yourself. So much for the notion of law not working that way for centuries, in the modern first world.
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8fa5/86da7b5f8caf07801a61f6e21f12fdf0c3d4.pdf
At least Reaver had the humility to admit that he wasn’t a criminal justice major, and doesn’t proceed to make unsubstantiated claims about the subject.
The claim that I did make was that social sciences in general are in a particularly sorry state, due to liberal bias. Relevant to our discussion, the fields of criminal justice and victimology are no exception to this.
These ideas are not my own, merely something I had an inkling of. That feeling that something isn’t quite right. Like I said, what Kermit pointed out to me seemed awfully suspicious.
A paper I came across (sadly) confirmed my suspicions. You may read up on it here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25036715
Again, I strongly invite you to read it. It may prove to be very enlightening. It might even aid us in coming to some sort of agreement on this current doxing matter.
Notice that Jonathan Haidt is one of the authors of the paper. Forgive me if it appears as if I’m name-dropping, but I really do adore that man.
I’ve watched countless lectures of his; he’s a paragon of correct academic conduct. Not one absolutist statement in speech, entertains alternatives, seldom attempts to ridicule or belittle the opposition.
Very much in stark contrast to what I’ve seen from you. I want to believe that you’re better than this. But a seven year track record is hard to ignore, so maybe you’re not.
As is, your behavior is more approximate to that of an ideologue, rather than a true academic. Calling it as I see it; an opinion is just that. Not trying to pass it off as fact, by any means.
But given that I’m not alone in this, that several people feel much the same, you might want to at the very least consider it.
-------
Maybe you’re confusing a case in which the victim is at the same time guilty of a crime; that is two separate trials, not the victim being punished.
Even the fighting words doctrine only reduces culpability; it doesn’t punish the victim.
I’m not sure where you got the notion that I want to punish you. Never had I indicated that was my desire. I merely wanted an answer to two very simple and honest questions.
The first being: “In your estimation, what amount of responsibility do you bear in this doxing incident?” .
The second: “…given how you often deal with vulnerable populations, what do you consider to be responsible, appropriate behavior?”.
You answered one of them. But we’ll get to that later. I’d like to keep this sequential and orderly, if I can help it.
-------
Reaver’s right; you do have a responsibility to him. That’s part of what being a leader is about.
You claim you aren’t the jury or the executioner but by refusing to look at the evidence, by refusing to act—to accept Reaver I are [sic] human beings with our own feelings, and by refusing to hold the people
who did these fucked up things responsible it’s exactly what you are.
At this point, the two of you sound like children, throwing a fit over not getting your way. How many times have you two made the same ad hominems? Must’ve been at least four times.
I’m going to simply dismiss those as attempts at character assassination, since the two individuals lecturing me about personal responsibility appear to be lacking much of it themselves. Lacking sense, even.
You want to talk about personal responsibility? About doing what’s right? Find a real solution to this whole mess? I restate my original position: establish a formal investigation with the appropriate authorities.
Because that’s what responsible people who are under very real threat do. They enlist the help of those that are already tasked with upholding the law.
They don’t drag on this melodrama for months on end, pointing fingers in every direction, never even once acknowledging their very own role in these events. That’s too easy.
Maybe that’s just your style? But I’d say that, at that point, the intention becomes very clear. No solution is truly wanted. Only the chance to be “right” again, I’d wager.
Sorry to say, Alice2, but I don’t answer to you. You’re going to have to do much better than to brow-beat me into submission. I cooperate with the law, not anekichat lynch mobs.
If I refuse to comply with any formal investigation, then you may freely call me irresponsible as much as you would like and attack my character to your heart’s content.
Dereliction of duty and refusal to indulge you in your own sense of self-righteousness are two very distinct things. Know the difference.
Refusal to look at the evidence? Be reasonable, Alice2. Prior to this video, no one was certain that Reaver even existed.
Sure, we could’ve taken your word for it, but we know better. Your word isn’t evidence. You’re a proponent of skeptic thought; so you should understand. Keep providing evidence, and I’ll keep listening.
Let it be known that your claim is untrue; I do consider you and Reaver human beings, with your own feelings. That’s demonstrably true, since I’m taking the time to hear the two of you out. It’s what I do.
As I told Reaver before…the metaphor of me being judge/jury/executioner isn’t holding up too well in establishing a coherent point. It is functioning nicely for rhetoric’s sake, however.
-------
Refusing to act is still a decision and while you didn’t pull the trigger, you also haven’t lifted the blade.
Refusing to act is still a decision. You’re absolutely right. I couldn’t agree more. I’m with you on that one, adding that both choices, to act, not to act, may breed equally severe consequences.
I’m glad that you said this, that I didn’t pull the trigger. Given all that had been said up until this point, I’d have surmised that you thought it was I who did the doxing. Thank you for the clarification.
I haven’t lifted the blade…well, that much is true. And why would I? I didn’t put Reaver in the guillotine. You and Reaver himself saw to that yourselves.
So it is up to the two of you to quit bumbling about and begin sorting out your mess in earnest. I’m willing to help if necessary, but by no means is it my responsibility to clean up after you.
-------
Finally, I agree with Reaver. He shares exactly zero responsibility for any of this. He’s innocent and they are guilty. Simple as that.
Simple as that? Really? No, I’m sorry, but I’m going to have to flat-out reject that proposition. The two of you had a role in this, and carry some responsibility whether you’d like to admit to it or not.
As much as it’s tempting to accept that it really is that simple, there’s a corpus of literature out there that states otherwise. The victim-offender dyad can be incredibly complex, according to VPT.
If I had to choose between well-established, published academics vs. an ideologue that claims to be of the former, well…the choice is obvious.
In Reaver’s case, I’m willing to cede that his responsibility in all this is limited. People make mistakes in who they choose to trust all the time.
However, if he continues to commit the same mistake, despite all that has happened, he should be held increasingly accountable. At that point it’s a conscious, foolish decision that cannot be dismissed.
-------
As for my responsibility, I plead the Sixth.
You’ve done absolutely nothing to provide me with even a hint of what my crime is, despite being invited to do so half a dozen times.
I must admit, that I am thoroughly disappointed with your anemic, faint-hearted response to an honest question. It was actually the crux of my message to you.
Disappointing as it may be, it wasn’t entirely unexpected. There is a reason why Anya had checked out in even attempting to talk to you, afterall.
It’s because you’re incapable of having an honest discussion, Alice2.
This is no proper trial to appeal towards. You hadn’t committed any crime that violates law. No one is accusing you of doing so, and no one is seeking to punish you. Victim complex acting up again?
You’re getting lost in your own rhetoric. My only claim is that your so-called “crime” is that you failed to address and handle Anya and Yui’s grievances appropriately.
I’ll admit that some of those grievances were ill-conceived, as Kermit had convinced me. But to say I’ve done nothing to provide you with even a hint of what your “crime” is? That’s a lie.
Between Kermit, Fred, and myself, I have something like 30 emails discussing the matter at length. Read them, pay attention, and you’d quickly find that I was trying to make a case on their behalf.
With a hand tied behind my back no less, because of Anya’s refusal to entertain the subject. So perhaps it was doomed to fail. But my failings doesn’t necessarily invalidate all their grievances.
As someone who has expressed in the past that you wish to make things right, the onus now lies with you to fix things between you and the last willing participant: Yui.
Rather than having me play messenger between the two parties, I suggest you engage with Yui in a manner that indicates you are willing to listen, rather than seeking to be “right”.
She wrote a well thought-out apology. An improvement over what she had offered before. I’m hoping that you read it carefully and didn’t stomp all over a sincere demonstration of goodwill.
I haven’t seen the outcome to it all, beyond your video to her, but cynical me anticipates the worst from you, because that’s all you’ve shown me up until this point.
Anya is now simply a non-participant, and there’s nothing you and I could do to change that. It’ll leave things unresolved, sure, but it’s arrogant to think we deserve a neat and tidy resolution.
To invoke the Sixth in this case is to be facetious, and you know it. Or maybe you don’t? The more we interact, the more I struggle with the question.
In any regard, I do ask that you reconsider your answer, and get back to me with something more substantial.
So, I ask again: “In your estimation, what amount of responsibility do you bear in this doxing incident?”.
And: “…..given how you often deal with vulnerable populations, what do you consider to be responsible, appropriate behavior?”. You outright ignored this one.
-------
As well you’ve decided not to ask the very simple and obvious questions that would answer that inquiry.
It’s pretty obvious why, Toobs; I’m not stupid. That’s the actions of someone unwilling to accept that they may be wrong.
The inquiry in question being: What is the “crime” (your rhetoric) that Alice2 committed? Right?
Wouldn’t want to leave any stone unturned, so why not clarify for me what those obvious questions are? And maybe you could even provide a non-evasive answer to them.
-------
So If you want to call my behavior appalling, if you want to say I deserved it, you need a better case for it than “People said so but I won’t ask them about it.”.
So much for graciously accepting my apology, for asserting that you deserved this. But I suppose anything can be abused, provided it furthers whatever point you’re trying to make. You truly are a class act.
Further cements my position that apologies of any form will never be enough you. They’re meaningless. You’ll claim you graciously accept them, but it’s only in hollow spirit.
You would just as quickly turn around and ask for more, endlessly shifting the goal post even further. Or, you’d politicize it and use it as a talking point.
Now, to this, you might object “I’m not the one that should be apologized to. Reaver, etc.” Please bear in mind that I’m talking about this specific instance, of my apology to you over my assertion.
But, I will address that objection of yours nonetheless. It might be true, that Yui has to apologize to Reaver. She claims that she has, in her most recent apology to you. Perhaps it wasn’t enough.
Before she revises, however, I demand that you clearly outline the conditions for what constitutes as a satisfactory apology. To put an end to this harassment.
But back to the main point of this sentence, you’re absolutely right. I tried to make a case that was rather unsuccessful.
I tried to articulate the grievances as best as I could, working with incomplete information. It was stupid of me, but I tried anyway.
So, why not go straight to the source? Ask Yui herself about the grievances and fix them between the two of you. Actually cooperate with her, rather than ridicule her. Get something constructive done.
Put aside that ego of yours for ten minutes and listen to her. Pay attention. Temporarily operate under the condition that her concerns are just as valid and worthy of consideration as yours.
Maybe this has already occurred? Like I said, I’m not privy to the details of the discussion between you and her, beyond your video response to her apology.
Doubt it, since there has been very little headway as far as I can tell. I’m still repeating the very same things I said months ago.
-------
You don’t like something someone did? Great. Go express that. Present the evidence, make a compelling argument, attack their ideas and actions.
Hell, take them to court if they violated the law. But attack them? The world has two assholes instead of one.
"Do as I say, not as I do.”
-------
Finally got through all of that. Had to restate much of what had been mentioned before; I see you’re still struggling to implement my suggestions.
At least I was finally afforded the chance to meet Reaver, but I am still disappointed that you haven’t addressed my questions. But it’s nothing you cannot elaborate on in a future email.
In summary:
01.)
If you insist that I punish Anya, then you must prove to me first that Reaver came under real threat, as well as provide proof of relocation.
02.)
In addition to this, you must demonstrate to me that you’ve escalated to a formal case, with police involvement. I’ve had enough of this lynch mob style of justice.
03.)
If you refuse to fulfill the above two conditions, at the very least try to fix things between you and Yui. Accept whatever apologies and move the Hell on.
04.)
Answer my questions, if you’d be so kind. I’m not accusing you of anything, but I’d like to have an open, honest discussion. That is, if you’re capable of it.
I think that just about covers it. As is, Anya and Yui remain in the server, free of your influence. Hope you can come to accept that, at some point.
Or don’t; it really makes very little difference to me. I’ve made my recommendations and you can choose to heed them or ignore them.
We’ve all had our choices to make this entire time; nothing about this is shocking or new.
But thank you for reminding me all the same.
-2B
P.S. Happy Birthday.
[end transmission]
