Alright 2B, I know neither of us has any patience for a cheeky introduction. Let's just get right into this point by point.

First off, I find it highly amusing that you accuse me of nitpicking when you're literally being guilty  of it in the same thought. You're absolutely right. "Would you accept Alice's apology?" isn't the question you asked. The question you DID ask was: "suppose if Alice2 wanted to speak to you, and offer up some sort of apology, would you be interested?"
If that's not you being nitpicky, I seriously don't know what is. You can give it whatever window dressing you want, but the general thought was still primed on the basis of alice apologizing to the people who worked to dox her. Which is pretty fucked.

I know this was all supposedly orchestrated to gauge the general mood of the people in question to talk to her, but the way you asked it STILL re-enforces the idea to them that they were somehow wronged, and that any conversation would have to involve Alice apologizing for an, as of that moment, still undefined grievance.

Also "because they can't make a real case for why they were wronged" is EXACTLY right. If you want to believe they tried to talk this unknown injustice out with her in the past, you can do exactly that. But you should probably back that up with some EVIDENCE first. As it stands there isn't ANY proof of that. As for Fred confirming this suspicion of yours, he has no idea what you're talking about. Unless of course you're referring to Blu logging into the chat to apologize, before immediately taking it back and then saying she didn't actually mean it.

That's not "talking it out".
I invite you to take this opportunity to correct me.

The only reason getting a direct statement from them is off the table is because we both know any statement they give will probably be bullshit. If you're just gonna sit there and tell me that you can't even GIVE me a reason in THEIR words for WHY they decided to dox my friend, then holy shit. I'm really at the end of my rope here.

If you want to offer your own conjecture that's fine. That's literally been all this has been so far.
But let's discuss it anyway.

Blu.
It's not a false dichotomy so say she either did something out of Malice or Boredom. Those were her two given statements. Either she did something terrible out of boredom or she did it out of Malice. Those statements are contradictory and do not go hand in hand. My point there was that Blu was PROBABLY lying about why she did it the 2nd time when confronted by Fred.
I simply don't buy that someone who had previously stated they "wanted to see" someone "burn" would do something that fucked up out of "boredom".

It's like trying to fit a square peg into a round hole, that shit doesn't fucking fit.
I 100% believe she did it with malicious intent. You can choose to believe whatever you wish, but based on her previous comments and the nature of the act itself, I'm going to go with malice.

The Screenshot.
Oh boy, this whole thing is so fucked up from top to bottom it deserves it's own breakdown.
Everything stated there is either a lie, exaggerated or an assumption.

Listen, I know you haven't known Blu that long. (And frankly you have my condolences for having her in your discord.) EVERYONE had a problem with her and her behavior. That isn't an exaggeration. If you don't believe me, I would consult Vimes or hell, even Enth about her.
Enth in fact, had the biggest grievances with her behavior out of anyone I know. Unfortunately I can't show you any examples of this, chat records only go back a year, and everything else I've shown you at this point has either been manually saved or screen-capped.

The only thing that I have on hand that MIGHT speak to this is this old (pretty ironic) screencap I have. https://i.imgur.com/9IM5tRg.png

But we're dealing with the type of person who broke up with her last girlfriend because she had an IMPULSE to tell her to "Fuck off" one time. That should tell you something about the nature of her character. Paranoid and delusional doesn't even begin to cover it.

But I digress, let's get into the specifics of this cap.
First of all, I agree. Blu's doubts were indeed unfounded, and most of the decisions she made that befell her were in fact her own fault.
She was also desperate for validation, something even Alice told her.
Paraphrasing here: "Alice must have seen me as a threat" because "I pass quite well and Alice is a trans woman who refuses to transition and doesn't believe it works."
These two thoughts don't exactly parse. It all hinges on the assumption that Alice is a pre-op transsexual. Which is something she hadn't considered until she attempted to Dox her and got Reaver's information instead. That last statement is also bogus. That stems from a conversation Alice had with Blu where Alice stated that transitioning wouldn't cure depression or solve all of her problems.
Which is absolutely true.

A statement from Alice herself:
Aneki Margatroid: It was literally a link to the study
Aneki Margatroid: showing transitioning does not substantially reduce suicide rates
Aneki Margatroid: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885
Aneki Margatroid: "Persons with transsexualism, after sex reassignment, have considerably higher risks for mortality, suicidal behaviour, and psychiatric morbidity than the general population. Our findings suggest that sex reassignment, although alleviating gender dysphoria, may not suffice as treatment for transsexualism, and should inspire improved psychiatric and somatic care after sex reassignment for this patient group."
Aneki Margatroid: Am I an asshole for citing the current research? Newer studies coming out JUST THIS YEAR suggest maybe SRS does have a good effect
Aneki Margatroid: But it's still up in the air

I'm not sure what the fuck this "beaten down into submission" shit is about, so I'm just going to ignore it.
Guessing whatever she told her therapist was heavily biased and exaggerated, much like this current sentiment.
As for the money discussion, I remember that as well. That had nothing to do with Blu's pride and satisfaction of herself; what that discussion had to do with was the meaning of what it means to be Middle Class.
It was a financial argument, not a personal attack. Alice after all, works in the finance industry. Alice has never stated she lives paycheck to paycheck. That is a lie.
In fact she's currently employing a few members of the chat for her YouTube channel and game work: Louise, Reimu and up until recently, Vimes.

I'd also like to take this moment to point out that the reason why Blu had any employment at all was because of a suggestion Alice had made.
Alice got her a job through Upwork, both to help her financially support herself and to pad her resume.
I can see that this is something Blu conveniently left that out in all of her diatribes.
Once again, this is something you can feel free to verify with members of the chat who were around during Blu's tenure there.
Alice helping her get a job? That doesn't exactly sound like someone who was jealously targeting her or berating her for her job prospects.

Sharply criticizing someone isn't the same as mistreating them. And they weren't even criticisms, it was information gauged to help Blu gain a better understanding of the realities of her transition and of her financial security.

Blu's paranoid delusions are really poking through here.
And once again, I offer you the opportunity to ask ANYONE else who was around about this.

Alice isn't a bully. The bully in this situation is the one who felt so delusionally persecuted that they decided to bite the hand that was feeding them.
It isn't bullying to give someone realistic expectations.
Doxxing as an intimidation tactic sure as hell is though.
If you truly believe you can get several people to testify on Blu's behalf, I offer you now as the opportunity to do it.

"given this is a reoccurring problem with Alice2, and it has happened with so many people, that I am correct in indicating some internal characteristic."

I would also ask you to back up this statement with specifics.

And as I've demonstrated previously, that screenshot is NOT enough to convince me. I KNOW Blu. I've known her for a lot longer than you have.
And other people know her too. Even Louise had invited her into the discord under the thought that "Blu has changed". She was of course, proven wrong almost immediately.

If you'll grant me that Blu can be "mistaken, reactive, and grandiose", then I please ask you that you believe me when I say that the problems with her are a lot more deep rooted than that.
That just maybe I'm possibly telling the truth. And if my word isn't good enough, maybe trust the word of someone you know better and trust more than me.

Is it truly more likely that Blu is delusional or that I am?

I also don't appreciate the underhanded jab suggesting that I'm indifferent to the suffering of others except in Alice's case. I thought I made thing clear regarding the events of the Makoto incident. An incident in which Alice and I had a pretty intense fight over the well-being of the chat.
I care deeply about the chat, and consider the people in it a sort of family. Ask Fred if you don't believe me. I have even spent sleepless nights talking with Dag, offering him company and advice where he needs it. You see, I still consider Dag my friend even after everything he's done to Alice. I'm aware of the circumstances concerning his choices. If you don't believe me, ask him yourself.

On the Makoto incident I fully agree with you. From the start I was pushing to just have Makoto outright banned. In fact, it was alluded to in that argument I mentioned before.
What Alice instead chose to do was be merciful. She gave Makoto a chance to come clean, and merely changed her name when the time came.
Had it been my choice, we would have just been done with it. Perhaps none of this would have played out the way it had.

But you're right. At this point it's futile to speculate.

And yes thank you, I graduated a couple years ago. Plenty of that knowledge is still stored in my noggin thankfully!
You don't need to remind me that criminology is an ever evolving field, I'm well aware.

Victim Precipitation Theory, Routine Activity Theory and Lifestyle theory all analyze a victims lifestyle choices, associations, upbringing, employment etc. They try to explain what might make them more susceptible to be VICTIMS of a crime.
None of these theories "Blame" the victim. Victim blaming IS quite well defined, and not very controversial.

There is a world of difference between saying someone "Precipitated" their victimhood in a crime and "Blaming" them for it.
It's not nuance or pedanticism, these words have entirely different meanings.

The word you chose to use at the time was that she "Deserved" to be doxxed. NOT that she "precipitated" her own doxxing.
These two thoughts are VASTLY different, believe me.

You can't accuse me of intellectual dishonesty while moving your goalpost to the fucking moon.
I WILL agree that, in some form, Alice precipitated her own doxxing on the basis of a decision she made almost a decade ago.
Where we disagree is on the metrics of her behavior to and treatment of, Blu and Enth.

But at this point, that is neither here nor there. You changed the phrasing of your original statement, and fundamentally changed the entire meaning of it.
If you're just going to retcon what you said, you might as well just fucking apologize for saying the wrong thing in the first place. Even if it's just on that basis alone, at least that's fucking something.

I'd like to believe you're virtuous as well, 2B. I really would.
I initially thought you were just being a cunt, hence my harsh language and lack of respect. But as I'm learning more about you, I'm beginning to think maybe you really do just have a fundamental misunderstanding of the situation.

So far your argument against Alice is propped up on the word of someone we know to be grandiose and delusional, and from someone romantically linked to another that was fairly removed from that chat.
Both of their main justifications have also been discredited.

And now you're changing the words and meaning of what you've originally said, to something I can almost agree with.

So I don't know what's left, 2B.
You can continue believing to believe their word against my evidence.
You can continue to believe the nature of their character against ours.

But I'd implore you to at least try to get to the truth of it, and not to automatically side with one part of the issue.

I would really like to hope we're closer to some greater understanding here.

[being transmission]

Kermit,

Are you done nit-picking? ‘Would you accept Alice’s apology?’ isn’t even the question I asked.

It was fairly obvious that I was gauging interest of even engaging in dialogue with Alice2. Notice that I was positing a hypothetical, not an absolute in my question.

With Yui and daggy, I had to elaborate, and even then I mentioned that it was an opportunity for an apology, provided that they fulfill the conditions of listing their grievances. This is fair.

But, as it shows, they want nothing to do with Alice2 at all. Period. Understand that.

No one wants Alice2’s apologies. They’re meaningless at this point. You’re truly the only one pushing for this. I never even asserted that Alice2 should apologize to Anya, Yui, and daggy.

Interpret their apathy towards it as you will. I’d imagine your thoughts being as ‘Because they know they can’t make a real case for why they were wronged.’ Something like that.

Another alternative, one I’m more inclined to believe, is because they’ve tried to talk it out with her in the past, and it turned out to be futile. Even Fred confirmed this.

If that is true, they’ve every right to decline talking to her or even entertaining an apology. Nobody wants to waste anymore of their time.

So that question? ‘What did Alice2 do to Anya, Yui, and daggy?’. Getting a direct statement from them is off the table.

If Alice2 wants to hash it out with either one of those three, she could. It’s their business, not ours.

However, for the purposes of complying with your requests, I can now in good conscience offer my own conjecture.

Just to be clear, we can dismiss daggy, correct? It’s mutually agreed upon that he wasn’t sound of mind when he did this. The focus on Anya/Mako and Yui.

------- Yui -------

First, I’d like to discard your false dichotomy, that either Yui lashed out in response to mistreatment OR she conducted it out of boredom.

Well, CLEARLY it’s both. In a few sentences preceding your presentation of this dichotomy, you state that Yui said the she ‘Wanted to see Alice burn’.

That’s a clear indication of malice in intent, which, I argue is bred from how she was treated. Yui’s own words, demonstrated by Fred’s records, confirms it was also out of curiosity/boredom.

Again, the issue is nuanced and multivariate, Kermit. This doxing is likely not attributable to a single factor or incident, but several. Please keep that in mind.

That being said, I’d like to share this screenshot of part of a conversation I had with Yui not too long ago:

https://imgur.com/a/i1op3

Here, Yui describes some of the mistreatment at the hands of Alice2. Sure, you can dismiss it and say ‘There are no specific incidents of wrong-doings.’ But that’s not what I’m arguing.

I’m arguing that a lot of the resentment Yui feels towards Alice2 does not originate from a singular, grand incident, but several minute ones.

Yui mentions having her transition and career aspirations sharply criticized. To me or you, who do not value such things, we do not see what the issue is.

But to Yui, who DOES care about these things, well…they’re going to have some kind of effect. And the effect was significant enough that she had to bring it up with her therapist.

And thank goodness she did. Because her therapist indicated what I couldn’t put into words for so long. Alice2 is a bully, plain and simple.

It isn’t just Yui that maintains this either; several can testify. Most of them aren’t around anymore (thank goodness), but there are a few lingering about. Some of them are even among her friends.

You mentioned fundamental attribution error: undue emphasis on internal characteristics of another person, rather than external factors.

I’m inclined to think that, given this is a reoccurring problem with Alice2, and it has happened with so many people, that I am correct in indicating some internal characteristic.

As I hinted at before, I’m not one for this culture of weakness that is often associated with cyberbullying. People could stand to toughen the hell up.

But keep in mind that Alice2 operates in a domain that includes vulnerable populations. Yui, Anya/Mako, and daggy all fall into this group.

I cannot attribute her behavior to ignorance; she knows all of this, yet she has proven time and time again to be tactless and irresponsible.

Granted, I think some of what could be construed as harshness on her part is necessary, but there is a point where ego and cruelty supersedes the well-being of others.

If this screenshot isn’t sufficient enough for you, for you to even consider the possibility that Alice2 wronged Yui in some manner, then I have very little hope that there is any convincing you at all.

Because, in order to fulfill what I presume to be your criteria of ‘evidence’, and hand-picking some isolated incidents of Alice2 wronging Yui, we’d have to comb through anekichat logs.

I’m not sure if you’re up for that. I’m not even sure if you’re capable of that, given your indifference towards anyone’s suffering other than Alice2’s.

It’s your chat, you keep the records, so it’s your call to make.

You can maintain that what Yui felt was invalid, for any number of incidents. And I’ll grant that; clearly Yui can be mistaken, reactive, and grandiose at times. She’s not perfect.

But past a certain point it appears delusional on your part, suggesting that perhaps you think Alice2 can do no wrong.

------- Anya/Mako -------

I took a few moments to review what happened with the Makoto incident, and I’m a little more sympathetic towards the decision, all things considered.

I wasn’t aware of the previous things Mako had done. Alice2 had every right to rid the chat of someone she believed to be endangering the others.

However, I still have my reservations with how she handled it. It wasn’t as poor as I initially thought, but it could’ve been handled better.

I’m not going to tell Alice2 how to run her chat, but I’m of the mind that she could’ve done without the theatrics altogether, and resort to a simple ban.

Afterall safety of other members was the paramount concern here, right?

But to criticize the decision at this point is utterly futile. It’s done, and it brought out the worst in Anya and Mako.

------- ‘Alice2 deserved to be doxed’ -------

Two degrees in criminology? I never knew that about you, Kermit. It’s sort of comforting to know that you’re a credentialed scholar and are relatively well-read and informed.

But that also makes my expectations of you all the more loftier.

Let me remind you that criminal justice is an ever-evolving field, just like any other academic subject. There is a constant flux of new data, theories being reformulated, and new ones developed.

There are a few central pillars to any field that are unanimously agreed upon, sure. But I’m afraid that your indication that victimology is absolute does not fit into that corpus.

As it turns out, victimology is a fairly controversial field. It isn’t as unanimously agreed upon, as you would have me to believe. I’m not as ‘rong’ as you’d like to think I am.

If I were, then explain to me why there are such theories as ‘Victim Precipitation Theory’, ‘Routine Activity Theory’, and ‘Lifestyle Theory’?

I took quite an interest in Victim Precipitation Theory, attributed to Marvin Wolfgang, a celebrated criminologist. I should thank you for that, for introducing me to a new, interesting idea.

Maybe the theory wasn’t part of the curriculum in your victimology classes? Could also be that you had simply forgotten. Intellectual dishonesty? In any case, a quick refresher:

Victim Precipitation Theory posits that, in certain scenarios, victims themselves behave or initiate confrontations such that the offender is provoked, precipitating into an attack on the victim.

The context of this assertion came from Dr. Marvin Wolfgang’s analysis of homicide cases in Philadelphia, noting that in several cases, altercations were initiated due to actions of the would-be victim.

This leads to the conclusion that, criminal acts, the victim is not entirely blameless and innocent. Often times the victim’s actions provide criminal motivation to the offender.

There are two classifications of precipitations: active and passive. Intuitively, they’re what they sound like. Active is when the victim knowingly provokes, passive when he or she is provoking, unaware.

Moreover, I came across this paper, published in The International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology:

http://ponce.inter.edu/acad/facultad/jvillasr/LECTURAS/Victimologica%20Developments.pdf

If you’d turn your attention to the bottom of page 460, top of 461, under the header of ‘Situation-Oriented Theories’, you’ll find the following passage:

It is occasionally misinterpreted as victim coresponsibility, responsibility assignment, and blaming the victim (Krahé, 1989). The dynamic, interactionist perspective of victim precipitation does not, however, appraise victim behavior. In this kind of interpretation model, there is no room for normative or value judgments such as guilt or responsibility (Fattah, 1994, p. 96).The model ultimately

describes only the misinterpretation of victim behavior by the offender. The illusionary misinterpretation of the situation by the offender, which is evoked by the victim’s behavior (Michaelis-Arntzen, 1994), is merely a substantiation of rape-supporting stereotypes in the rape situation. The concept of victim precipitation, which is based on the theory of symbolic interaction and which does not in any way dispense the offender of his exclusive responsibility, thus only marks the application of social structural theory and cognitive social learning theory in the rape situation. The denial of an offender-victim relationship in the rape situation and of a potential victim precipitation reinforces the questionable proposition that rape is an uncontrollable event and that the victim cannot take any preventive action (Heath & Davidson, 1988). This promotes the learned helplessness of the potential rape victim who refrains from developing self-protection measures, because of their assumed futility, and succumbs to his or her fearful, self-defined, victim attitude.

I’m recapping VPT and mentioning this passage to make two points:

First, I revise my statement. Alice2 precipitated her own doxing. I still have my personal value judgments on the matter, but you need not concern yourself with those.

Second, this passage ties back neatly with my recommendations to Alice2 to reevaluate her behavior, so that this kind of thing doesn’t happen again.

I’d maintain that she was actively precipitating, by chiding on Jack and co. and being purposefully condescending. But perhaps there are character flaws she’s truly not aware of? Might very well be passive.

It is the viewpoint of several others that she plays the victim too readily. Is this a form of learned helplessness? Maybe this could change that.

Although I find this theory fascinating, it isn’t without it’s critics. See? Told you victimology was controversial and not as clear-cut.

I offer you this other paper I’ve found, from The Criminal Justice Review:

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/073401688400900209

I couldn’t access it because I’m not on campus this week, but I invite you to read it.

Why would I want you to do that? Well, because that’s what true intellectual honesty is. Addressing both sides of the argument, even attempting to bolster the opposing side.

So far, I’m not convinced you’ve been doing me the same courtesy. You’ve only tried to obfuscate the existence of another position, contrary to your own, by asserting absolutes. Make up for it.

But I guess according to you we should always prepare for the worst from people.

You should. Idealists get sorted out rather quickly by the world.

It is funny though, despite everything they tried to do to her: We never for one moment considered doxxing them in return.

And I believe you wouldn’t, neither you nor Alice2. As I said before, I believe her to be virtuous, perhaps you as well.

-2B

[end transmission]

Hello 2B!

In the interest of keeping this conversation civil I've replaced my usual vulgarity and expletives with safe for work language.
I hope this is easier to digest for you.

Now where do I begin with this gosh darned mess? Let's just take things point by point!

Ok so first off, the original question was "what did Alice do to Enth, Blu and Dag".
You even acknowledged this in your silly little opening.
However, that is not the question you asked!

"Would you accept Alice's apology" is a pretty radically different question. Pretty loaded too!
You see, the question is already assuming Alice has something to personally apologize to them for.
It's pretty different from the entirely neutral question of "Why are you upset with Alice" or (the less neutral but still acceptable) "What did she do to make you act this way."

In fact, as I'm sure you're well aware, this tactic is known as "Priming".
https://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/28/weekinreview/28sussman.html
You primed them people a certain way by asking that specific question with that specific wording.
It's quite intellectually dishonest.

But regardless let's go down the list:

Enth's "No" isn't much to go on. Maybe if you had asked "why not", or "why do you feel that way", we could have gotten an answer that I could work with. But oh well.

Dag is actually the wild card here, he's recently given me a statement that runs directly contrary to the narrative you're weaving for him here, but I gave him my word I wouldn't share what exactly he told me.
However, he did tell me that he would be talking to you about his feelings on the matter personally, so keep an eye out for him. it's part of the reason why my reply has been delayed.

Now Blu over here, she sure is a piece of something isn't she?
I would like to point out that she told us to "get over something that happened almost 3 months ago." The irony of course being the fact that she decided to Dox Alice about a full year after she had left the chat.
It's funny to me how that works. She also mentioned something about how Alice needed to message her? She is of course, completely capable of messaging Alice herself. In fact, in their last E-mail exchange, Blu abruptly stopped talking to her.
Ball is totally in her court there.

We'll get back to Blu later on though, I'm not quite finished with that sweet little cupcake yet!

You see, fortunately for them and fortunately for me, I have no strong desire to contact either Blu or Enth. I'm perfectly capable of recognizing the exchange wouldn't be productive. They did after all, try to dox my best friend.
And no, of course their response doesn't bode well with me, you didn't ask the the right motherflipping questions!

I really liked what you said next though:

"Of course they want nothing to do with this, right? They committed the crime, got away relatively scot-free, and are happily living out their wretched little lives.
Meanwhile, your good friend Alice2 is still suffering. Suffering that was brought on by their reprehensible acts.
They OUGHT to answer for it. They owe her an apology, if they truly do regret what they have done."

I honestly couldn't have described the situation better myself, though I'd leave out the last bit. It's abundantly clear to me neither of them regret what they've done.
And quite frankly, I don't expect anyone willing enough to collect and spread a dox to ALSO be willing to apologize for it. It's sort of a rule of thumb: if you would do something like that in the first place, chances are you're probably a completely unapologetic doorknob.

Dag is of course, the exception, both for apologizing and for being out of his mind at the time.
See, I'm not totally heartless. I see reason and I take it where I can get it.

But so far this entire ordeal has been so far removed from reasonable, even you are clearly clutching at straws.

Anyway, you could have certainly fudging fooled me regarding your sympathies on the matter, considering your prior behavior, justifications and statements. But for now, we'll say I trust and believe you, and that you truly do want what's best for everyone involved, including Alice.

I mean, i don't actually believe it, but I'll say it now for the narrative of this conversation.
And you HAVE been replying to me, and that does count for something.

As for considering the viewpoints of those involved, I already have! In fact I thought I demonstrated to you earlier why I believed those viewpoints to be INVALID. Feelings can be irrational, and propped up under exaggerated beliefs or outright lies or delusion.
I've already shown you some examples of this. In fact, I'm 100% willing to concede that some of their feelings on Alice are in fact perfectly reasonable responses. But I actually need tangible proof or some sort of explanation.

You mention further down that YOU believe their reasons aren't illusory, but you also fail to provide evidence for this belief (and no, the Kamina name change doesn't count, we'll get to that in a minute). I've provided evidence for every belief I've so far held about them. I haven't seen squat diddly to contradict that. And I'm literally ASKING to be contradicted.

But before we get into the name change, we gotta jump back to Blu (remember when I said we'd do that, it's happening right now how exciting) You see, I had initially thought, what with all the testimony and evidence, that Blu's recent doxxing surge in january was a result of her still being raw at alice (for the reasons I had shown you).

However! Fred was kind enough to share this gem for me:

https://i.imgur.com/FlQNezK.png

You can't quite see it, but that first bit is related to Fred asking if Mako and Enth had doxxed alice. Which is a bit of irony, because we of course know now that they had in fact done that.
So either Blu is covering for them, or she truly doesn't know. But considering her statements before that she "Wanted to see Alice burn", I'm gonna go out on a limb and say she probably did know. But you're free to disagree, that's purely guess-work on my part.

Well, that and the fact that she was probably one of the five that Rory had mentioned, but I'm getting ahead of myself.
let's forget her past involvement for a minute.

BY HER OWN WORDS, she did it out of mere curiosity.
And furthermore, she states that she doesn't feel sorry about it!

So either we accept your hypothesis that she felt so wronged by Alice that she felt compelled to lash out in one of the worst ways
-OR-
We accept her at her own words, and that she literally just did it out of boredom.

At best, she's a liar.
At worst, she's a piece of fudging bubblegum that doesn't give two fricks about the consequences of her actions.
Take your pick!


Anyway now that we got sweet Blu out of the way, let's focus on your next points.
The unmasking of Makoto.


First of all, I'd like to dismiss this notion that Kamina merely wanted to move on from his past and try to settle in with us as a changed person.
Kamina wasn't some pure innocent angel that we unfairly attacked over our "you can't ignore your past" outlook.

You see, Kamina certainly enjoyed the games they played with people.
Outside of the lying of course, there was the catfishing. Intentionally being provocative with male members of the chat for some sort of thrill.
I mean, you really can't get anymore blatant than this:

https://i.imgur.com/HN5TlVE.png

If we believe that Kamina was a pure innocent and truly was just looking for a fresh start, or that she didn't intend to hurt anyone...well...
The sub-level taunting about their true identity certainly flies in the face of that.

THEN there was accepting the car loan of 2000 dollars from Dag, whi ch is how this whole lie  was first unearthed. You see, Dag obviously had no idea who Makoto truly was, or his past history with the chat. I'd argue that this arrangement was made in bad faith, considering.

And this of course all ties back together to Kamina's past itself:

Hunter and Ezio, two members from 2011, directly accused Kamina of having an abusive relationship with Hunter when she was underaged.
Kamina has a history of such relationships.

The past is terribly important. And Kamina wanted to escape it with good reason.

So when you ask me to have some sort of sympathy for Kamina having her identity revealed, I'd also ask you to have some sympathy for the people that were wronged as a result of it for the charade's duration.
I don't give a good golly gosh about perceptions. You OWN what you did. You don't get to pull the wool over everyone's eyes.
Kamina's concerns don't get to override the concerns of everyone else. There was much more at play than mere ideology.

And furthermore, there was nothing cruel about the way Alice handled this. If you would refer back to the "Shark Fin Soup" post, you would see that Alice had in fact, talked to them privately and gave them ample opportunity to come clean about the truth on their own terms. A gesture I believe to be way more than fair.
However they squandered the opportunity and refused. As a result, Alice changed a name.

So what are we left with now?

Let's do a quick recap! (it's not a parody of yours I swear.)

1.) Someone made a choice to lie about who they were.
2.) They exploited this new identity at the expense of others.
3.) When given the option to tell the truth on their own terms, they refused.
4.) The Truth was revealed. One -falsely- believed Alice used a dox; another -falsely- believed it was an anti-transgender tactic.
5.) They both conspired to hurt Alice, using an unmedicated alcoholic.
6.) Neither of them feel remorse over their actions.

I left out the bit where you said they had been wronged before and it had accumulated. You have yet to provide any evidence of that. so I'm throwing it right the heck out. Right into the garbage. Right in the Traesh.

Remind me again why you think Alice owes any of them an apology?
I'd ESPECIALLY like to hear why you think she owes Blu one.
In fact I'm quite unsure where this piece of the narrative came from exactly. This was supposed to be about you apologizing for saying something fudged up. You know, the whole "Alice2 deserved to be doxxed" thing.

Thus far you have not provided sufficient evidence for this statement to hold any merit, and I'm still expecting an apology.
You don't even need to give it to me, you can just directly send it to Alice. You know her email right?
As for the others apologizing to Alice, I can safely say I don't expect it.

Being willing to Dox someone doesn't exactly go hand in hand with the considerate, remorseful type. I already mentioned this.
However, I would actually like to believe you're better than that. You haven't doxxed anyone to my knowledge, so I'd expect you to be perfectly capable of apologizing.
Those two though? I ain't holding out much hope.

Now onward to the victim blaming point!

First of all it's not virtue signaling OR an attempt at character assassination. It's literally what you're doing. You fit the definition to an absolute T. I'm sure that sucks to hear and I'm sorry, I mean I'd feel pretty bad if someone accused me of it too. But I'm callin' it like I see it. Doesn't mean you're beyond redemption or whatever, I mean I am still expecting to hear an apology from you. I wouldn't be asking for one if I thought you were incapable of it.

Hoo boy.
Now I gotta admit I had a big grin on my face at this next part:

"There is a reason why victimology is a real field of study. Because matters of responsibility, accountability, crime, and victimhood are complex matters"

Now I don't know how much you know about me, but I actually have a couple degrees in criminal justice! I have a few courses of victimology under my belt.
However!
The great irony of that statement is that you don't even need to have an education in psychology or criminal justice to tell you that ur rong:

You see 2B, if you literally go to the Wikipedia definition of "Victim Blaming" you can literally just read the second sentence.

"The study of victimology seeks to mitigate the perception of victims as responsible."
(The source on that is the Journal of Interpersonal Violence. It's a peer-reviewed academic journal.)

Now I'll fully agree with you that victimology is a pretty complex area of study. Believe me, I spent a lot of sleepless nights on the subject. But I gotta tell you, victim blaming has no place in the field, outside of being something that needs to be corrected.

I could go further and tell you that you'd fit nicely into something called FAE (Fundamental Attribution Error), but I've been spending almost this entire time trying to convince you why your outlook is fallacious, so we'll just ignore that!

You say that there is culpability on both sides, but at some point you need to acknowledge that the scales are VASTLY shifted.
In fact, I still don't even really see anything she is truly culpable for. I mean I'm well aware she isn't a saint (she has terrible taste in music) but I mean, come on dude.
At SOME point you have to prove this to me. You need to TELL me what she did that was so wrong, at least something that I can't debunk right out of hand.

Also for the record, when she said "It's one I can live with" I'm pretty sure she wasn't expecting people she had known for years to do one of the most repugnant things you can do online. I certainly wasn't, and I'm a stone cold cynic. But I guess according to you we should always prepare for the worst from people. Out of everything you've impressed upon me, I'll be keeping that one in mind.
Because the worst is certainly what they tried to give her.

It is funny though, despite everything they tried to do to her: We never for one moment considered doxxing them in return.

Insolently yours,
-Kermit

[begin transmission]

Kermit,

------- In what way did Alice2 wrong Anya, Yui, and daggy? -------

As I’ve told Fred, I delayed mentioning what specifically Alice2 did to upset Anya, Yui, and daggy, to prevent any chance for misunderstanding.

I wanted to get clear and concise statements directly from those involved, rather than submit my own personal conjecture.

Here are their responses:

https://imgur.com/a/usw3Q

It’s safe to say that none of them want anything more to do with this.

As such, I’ll be respecting their wishes and will no longer pester them about this. I suggest you and everyone in aneki do that same.

This response is likely not going to bode well with you.

Of course they want nothing to do with this, right? They committed the crime, got away relatively scot-free, and are happily living out their wretched little lives.

Meanwhile, your good friend Alice2 is still suffering. Suffering that was brought on by their reprehensible acts.

They OUGHT to answer for it. They owe her an apology, if they truly do regret what they have done.

That particular side of the issue isn’t lost on me, Kermit. I hope that you do realize that I’m sympathetic to your viewpoint.

If I weren’t, and I need to preface this by mentioning that I’m saying this will all the humility I can muster, I wouldn’t have bothered with our correspondence.

But by that same token, I ask that you consider Anya, Yui, and daggy’s position as well. For the sake of everyone involved.

So that maybe, this entire ordeal isn’t a complete failure. We can prevent such a thing from happening again in the future.

The fact of the matter is that Anya, Yui, and daggy felt wronged enough to dox Alice2.

You maintain that they were not justified, because their grievances are not based in reality. Most (if not all?) of their issues with Alice2 were illusory, stemming from something else.

I also maintain that they were not justified, but in the strictest sense of the word: they did not act in a way that was ‘correct’ or lawful. However, I don’t believe most of their issues were illusory.

I’ll admit, the way that they handled it was awful. But I also maintain that the way Alice2 treated them was awful. She could’ve certainly handled the situation better.

Could you please at least concede a little bit of ground here with my assertion that Alice2 treated them cruelly? Here’s my case.

Recollect the Makoto incident, where she changed the names in the chat. You brought it up, and I think that was certainly one of the ways Alice2 wronged Anya and Mako. Lets go with that.

On the surface, the simple act of changing a name in a chat room for a day doesn’t seem to warrant participation in a dox. That’s what you were trying to indicate. Objectively, true.

I implore you to revisit Alice2’s post, ‘Shark Fin Soup’. You’ll quickly get the notion that perhaps there was more to it than first impressions reveal.

https://imgur.com/a/Xnjwu

Alice2 recognizes in this post that the act was fairly loaded: 'I connected their past and present.’ were her exact words. Not exactly a matter to take so lightly.

I know you don’t care much for flowery language, but think about it for a second. It’s still true, isn’t it?

By outing Mako as Kamina, she undid any new ground Mako might have gained under a new identity and reinserted all perceptions of her as Kamina, memories good and bad, back into the minds around.

Of course, you and I could be callous and dismiss any negative affect that might be a result of all this. We get this luxury; we’re not the ones being outed afterall.

Compassion comes into play. It is all we got. It’s what enables someone like me, to care about your concerns, as pertaining to your good friend Alice2.

Mako was concerned with a fresh start. That was unceremoniously stripped from her. For what? An ideology that dictates that you are your past? It isn’t hard to see why she’d be upset.

There’s really too much to address; it cannot be understated that the incident was anything else other than ‘simple.’

However, I do think if you took the time out to consider their position, you could manage to find some real offense that might have occurred.

That’s what I’m getting at here, Kermit. Nothing is ever quite that simple. It isn’t as clear-cut as you’d make it out to be, as you’d like to believe it to be. I wish it were.

Moreover, we cannot reasonably dictate who gets to take offense at what, to what magnitude, and whether it’s valid or not, with few exceptions.

How arrogant can you be to think you can act as if you’re the end-all, be-all judge as to what people should value or dismiss? You don’t get to determine that.

Simply because people value different things. A debutante with a fortune ought not to look down on the beggar and tell him that his concerns over money are invalid.

Sure, you can assert that people’s actions are unjustified. Because you judge in accordance to whatever ethic you subscribe to. We have to be able to do that in order to maintain some form of law.

But that’s about as far as you can reasonably go. Anything more would be overreaching boundaries.

It is fact that people behave irrationally. It must be accounted for. Someone with the expressed desire to help others must reflect that consideration in their actions.

People are not disembodied, perfect logic. You can impose that standard on yourself and others to act that way, but be prepared to be disappointed time and time again.

Whether we like it or not, we have to take into account some feelings and some measure of subjectivity. You’d be a fool to think you can deal with people successfully, otherwise.

And that is what partially informs my bleak outlook on all of this. For seven years now the same pattern has played out again, infallibly.

It is why I don’t fault Anya, Yui, and daggy for no longer wishing to even entertain the thought of an apology from Alice2. They’ve lost faith in her.

Because they know all too well that Alice2 hasn’t changed. She hasn’t learned. There is no consideration towards subjectivity, only a misguided insistence on objectivity, invalidity, and absolutes.

There is an extraordinarily low chance that a tidy resolution will come of all this. Furthermore, the damage is done; it’s too late for apologies. To insist on them would be for levity or pettiness.

Then, 2B? What is it that you want me to do? If you see how we handle things as being so insufficient, what do you recommend? Have such extreme foresight to anticipate the worst in others?

Well, yes and no. As I’ve said before there is true malevolence around (ie Jack and Nevada). These people WOULD harm you for simply being rude to them.

Acknowledge that and act accordingly. Don’t be an idiot. If you continue to ignore this, you do so at your own peril and I will maintain you deserve the misfortune that lands at your feet as a consequence.

As for normal, scrupulous people, don’t subordinate their values to your own ideology; if you make mockery of what people hold dear, they act savagely. Don’t give them a reason to be unethical.

So, a quick recap:

Alice2 treated Anya, Yui, daggy in a manner that was awful.

Anya, Yui, and daggy were significantly offended enough respond in kind. They doxed her.

They were not justified in their actions. But they responded in accordance to whatever slight they perceived.

This is appropriate. Sub-optimal, wretched, and all too human, but appropriate nonetheless.

-------‘Alice2 deserved to be doxed’-------

Fred mentioned the very same thing to me as well. Victim-blaming. Aside from virtue signaling and an attempt at character assassination, what’s your point?

There is a reason why victimology is a real field of study. Because matters of responsibility, accountability, crime, and victimhood are complex matters.

Yes, Alice2 is a victim of an unethical act. Yes, I think she is partially responsible for it. To a degree, she had brought it on to herself.

It’s an opinion. Agree/disagree, think what you will of it. You don’t have to talk to me, that’s fine. This whole discussion was done out of courtesy to you and Fred anyway.

But I’m not going to apologize for it; I still stand by what I said.

There is still culpability on both sides; there are no perfect innocents in this scenario.

In her ‘Shark Fin Soup’ post, she mentioned that she made a decision that ‘isn’t one without consequence’, closing with ‘But it’s one I can live with’.

I could not agree more. I intend to hold her to it, even if no one else will.

I’m reminded of one of Alice2’s favorite maxims: ‘Cruel to be kind.’

I’ve always liked it, and acknowledged the great amount of truth to it. Yet there was always some issue I had with it. The abuse potential is much too high.

It allows for true cruelty under the guise of kindness. What is the limit to such cruelty? Who gets to decide that? It certainly isn’t for the target to decide, is it?

Sure enough, it is. To those who believe in the maxim, that one must be cruel to be kind, I offer the caveat: expect cruelty, in kind.

-2B

[end transmission]

If you honestly believe any of that, I see no reason to continue this conversation.

In all of your exchanges with me, you haven't yet articulated what it is exactly Alice did to deserve getting doxxed. You haven't said what it is she did to Blu, Enth or Dag.

A vague notion that she "treated them unfairly" isn't reason enough. In fact, there is NO reason strong enough to warrant doxxing anyone. It's a line that simply shouldn't be crossed.

We're in agreement that it's appalling, but it is NOT an equal reaction to ANYTHING she's done. Which so far, hasn't been named by you.

And if you honestly believe I would deserve to be doxxed, simply for being rude to someone, you're out of your goddamn mind.
I know Fred has already passed on this idea to you, but your behavior is textbook victim blaming, there really isn't any way around it.

Also I'm not a 'radical' assuming extremes. You LITERALLY said she deserved to be doxxed, citing the "equally appalling manner" in which she treated them.

However I haven't seen any proof of this.

Changing someone's chat name for a day isn't nearly as appalling as doxxing someone. You've yet to provide any other examples of this supposed appalling treatment she's inflicted on those three.

I was there, 2B. Fred was there. As were a lot of people. Records of these events exist. I've sent them to you.

I've also known them far longer than you have. I even considered Enth a dear friend once.

There is NOTHING there. Nothing at all, that would warrant a Dox.  Even a hypothetical accumulation of other misgivings isn't nearly enough.

Which, by the way, there still isn't even proof for. Proof as it turns out, is pretty important when it comes just trying to justify something as fucked up as doxxing.

And that's IS what this is. Trying to justify it.

You claim it's not, but saying that it was an reaction to something equally as appalling IS an attempted justification.

I have no doubt that they've both talked shit, but that still isn't enough. People lie and exaggerate. I've shown you two examples of those people in question doing exactly that.
I work with facts, not vague notions of "what might have been done". Nor is that even enough to suggest that Alice should apologize to them.

Because what is it exactly she should have to apologize for? And why should she apologize to people who have done something as vile as they have?

This is just me speaking of course. I'm sure Alice herself would be all too eager to apologize. But as she's told me before. "I'll apologize as soon as they tell me what i need to apologize for."

However, unlike with Alice and Enth/Blu, I actually have something concrete I want you to apologize for.

I understand your opinion in the same way that I understand the mindset of someone that blames a victim.

Fundamentally flawed. 

[begin transmission]

Kermit,

But no, Alice and Reaver deserve to suffer over a decision they made almost a decade ago when she was still a teenager.
I guess they should have foreseen people like Enth, Blu and Dag coming into the fold several years down the line, huh?
Did I deserve to get doxxed by Nevada I wonder?
That seems to be the way you've been working through this. If someone can find it, even when motivated by false assumptions, you deserve it.

You’re starting to get it. Alice2 does deserve to suffer the consequences of a bad call. They were not unearned; she was a high-profile target and failed to change her email. Negligence costs you.
She made enemies, was unapologetically brash, and had upset a group of people sufficiently that they made an appalling call in response to the equally appalling manner they were treated.
And yes, her ‘friend’ Reaver is also paying for it. I’m not being facetious here; I’m not quite sold on this person’s involvement. But that’s besides the point.
Did you deserve being doxed by Nevada? If you treated him the same way you’ve treated me in these correspondences, I’d say yes.

I find it very telling that you and Alice2 think you can be so tactless with others and not suffer any consequences.
Among the things it could indicate, it’s readily apparent that you two surround yourselves with people that are more-or-less of the same mind. No criticism there, that’s fine. It’s comfy, isn’t it?
Maybe it’s just been a good while since someone came around that had a difference of opinion or disposition. Look at how many times I’ve had to correct you and Fred.
‘Anya, Yui, daggy are justified in their actions.’ ‘Doxing is acceptable’. ‘Alice2 should suffer.’ A radical assumes the extremist out of anyone that isn’t on their side.

But let me remind you that there are, in fact, people that are less patient, less considerate, less tolerant, and less scrupulous than you. They don’t value or believe in the same things you hold dear.
Taking this into consideration, could one reasonably be so audacious and not expect some sort of blowback? From people associated with /b/, of all places?
By saying that, I mean to implicate people like Nevada and Jack: those that truly do not care. Not people like Yui, Anya, and daggy. All things considered, they’re decent, reasonable, and fallible people.
Unfortunately, they were driven to do an indecent, unreasonable act. The commonality they share is how they were treated by Alice2.

It’s astonishing to see how needless cruelty spreads and corrupts, making everyone lesser than they were in a very fundamental sense. But I won’t bore you with my musings.

Now then, by showing me these screens, you sought out to prove to me that Yui, Anya, and daggy had no basis for a grievance against Alice2, is that right?
If you don’t mind, I’m not going to address Rory; I have had zero contact with him and don’t know him very much at all.
I read through the screens you provided me, and you make a strong argument, in both cases, presenting nothing but fact.
I’m with you on those points.

Had Anya been seeking revenge against Alice2 over an incorrect assumption that she doxed Mako, Anya would have been clearly in the wrong.
Similarly, had Yui been seeking revenge against Alice2 over a misattributed anti-transgender campaign, Yui would have been clearly in the wrong.

However, are you willing to consider the very likely possibility that this animosity towards Alice2 had been bred from more than one incident?
I think this is a likelier scenario, since I’ve heard about other apparent sleights on the part of Alice2 from both Anya and Yui. There are likely more that I haven’t heard of, yet.
I’m willing to investigate, provided that everyone is on board with the idea of clearing this up. That includes you, Alice2, Anya, and Yui.
So, although your evidence is compelling, I’m afraid it isn’t sufficient grounds to completely invalidate Anya and Yui’s feelings.

Throughout all of this, not even in your semi-formal logical frame-worked argument, did you even come close to explaining why you think Alice owes ANYONE an apology.

Again, I never said that I think Alice2 owes anyone an apology. I think it’s too late for that. No, I’m of the mind that distance and indifference is the optimal route to take.
We shouldn’t be so conceited as to think that anyone involved deserves a clean, tidy resolution. It likely won’t happen anyway, considering the circumstances.
This dialogue between you, me, and Fred?
It started because the two of you had issue with my assertion that ‘Alice2 deserves the doxing.’ Which, I think you and Fred are starting to understand, but not exactly happy with.

That’s okay. It’s an opinion, and you don’t have to agree or even care about it.


-2B

[end transmission]

Well 2B, I'm honestly disappointed.
I thought maybe I had something wrong. Maybe you knew more than you were letting on.
That Dag or Enth or Blu had either lied to you or told you something I didn't know about.
Something that would convince you to stick to this conclusion you've made.

I was thinking it must have been something really compelling, something that would at least explain your decisions up until this point.

But I was wrong.
There really isn't ANYTHING beyond what you've told me, is there? You honestly believe in all of that borderline sociopathic shit don't you?

A man who leaves his car door unlocked doesn't deserve to have it stolen.

But no, Alice and Reaver deserve to suffer over a decision they made almost a decade ago when she was still a teenager.
I guess they should have foreseen people like Enth, Blu and Dag coming into the fold several years down the line, huh?
Did I deserve to get doxxed by Nevada I wonder?
That seems to be the way you've been working through this. If someone can find it, even when motivated by false assumptions, you deserve it.


Throughout all of this, not even in your semi-formal logical frame-worked argument, did you even come close to explaining why you think Alice owes ANYONE an apology.
I've already demonstrated why she doesn't, why they had the wrong idea.

You owe HER one, for your callous words that re-enforce the idea that Alice deserves to suffer.

Talking to them would be just as futile as talking to you.
You're not going to change your mind, even when reason is staring you right in the face.


And for the record, I'm perfectly capable of being cordial.
I just treated you with exactly as much respect as you deserved.


So in the interest of being insolent: Go fuck yourself.