5 ms·
There are two things wrong here: The person saw some exploit with curl headers, which damaged their life. That's upsetting, even if the email is misdirected, b
by david_draco 6y ago
There are two things wrong here:
The person saw some exploit with curl headers, which damaged their life. That's upsetting, even if the email is misdirected, because Daniel just provided the infrastructure, and did not cause the specific abuse. What is wrong is the threat to life.
The second thing that is wrong is to respond to the second email by doxxing the author to the public. The second email showed that the threat was likely not specific and immanent, but venting. A reasonable response would be to notify the police. Or to reveal this case to the public explaining why this is misdirected, but without the author's name.
- Clewza313 6y agoNobody is being doxxed here. "Al Nocai" is a pseudonym, and Daniel redacted the actual email address.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- aFaid7see0ni 6y agoMust be the persons wordplay on Nicolai
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- mahart 6y agoI disagree with the idea that sharing a singular name of someone you had a conversion with is doxxing. Especially one voluntarily sent without a prior agreement that the email conversation would remain private.
- lilSebastian 6y ago> The second thing that is wrong is to respond to the second email by doxxing the author to the public. What evidence do you have for this?