3 ms·

I will always downvote for complaining about downvotes, it's unbecoming, uncouth even! But just to bite your bait, the mob is rightous! there should be no such

I will always downvote for complaining about downvotes, it's unbecoming, uncouth even! But just to bite your bait, the mob is rightous! there should be no such thing as an abortion bounty and it is beyond political disagreement to create a site encouraging the harrassment (legal & otherwise) of women seeking abotions - it is a war on women and tiktok formstuffers should be the least of your worries!

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
rvz 5y ago
> But just to bite your bait, the mob is rightous! Is filing blatantly false reports (even police ones) in the hopes of deliberately crashing the website and also encouraging others to do so legal though? You also haven't answered my question(s): > You are saying that this isn't encouraging malicious activity then? > So these TikTokers are not script-kiddies then? There are other ways to combat this. But intentionally trying to taking down a site is exactly like malicious internet activity comparable with coordinated efforts such as [0], given they are encouraging others to do the same. The website owners also have the option to trace them down, report it to the police and they will be dealt with by the authorities. What the TikTokkers are doing isn't really a smart way of trying to change or protest about something one disagrees with. Just proves they don't have an argument. [0] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-37439513 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-37439513
- boublepop 5y ago
  > Is filing blatantly false reports (even police ones) in the hopes of deliberately crashing the website and also encouraging others to do so legal though? I don’t think you understand the concept of civil disobedience if your argument is “but that’s illegal!”.
  - rvz 5y ago
    > civil disobedience 'Citation needed.' Do the TikTokkers have 'the right' to co-ordinate a joint effort to deliberately flood and take down someone's website? So you are saying it's fine for others to flood, DDoS and take down other websites they don't like, because they disagree with the content that is on there? The intention is obviously malicious and it is equivalent to similar web attacks such as this one which involved the authorities. [0] The fact that my questions haven't even been answered not only proves that no-one can defend it with a logical argument that justifies this act on someone's website, but it seems that some here are even defending script-kiddies now. [0] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-37439513 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-37439513
    - TheSpiceIsLife 5y ago
      A movement, or an ideology, doesn't need your approval nor does it need to convince you in particular, that it's methods are just. Is your argument that a website that encourages people to report violators of the anti-abortion law a net good for society? If that's your argument, I don't see why anyone should engage with you.
      - rvz 5y ago
        > A movement, or an ideology, doesn't need your approval nor does it need to convince you in particular, that it's methods are just. So trying to coordinate an effort into taking someones website down by filing multiple fake reports even through VPNs is legal isn't it? Majority of them are not even from Texas and are flooding the website to try to bring it down. If you are trying to defend script-kiddie behaviour on someones website that you disagree with, then maybe you think it is fine that this should also happen on anyone else's website that you don't like. How is that legal? > Is your argument that a website that encourages people to report violators of the anti-abortion law a net good for society? I didn't even make that argument and I already said I was against the website. [0] But feel free to create a straw-man argument. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28400386 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28400386
        TheSpiceIsLife 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

rvz 5y ago

> But just to bite your bait, the mob is rightous! Is filing blatantly false reports (even police ones) in the hopes of deliberately crashing the website and also encouraging others to do so legal though? You also haven't answered my question(s): > You are saying that this isn't encouraging malicious activity then? > So these TikTokers are not script-kiddies then? There are other ways to combat this. But intentionally trying to taking down a site is exactly like malicious internet activity comparable with coordinated efforts such as [0], given they are encouraging others to do the same. The website owners also have the option to trace them down, report it to the police and they will be dealt with by the authorities. What the TikTokkers are doing isn't really a smart way of trying to change or protest about something one disagrees with. Just proves they don't have an argument. [0] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-37439513 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-37439513

boublepop 5y ago
> Is filing blatantly false reports (even police ones) in the hopes of deliberately crashing the website and also encouraging others to do so legal though? I don’t think you understand the concept of civil disobedience if your argument is “but that’s illegal!”.
- rvz 5y ago
  > civil disobedience 'Citation needed.' Do the TikTokkers have 'the right' to co-ordinate a joint effort to deliberately flood and take down someone's website? So you are saying it's fine for others to flood, DDoS and take down other websites they don't like, because they disagree with the content that is on there? The intention is obviously malicious and it is equivalent to similar web attacks such as this one which involved the authorities. [0] The fact that my questions haven't even been answered not only proves that no-one can defend it with a logical argument that justifies this act on someone's website, but it seems that some here are even defending script-kiddies now. [0] https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-37439513 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-37439513
  - TheSpiceIsLife 5y ago
    A movement, or an ideology, doesn't need your approval nor does it need to convince you in particular, that it's methods are just. Is your argument that a website that encourages people to report violators of the anti-abortion law a net good for society? If that's your argument, I don't see why anyone should engage with you.
    - rvz 5y ago
      > A movement, or an ideology, doesn't need your approval nor does it need to convince you in particular, that it's methods are just. So trying to coordinate an effort into taking someones website down by filing multiple fake reports even through VPNs is legal isn't it? Majority of them are not even from Texas and are flooding the website to try to bring it down. If you are trying to defend script-kiddie behaviour on someones website that you disagree with, then maybe you think it is fine that this should also happen on anyone else's website that you don't like. How is that legal? > Is your argument that a website that encourages people to report violators of the anti-abortion law a net good for society? I didn't even make that argument and I already said I was against the website. [0] But feel free to create a straw-man argument. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28400386 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28400386
      - TheSpiceIsLife 5y ago