4 ms·

If you need that noted, I'm worried. It's an expression that I thought most people would understand, but to make it abundantly clear: I do not think that Krebs

If you need that noted, I'm worried. It's an expression that I thought most people would understand, but to make it abundantly clear: I do not think that Krebs is executing people. Nor do I think he has the legal training to be a judge. He might have been on a jury before, I'm not sure. I am using it as an expression to state that he is taking upon himself the task that is normally reserved for either LEA and/or the court system, which is ascribing guilt.

chipsa 4y ago
He appears to be acting as an investigative reporter. Such acts have a long history of naming and shaming people, even ones that were not previously public figures. That he writes for his own publication is not really material to the fact that he is acting as a reporter.
- ziddoap 4y ago
  Funny enough to some, I disagree with any reporter who names private citizens with little proof and no avenue for recourse. Especially when they post things like a persons non-redacted passport, for example, which has plenty of personal information that is not material to the story in any which way. If you have enough information to release a bunch of personal information on someone and tell thousands of people that they are guilty of something, you should go to the appropriate LEA and either take some care writing your story or wait until an actual investigation has happened, reporting on those results. Edit to add: At least in this case, regarding Krebs, it would seem that at least one senior editor and journalist agrees with me that Krebs acted unethically (see the first comment for a link to a tweet by a senior editor at The Verge). Other major news organizations (e.g. CBC) have policies not to named those only accused of a crime, except in extenuating circumstances or after a charge is laid/legal proceedings have begun. They must also report on the outcome of the criminal investigation.
freeopinion 4y ago
Courts ascribe guilt by questioning private individuals for their testimony ascribing guilt. "Costing an arm and a leg" is an idiom. "The disease cost her an arm and a leg" might be using the idiom to refer to the costs of medical treatment, or could refer to the literal amputation of limbs. Most people use context to understand this. For example, what was the disease? Disapproval of doxxing is often specifically because of the danger it can pose to the life and well-being of the victim. In this context, a reference to execution does not seem like an innocent expression.

chipsa 4y ago

He appears to be acting as an investigative reporter. Such acts have a long history of naming and shaming people, even ones that were not previously public figures. That he writes for his own publication is not really material to the fact that he is acting as a reporter.

ziddoap 4y ago
Funny enough to some, I disagree with any reporter who names private citizens with little proof and no avenue for recourse. Especially when they post things like a persons non-redacted passport, for example, which has plenty of personal information that is not material to the story in any which way. If you have enough information to release a bunch of personal information on someone and tell thousands of people that they are guilty of something, you should go to the appropriate LEA and either take some care writing your story or wait until an actual investigation has happened, reporting on those results. Edit to add: At least in this case, regarding Krebs, it would seem that at least one senior editor and journalist agrees with me that Krebs acted unethically (see the first comment for a link to a tweet by a senior editor at The Verge). Other major news organizations (e.g. CBC) have policies not to named those only accused of a crime, except in extenuating circumstances or after a charge is laid/legal proceedings have begun. They must also report on the outcome of the criminal investigation.

freeopinion 4y ago

Courts ascribe guilt by questioning private individuals for their testimony ascribing guilt. "Costing an arm and a leg" is an idiom. "The disease cost her an arm and a leg" might be using the idiom to refer to the costs of medical treatment, or could refer to the literal amputation of limbs. Most people use context to understand this. For example, what was the disease? Disapproval of doxxing is often specifically because of the danger it can pose to the life and well-being of the victim. In this context, a reference to execution does not seem like an innocent expression.