3 ms·
The sorts of people being "documented" on KiwiFarms are not celebrities. They're usually vulnerable people with some sort of mental illness who are struggling.
by icepat 4y ago
The sorts of people being "documented" on KiwiFarms are not celebrities. They're usually vulnerable people with some sort of mental illness who are struggling. And I don't buy for a moment the "no touch" policy. Just because you can't use a specific website to harass someone, does not mean you can't use the information on the website to harass them off-platform. This is a bad take. There's a major difference between journalism, tabloid journalism (which I also consider worthless and wrong), and stalking vulnerable people on the internet. Or as you call the latter, "documenting".
- throwaway589275 4y ago[flagged]
- icepat 4y agoYou do realize that KiwiFarms is named that because of Chris Chan, the person the website was set up to stalk, right? See: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2016/07/kiwi-farms-the-webs-biggest-community-of-stalkers.html https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2016/07/kiwi-farms-the-webs-... > That's because you haven't spent much, if any, time on the site. Lurk more. Zero interest. You don't have eat white lead to know it will give you cancer. > there is some truly bizarre social phenomena that you can't find documented elsewhere There's a word for this: stalking. Many of these "social phenomena" are people, and like I said, ones who suffer with mental illness. You're quite literally advocating for, and enabling real-world stalking when you endorse write-ups about these sorts of people. > apps which literally can be (and have been) used to coordinate harassment Used for, vs created to enable. There's a difference you're either ignoring or willfully blind to here.
- throwaway589275 4y ago[flagged]