https://xcancel.com/theliamnissan/status/1939721061710574072#m
The Idaho shooter who killed two fire fighters. https://www.cnn.com/2025/06/30/us/idaho-fire-shooter-wess-roley
this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2025
793 points (96.8% liked)
People Twitter
7545 readers
1293 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You keep using the word "doxx." I don't think you understand what that word means.
Off of wikipedia - it is an act of publically providing personally identifiable information about an individual without their consent
And if you read up on the article you will know that "aggregation from public databases and social media" counts too.
It may be carried out for reasons such as online shaming (...)
So yeah, this is 100% doxxing, so save me your "oh you don't know what it means" spiel.
Wow, some folks really do have trouble with the concept of cause and effect, don't they? They gave consent when they publicly posted the pics online.
No, they didn't give consent to have their names and faces shown publicly to people like you who would shame them for the crime of having a kid that grew up and commited murder.
Actually they did when they posted their names and photos publicly to the internet. "Public" doesn't mean only the people that you like.
Edit: Additionally, I find your "people like you" statement hilarious. You know nothing about me, you're upset that these parents were publicly identified, and you assume my motivations (completely incorrectly.) When something is PUBLICLY posted, that means there are NO restrictions on who sees it. Consent is not qualified by "oh I posted it publicly but not for this group of people I don't like." Public means everyone. Had they posted it PRIVATELY, you'd have an argument. But they did not, so you don't have a valid argument, you're just upset. There's a difference between the two.
Read up on the wikipedia definition of doxxing. It states plainly - it can be done from public databases or from social media, and that the goal is often to shame someone. This fits 100%. Otherwise you could argue that "it's not doxxing, I just went through this guys comments and he slipped up and said that he lives in X city, then posted a photo that let me triangulate his exact location in the city from landmarks". It is doxxing and a criminal act.
Please show me the law that was broken by referencing publicly available posts voluntarily shared by the people in question. Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it's a "criminal act."