Ethics of doxxing

[Thunderbird is the word]

Last night I saw a comment on Facebook which made my skin crawl where somebody openly advocated genocide against muslims including the murder of muslim children. This comment which I took a screenshot of was made publically and after doing some digging I found this person's employer. I consider myself to be a free speech absolutist but I do think that some things are beyond the pale and I don't believe that free speech should exist without consequences. Would it be ethical for me to inform this person's employer that they say things like this?

[ingemann]

Last night I saw a comment on Facebook which made my skin crawl where somebody openly advocated genocide against muslims including the murder of muslim children. This comment which I took a screenshot of was made publically and after doing some digging I found this person's employer. I consider myself to be a free speech absolutist but I do think that some things are beyond the pale and I don't believe that free speech should exist without consequences. Would it be ethical for me to inform this person's employer that they say things like this?

Honestly even asking the question lower my opinion of you. Unless something affect people's work, their opinions and morals are not their employers business.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Incidentally, is anyone else surprised that with the advent of Facebook comments under news people are still willing to say diabolical and moronic statements connected with their real name?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

It's more of a Twitter thing but I've noticed a trend:

-a bunch of people post something stupid on Twitter about some recent event.
-some blog compiles the many stupid comments.
-TTry to look up all the Twitter accounts and you'll find they have been deleted or protected, no doubt due to the posters being hounded.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Now might be a good time to mention that Inks did this to jmfcst in retaliation for jmfcst's socks. In one case he even directly emailed jmfcst's employer.

[tpfkaw]

If you don't like someone's Facebook posts then unfriend or unfollow them. Trying to destroy someone's livelihood (someone who may have kids, sick parents, etc. etc.) for Facebook posts is utterly despicable.

[Mr. Morden]

Now might be a good time to mention that Inks did this to jmfcst in retaliation for jmfcst's socks. In one case he even directly emailed jmfcst's employer.

Not exactly.  Inks complained to the ISP in order to get him to stop using that IP to make socks, but didn't know that the ISP was jmfcst's employer.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Incidentally, is anyone else surprised that with the advent of Facebook comments under news people are still willing to say diabolical and moronic statements connected with their real name?

This is why I don't understand why people think removing anonymity from places on the internet will reduce cyber bulling and harassment. Unless we live in some sort of cartoonishly authoritarian state where people have to sign up with their social security number just to get an authenticated internet account attached to state-owned computers there's really no way that makes much sense. People talk about Twitter all the time, but Facebook is really where the worst of it goes down. Ironic, because many activists speaking up about this problem get what they want with Facebook - much more tools for dealing with problems, perhaps the best privacy options for social media of them all, better moderation and oversight in general, less anonymity - and yet its the easiest and perhaps most common way to find ways to do damage to someone.

As for the question, I don't really think it's good unless its in the public interest. As in, if the person is a politician or something and they've done something especially galling or hypocritical or whatever; this is sort of the reasoning for why I support outing hypocritical politicians or influential people. But I think this is a dangerous road to go down. It can be made to sound perfectly reasonable, sometimes, but ultimately what it boils down to is someone saying "Well, I think an employer should be notified if the employee says something I disagree with strongly." If the person is actually personally threatening to kill muslims, then that's another thing, but I don't think this is something people should be doing and I do find it a little scary. I don't want to be fired because my employer is a conservative and people letterbombed the office with examples of my tweets or something.

[Nhoj]

Incidentally, is anyone else surprised that with the advent of Facebook comments under news people are still willing to say diabolical and moronic statements connected with their real name?

It becomes less surprising if you have ever talked to such people in person

[Thunderbird is the word]

After reading through this thread I decided against it. I think that the reasons you all gave are pretty sound. Another one that I thought of was that in the grand scheme of things getting a hateful bigot fired from their job isn't going to change their mind or do anything to make the world a better place. If anything it would make them more likely to decide that they wanted to take violent revenge on someone.

I think that when I see that kind of rank and literally genocidal hatred I just have a visceral reaction to it and want to see the bigot punished in some way. I just can't imagine what it's like to be in the mind of someone with that much hatred in their heart.

[Cory]

No, you shouldn't. This is such an SJW question it isn't even funny.

"Should I try to destroy someone's livelihood because they posted something I didn't like online?"

[Thunderbird is the word]

No, you shouldn't. This is such an SJW question it isn't even funny.

"Should I try to destroy someone's livelihood because they posted something I didn't like online?"

Well after some consideration I decided against it. Normally it's something that I wouldn't dream of doing and I would agree with you. I just found the comment so disgusting that I was briefly tempted.