They invited that guy back. I do have to admit, I admire his inability to read a room.
Wow doing a dive on somebodies post history is a bit creepy, not sure how I feel that every site now keeps (and makes public) that much info about everybody.
Otoh, from the ‘top categories (posts/replies)’ part:
lawl. (I’d assume a github profile is more important in this case, but I’m not going to dig into that, I already feel filthy).
nah, not going to allow “looking into the chud’s extensive comet tail of receipts is bad” as any sort of discourse norm
No that is fair, it was a personal expression of disgust. A combination of being a bit of a private person and disliking how everything has public gamification and searchable logs now. That and I do not think what they said was that bad (just dumb, and the context made it worse) to warrant a full investigation ;).
nothing particularly wrong/dirty/whatever about this imo. hell, it’s just about an essential skill for researching in general, whether researching chuds or otherwise
also fwiw this was, like, “clicking their name in the forum to see who the hell they were”. I barely even started digging :D
Yeah it just feels dirty to me, I usually try to set those kinds of features to private the moment I become aware of them. (And I certainly have digged into peoples posts here before and then kept the info to myself as while what I found wasn’t great I think doing a sort of helldump (I think that was the term) even on chuds is a bit eurgh. Esp when the people themselves are just random people with a hundred followers. (Of course this depends on the type of person, neo-nazi types I’m a lot less friendlier to than other random meh people, like this attempt above at trying to put the ‘our community blew up’ back into the bottle tone police guy (that is the type of person they seem to be on reading my initial comment, didn’t dig further)).
