[DISCUSSION] Self Doxing rules

Summary:

Today in oh shit we don't have a rule against this

page 1 of 212next »

[DISCUSSION] Self Doxing rules

psychicprogrammer 30 Nov 2022 12:24

04 link: https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/forum/t-15424548/discussion-self-doxing-rules

After a discussion in staffchat involving the removal of a google drive link for a SCP article it has been revealed that we don't have any rules against actions that may inadvertently dox either the poster or other users, like google drive links do. This sparked a further discussion about if we should have any rules against self doxing, both inadvertent and intentional.

Edit: to clarify this is not about other users using things like google docs to try and dox other users, but people linking google docs out of ignorance to potential risks

Points of discussion:

Should we ban all google drive links

What other rules/staff powers should be put into place to prevent accidental self doxing if any

Should we allow intentional self doxing and to what extent (EG preventing people from posting their names/selfies/pictures of their hat to the wiki)

This discussion will go on for 7 days

Last edited on 30 Nov 2022 12:54 by psychicprogrammer Show more

Re: [DISCUSSION] Self Doxing rules

basirskipreader 30 Nov 2022 12:47

1. yes. unless used for Official Staff purposes on a clearly indicated separate account for SCP purposes, no google drive links please
2. immediate removal of any offending self-doxxing stuff, along with prolly a PM to the user to take care of their internet safety more
3. No pictures, no addresses. Names are a bit iffy for me personally, but i think it should be allowed. Numbers related to the user (SSN, credit card number, etc.) are not allowed.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Self Doxing rules

psychicprogrammer 30 Nov 2022 12:57

My thoughts exactly, though pictures should be allowed, given the number of users on the platform share them anyway offsite (twitter/youtube).

Re: [DISCUSSION] Self Doxing rules

JackalRelated 30 Nov 2022 13:00

I think the "no pictures" rule is unmaintainable on our end because we'd only know the picture was of the author/contributor if they admitted to it. Not to mention as far as I'm aware, a chunk of scps have 'cameo' pictures of authors or their family members and even some AAs are directly based off of their IRL authors - I believe Cole13's character Thereven uses pictures of themselves? It's an understandable point but I don't think it's one that could/should lead to a specific rule prohibiting it.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Self Doxing rules

Voiiiii 30 Nov 2022 13:00

Should we ban all google drive links

Yes, absolutely. These can easily be used to find out information about the original creator of the document or anyone viewing it. Especially if someone is viewing on a school account.

What other rules/staff powers should be put into place to prevent accidental self doxing if any

---

Should we allow intentional self doxing and to what extent (EG preventing people from posting their names/selfies/pictures of their hat to the wiki)

I’m definitely not a fan of selfies or people posting their full name, but I don’t think there should be a specific rule against it, rather something that is discouraged. Going back to the full names, I can get if people want to make their account username their real name, and to an extent wikidot actually encourages its users to reveal their full names. When you click on someone’s profile, that can be something that is on there. I don’t think we have any power over that and definitely don’t think we should deny/revoke membership because someone has a slot filled in on the website we’re using. Basic internet safety is up to the user, and, in my opinion, not a duty of staff.

That’s my two cents, cheers!

---

Cheers!

Re: [DISCUSSION] Self Doxing rules

Siddartha Alonne 30 Nov 2022 14:37

I'm leaning to agree with Voi. We are staff, not teachers - it's not on us to teach people internet safety.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Self Doxing rules

GremlinGroup 30 Nov 2022 14:38

You've said what I was planning to. Agree.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Self Doxing rules

(account deleted) 30 Nov 2022 15:12

Echoing this

Re: [DISCUSSION] Self Doxing rules

Uncle Nicolini 30 Nov 2022 14:20

Should we ban all google drive links

yes. this one is kind of a no-brainer that we really shouldnt have had a thread discussing it.

What other rules/staff powers should be put into place to prevent accidental self doxing if any

maybe no sharing of personal social media. gimmick accounts or scp dedicated accounts are fine but personal accounts maybe not. unless your personal twitter is also your scp twitter¹, in which case, it cant be helped i guess.

Should we allow intentional self doxing and to what extent (EG preventing people from posting their names/selfies/pictures of their hat to the wiki)

if people want to practice poor internet safety, thats on them. i still think no selfies should be allowed, but things such as pictures of animals, hats, first names, state/province sharing should be fine because theyre too broad to really act upon, unless your name is something like snaggledorf² and you live in loving county, texas, in which case you should probably not share your first name and location.

imo we should include a link to a proper internet safety guide in one of the required readings and ask that people adhere to it. of course, the number of people who actually read the required reading is probably in the single digits, but at least we can say we tried.

Footnotes

1. ill-advised

2. with apologies to any snaggledorfs reading this

Re: [DISCUSSION] Self Doxing rules

Prime Girl 30 Nov 2022 14:25

Should we ban all google drive links?

Yeah, since they have the possibility to "dox" not just the poster, but those others clicking the link. Also I don't really see a benefit to allowing them, since to my understanding when they typically crop up is in defiance of formats for idea threads or draft threads anyway(?)

Other than that though, everything I'd heard talked about in staffchat re:accidental or intentional self-doxxing feels like staff overreach. Some people like to use pictures of themself or mention the city they live in or in some cases even use their real name as a username or in an article or what have you.

That's not good practices, no, but if someone does want to do that, I think we should let them, especially given the site's minimum age is currently increasing to 18.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Self Doxing rules

Ralliston 30 Nov 2022 17:02

Should we ban all google drive links?

Yes.

What other rules/staff powers should be put into place to prevent accidental self doxing if any?

None. Like Nico said, if people are bad at internet safety, it's on them. It's not our job to hold somebody's hand. Our users are adults.

Should we allow intentional self doxing and to what extent (EG preventing people from posting their names/selfies/pictures of their hat to the wiki)

We should allow that, yes. If people understand the dangers of what they're doing, then, as responsible adults, they should carry that responsibility themselves, especially since people have more than shown to be capable of doing that in the past. Also, it's worth pointing out that many people out there use their own images on the Wiki, and we should absolutely never ban that.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Self Doxing rules

EstrellaYoshte 30 Nov 2022 17:17

google docs/drive/similar service with exposed identity concern is a security issue and would be removed as a tech directive. anything else the user do is not and shouldnt be staff actionable.

Last edited on 30 Nov 2022 17:18 by EstrellaYoshte Show more

Re: [DISCUSSION] Self Doxing rules

gee0765 30 Nov 2022 17:27

ban google docs

anything else is massive staff overreach to solve a made up problem

Re: [DISCUSSION] Self Doxing rules

Rounderhouse 30 Nov 2022 17:28

succinct, yet accurate

Re: [DISCUSSION] Self Doxing rules

Rounderhouse 30 Nov 2022 17:27

Google Drive links aren’t a problem for us because they expose the creating user’s identity — they’re a problem because they risk exposing the identity of other users who click on them. That’s why we get rid of them, so sure, let’s codify thay.

The other stuff, no. Not our problem, nor is it our job to be the internet hygiene police. If people want to make the kind of decisions that harm only themselves — well, that’s their prerogative.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Self Doxing rules

OriTiefling 01 Dec 2022 15:44

Google Drive links aren’t a problem for us because they expose the creating user’s identity — they’re a problem because they risk exposing the identity of other users who click on them. That’s why we get rid of them, so sure, let’s codify thay.

This, and the fact that from my understanding it is really easy to hide a virus or malicious program in Google Drive content. Also, speaking from a crit perspective, it's generally better for our users if written materials are kept on-site for review.

The other stuff is an egregious overreach. Like Rounder says above if people want to make poor internet safety decisions it is not on us to police that, it's on them to live with the consequences. I'm not comfortable with us making that our job.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Self Doxing rules

CityToast 30 Nov 2022 18:29

I absolutely understand the concerns with Google Drive links. I would love to see suggested alternatives for collaborative documentation.

On the other stuff, it really should be on the responsibility of the user. Some people (like me) don't mind personal info being out there, while others do. But we cannot be the self-doxing police, nor should we be.

page 1 of 212next »