←back to thread

2525 points hownottowrite | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
FDSGSG[dead post] ◴[] No.21190673[source]
The obvious, necessary solution would be to respond by aggressively doxing the executives of Blizzard and their large stockholders.

It's all about money until your wife and kids start getting calls at night and the cops kick in your door.

There's no reason to remain civil when fighting those who'd stand against human rights.

soapdog ◴[] No.21190688[source]
So a company does a shit move and you want to take it out on kids?

Doxing is never the answer. The answer is: stop using products from shit companies.

replies(2): >>21190696 #>>21195053 #
FDSGSG[dead post] ◴[] No.21190696[source]
Direct action against executives, even by tiny groups, is far more likely to have an impact than passive boycotts.

Eh, I guess virtue signalling is the priority on HN and not actual change. Think of the poor executives kids! Not Falun Gong, HKers or the Uyghurs.

dsfyu404ed ◴[] No.21190767[source]
Morally wrong, but technically not wrong. Many a dumb law was only changed after some politician ran afoul of it.

If you're going to take "direct action" you should probably try to keep it fitting to the issue at hand. Swatting someone because they are in charge of something you don't like won't make your cause any more likeable to most observers.

replies(1): >>21190776 #
FDSGSG[dead post] ◴[] No.21190776[source]
Swatting someone will make them seriously consider whether or not they want to continue in that job, and will make their future replacement wonder whether or not they want to be swatted themselves.

In the end this isn't about opinions, you can very much coerce people to do what you want. Even the executives of BigCos.

Nobody should be able to sleep easy at night while running a company taking active measures to support the CCP.

TeMPOraL ◴[] No.21190821[source]
Yes, because beating someone for doing or thinking something is a proven way of making them stop doing or thinking that thing.

In reality, what will happen is swatters will get caught, tried and put into prison. As they should be. What you're proposing is anathema to civilization.

replies(2): >>21190838 #>>21190969 #
1. ryanlol ◴[] No.21190838[source]
Historically very few swatters have been caught and convicted. Not unsurprising given how easy it is to conceal the source of a phone call on the internet.

E: throttled and can’t reply below

I don’t think you understand how swatting works, the only way you’re too high profile is if you live in the white house.

replies(1): >>21190843 #
2. TeMPOraL ◴[] No.21190843[source]
That may change if the victim is high-profile. I'm also doubting the probability of a successful swatting of a high-profile target.