IsisStormDragon

Isis E. Prosser

@IsisStormDragon

Writer, Procrastinator

Demiromantic asexual lesbian in love with Samus Aran. White. 28. Dragon who hoards stuff. I designed a small game once; hope to design more someday.

(IsisDreamWeaver, from Twitter, for any who know me from there)

log in
IsisStormDragon
@IsisStormDragon
atomicthumbs
@atomicthumbs
tjc
@tjc

I don't believe in a lot of absolutes but I will absolutely say that if you find yourself on the same side as KiwiFarms, especially if you're using material sourced from KiwiFarms (whether it's been passed through a layer of indirection or not) against somebody, you need to stop and rethink everything you're doing. The worst person in the world doesn't deserve what they do to people, and their tactics don't even work against the worst people in the world, only against people who have already been disadvantaged on top of disadvantage. And, if you think you've found somebody evil who they've coincidentally also identified as evil, you are likely being fooled.

"Are you thinking of something specific?" No, I'm thinking of more than one specific thing.

You must log in to comment.

in reply to @tjc's post:

tjc
@tjc

Indeed. I ran into one example of "read this extremely long document, the proof for [HORRIBLE CLAIM] is there", and... I can see exactly where they're getting the horrible claim from, exactly why the claim isn't substantiated by the piece of the document, and how they're relying on no one actually reading the thing and people just assuming that if someone cites a source, the source must say what it's supposed to say.

Especially given how you can just get people's rational minds to shut down by making claims about abuse of children or animals (convenient in both cases because the victims can be used to prove a point, without them showing up to present their own side of it.)

login to reply
tjc
@tjc

Yeah. I'm trying to articulate something else about how even if KF is "accidentally right" about someone (and I'm not aware of any cases where they were), their approach is so fundamentally wrong that nothing they produce can be a useful tool for reducing harm. Small-scale abuse is best handled on a small scale (within the community that the abuse is taking place in), and the intrinsic nature of KF is to never go after large-scale abusers. This isn't quite coming together (wording-wise) and could probably be taken out of context as me minimizing abuse, but I'm willing to take that risk.

login to reply
tjc
@tjc

Basically, I'm willing to acknowledge that occasionally one of their targets might have harmed people, and what KF said about them is limited to the truth (unlikely, but possible); but I'm also willing to commit to nothing they do ever being a proportionate response, and reinforcing a pattern of disproportionate responses to harm creates more harm for everyone. Likewise, their campaigns aren't victim-centered and that's also a terrible precedent.

login to reply