> London Ontario police department said that Keffals was the target of swatting.
Xcel energy in Colorado turned off people's thermostats recently. There was an article about it on KF. Are they related?
> Keffals was doxxed by KF, and the site has a whole long thread on her.
KF republished information he posted online. Aggregating public content isn't doxxing as it's typically defined, which is people who are actually trying to maintain privacy.
>I doubt anyone was stupid enough to type out, "let's harass her!" But if you can't connect the dots here you've got your head in the sand.
And yet, "anyone" would need to, to actually be implicated.
I don't suppose facts, like actually interacting with any of the zoo-fauna being documented on the Farm, was incontrovertibly prohibited and would result in an instant ban?
It's easy to connect "dots in your head" when there's already a conclusion you've reached.
Yes, KF hosted videos of the Christchurch shooting, as well as many others. That's unrelated to your assertion the site, which is of many thousands of people, are "implicated in several deaths". It is not. Nor is it a participant in swattings.
If there were a shred of credible evidence of those things, then you should be communicating with the FBI or any law enforcement agency you're able to engage with.
I hope KF's owner sues the absolute crap out of the media outlets and any personal not hiding behind a nym for defamation, as I think this level of speech has risen to it.
> Keffals was doxxed by KF, and the site has a whole long thread on her. KF republished information he posted online. Aggregating public content isn't doxxing as it's typically defined, which is people who are actually trying to maintain privacy.
>I doubt anyone was stupid enough to type out, "let's harass her!" But if you can't connect the dots here you've got your head in the sand.
And yet, "anyone" would need to, to actually be implicated.
I don't suppose facts, like actually interacting with any of the zoo-fauna being documented on the Farm, was incontrovertibly prohibited and would result in an instant ban?
It's easy to connect "dots in your head" when there's already a conclusion you've reached.