RE: Now why would kafkanarchy do this?
No, I don’t need your consent to use a name you’ve publicly and openly plastered all over the internet. This much is obvious. If that to you is some form of harassment, you may be better served to looking to your own behavior, and ask if perhaps there is a reason people are giving your actual public identity attention now.
As for me. My name is Graham Smith. And after what I’ve been going through, and what you’ve been accusing me of, nah, I don’t respect anything about you other than the fact that you have not physically violated me. You’re only making noise, and that sycophantic racket always happens when an idolized figure is criticized, so it is to be expected.
Now, I’m the one doxxing you by exposing a cyberterror plot against myself and my family? That’s pretty funny.
“Mykl,” Wood, the “Director of Tech” for the Kokesh campaign, listed publicly on linkedin, and posting photos of himself at Adam’s events on this platform, here on Steemit accusing me of all kinds of horrible things, and engaging in non-stop victim blaming.
I do appreciate that your whole blog here as of late is dedicated to me now, though. An impressive string of posts for someone seeking decidedly to not “give attention” to me.
Cheers.
I was able to google the Director of Tech for Adam Kokesh and your LinkedIn came up immediately Michael . This presents the public name in question that you have alleged is an act of doxxing. It appears that those who pieced together this information relied exclusively on public information, especially information posted by you. The investigative technique is merely to look for clues in public information and make connections across multiple online platforms and personas. At least, I could not find any Non-Public Private Information (NPPI) released in your LinkedIn, Facebook or steemit.
So here is what I don't get. If there was any action to be done to a child, it would have been done by you or someone you hired, as Ben never requested any such action in what is public. So how are you not the person being held responsible? There was no order from Ben to cause any harm to anyone, the only place that is ever listed is a list you sent to Kafka, a message in which Ben was not connected to.
So those screen caps were Ben?
And this individual has explained clearly what was taken out of context and twisted.
I was presented as some evil bad guy by Koke campaign/Farmer to individual who launches counter campaigns against malevolent parties.
Infosec warned Ben that sometimes children get dragged in to these wars and that this has nothing to do with the matter at hand (making him aware of the gravity of launching a cyber attack/discouraging the action insofar as it could drag children in). Ben says “just keep that to yourself.”
Again, are you saying the screens were Ben?