My hope is that he is lying low until this blows over.

It seems like it is all speculation at this point.

I liked Linko because he is the first to do what the forums needed, attempt to equally enforce civility. It should be noted that within a day of his absence, many users went back to spouting off unrelated political opinions and telling other users how they should leave the forum which is bullying and harassment. He did a wonderful job calming the forums.

As it comes to Twitter and social media, it's not as if whomever it was really did anything wrong.

You promoted PC Master Race with a video featuring Terry Crews and his heart-warming story about learning to connect with his son. Terry and his son learned together how to build their own computer with the help on others on the Internet. Yet the uninformed minority on the Internet attacked GoG for this claiming this was somehow racist because of the term "Master Race" ignoring the fact that Terry Crews is Black. This was typical outrage over nothing. GoG, you did nothing wrong except maybe to apologize and remove it. Because once you start bowing down, these outraged people know you are weak and will force you to bow down more.

You had a post promoting a politically irreverent game with "The Dude" pissing on a Games Journalism headstone. This same Games Journalism that regularly calls gaming enthusiasts "shitposters" "basement dwelling neckbeards" "misogynists" and claims that games and gamers of old need to go away. These so-called journalists use insulting language at gamers (YOUR CUSTOMERS) every single day in articles and Tweets. Who are these people to tell you that a handful of Tweets over the last couple of years is a problem, that classic franchises like Doom are breeding the next generation of serial killers or whatever crazy rhetoric they come up with next? Especially ironic to call you out when they try to spew up a shit storm nearly every single day.

And if you look at your Tweets "Don't assume our gender" in response to someone referring to you as "You guys" or talking about your commitment to make sure old games #Wontbeerased , GoG are virtual angels compared to the articles and Twitter feeds of your detractors. You haven't directly insulted your customers or anyone for that matter, but they do nearly every single day. No one on your staff has done anything actually wrong. I took "don't assume our gender" on face value, don't assume all our staff is male because it was in response to "You Guys". I thought the use of that phrase was pretty witty although I do question the idea of randomly co-opting popular hashtags for advertising.
But it's not like you were making any kind of political statement at all. You clearly weren't and only the perpetually outraged can turn something so innocent into murder. But ironically these journalists and other hate-mongers insult others daily yet call you out for a handful of innocuous Tweets. The hypocrites.

The only thing you have done wrong is back down. Your chief competitor Valve knows when to fight back, but you don't. When some of these same activists exploited their reporting system to force games like HuniePop and many visual novels off their service, Valve responded strongly, saying that they aren't in the business of deciding taste. If you don't like it, you don't have to buy it and that they will only remove content that is illegal from that point on. That is how you take a stand against these outrage mobs who are trying to use you to promote their own political agendas. Don't fall into that trap. Your job is to make available popular and classic games. Games are art and sometimes the will and vision of the creators are a part of them. Don't let the perpetually outraged tell you what you can and cannot sell on your store. Stand strong, let us the customers decide with our currency.

Support your employees. They haven't done anything wrong by any reasonable standard. Those at fault are the outrage mob who are looking at every avenue to push a mostly American political fight into every corner of the Internet including a successful Polish company which has no relation the American politics at all. It's a dangerous age. People take things out of context all the time. Print journalism is dying as they are losing readership and thus revenues and in their death throes they are lashing out by grasping at every clickbait movement in a vain attempt to stay relevant and find customers. Stick to what you do and stand up for it and your employees.

I think Linko is the best community manager you ever had. He looked at what was causing problems on the forums and fixed them. Political discussions never were actual discussions at all, so he banned them and enforced it. Many people would go out of their way to personally attack other users and he did a great job of quelling it as well as correctly assigning blame to those initiating the conflicts. While it would be nice to be in a day and age where people could discuss issues freely, today's age is not it as most responses are now pre-programmed rhetoric without actual thought and subsequent discussion. Linko saw that, and did the best any CM you have had since at least Enigmatic-T. Linko is a special employee, you need to keep him.

^ Great post. I actually didn't know a lot of that.

It only has to do with this generality, that goes beyond doxxing.

My stance about Linko has been made clear in this thread.

As for "having it coming", the question would be more about the doxxers themselves, for their role in the real life violence of doxxing (from threats and harrasment -again "mere words" with real impact- to physical consequences of the doxxer's "mere info"). I don't trust eye-for-eye vigilantism in general, but the very material answers of legal authorities would certainly be legitimate there, just as in other cases of "performative utterances" (hate speech, incitation to violence, libel, etc).

I believe that. If you feel otherwise then that's your view and I disagree.

More or less agree.

If you don't want to answer the question then don't bother.

I'm not sure which question's answer you're not clear with, at this point ?

You're either alright with doxxing in certain instances... or you aren't.

GOG should really reconsider "rate this post" feature - again, in this topic (as in many others) there is "downvoting" people who have other opinion than majority. Simple removing minus button (and leaving only plus) would be great - if you agree with someone, you're plusing him. If not - then don't, instead of "punishing" with minuses for having other opinion.

Ah, ok. I had missed this specific question.

Yeah, indeed, I'm not very clear on the answer about this. I would say, spontaneously, that I could imagine situations where doxxing is legitimate. In the case, for instance, of some very prominent neonazi propagandist, or some very prominent disinformer, operating under the shield of anonymity. Outing their genuine identity could be legitimate. But would it necessarily be "doxxing" (if doxxing implies pointless details such as address, contacts, etc) ? What I may have in mind could be just legal investigation, and reintegration within the world of accountability.

Generally speaking, I'm, on the opposite, more favorable to culprit anonymity in journalistic articles, to ensure potential reintegration in society (if a person "changes", a second chance is only possible if the stigma of the transgression is lifted). The logic of public doxxing goes against that.

But is the anonymity of some (imaginary) mass propagandist as valid as the anonymity of a Bansky ?

Also, my gut reflex (the basic eye-for-eye thing above which civilization tries to lift us) could lead me to doxx doxxers. No, you are right. I don't really have a definite clear answer on this.

(Edit: I'd also say that, underlying this, I have very ambivalent, "unresolved", views on anonymity.)

Bring back Linko!

Ok... but how about a Communist propagandist or far left disinformer? Combat bad ideas with good ones. Doxxing is basically one side admitting they don't have the ability to debate. They've had to lower themselves to intimidation.

You don't seem to know what you're talking about.

Doxxing has nothing to do with authorities or legalities. It involves an individual who disagrees with someone, usually politically/ideologically, passing out personal information.

This is expressly done with the expectation that people will then be able to harass that person.

Its basically, vigilantism. I don't like using that word because it is too kind of a word for what it is. I mean... vigilantism against tweets? Ideas? That was the very reason I brought up that example earlier... it was at least 'extreme'.

Reintegration in society?

Will you still believe this nonsense if society shifts?

"Bansky"?

I don't think you have a clear idea of what doxxing does to people and seem to be ok with it if it is used against those you disagree with. Doxxing can be aimed at anyone with ANY ideology.

The very thing we're talking about RIGHT NOW is linko. I'd say he sure as hell does not deserve a harassment campaign for what appears, at worst, a poorly thought out tweet.

I for one liked Linko. He was the most active community manager here and thought he was gonna be in it for the long haul. From what I've read he got treated unfairly in for what he did.

Anyway, sorry if I got a bit off topic.

I'm not sure what was remotely controversial about my explanation of doxxing.

I'd hoped that we could all agree that DOXXING = BAD and I'm sorry it happened to linko. I didn't like fables (wont go into why), but I'd be defending them if they were doxxed too. It's a sleazy tactic used by cowards to silence people they disagree with. Will be gone for a while so have a good one folks.

probly had enough of modern holier than thou culture and just left

That's an understatement:)
Exactly,for all we know he could of been given a weeks holiday until things cool down.