The address you posted was to an apartment complex and your point could’ve been made without it. Either my investigative skills are deteriorating, or they’ve since removed that information from their sites/profiles, but I could not find anything public that was as specific as what you posted. Whether it should be considered ‘doxxing’ is beside the point, it was close enough to private information being made public that it was removed.
They actually did remove it. I would definitely never do some crazy shit like that intentionally. You can literally type in the company name and that address into Google,
RIGHT NOW, and you can still see where it was listed on the official Linkedin page before they scraped it. It's not that difficult to do.
Not to knock your "investigative skills," but...
Get insight into Vinylmnky! Dive deep into company history, current jobs, hiring trends, demographics, and company reviews.
lensa.com
How private is that information? Any "private information being made public" was made public by them.
The assumption that I would and did intentionally try and do something like that must be informing the admin response that I'm receiving, but it's also informing my response to that response. If I accidentally bump someone and didn't realize it, I'll always apologize. If their reaction is to tell me that I did it on purpose, my reaction is to feel like they are tripping. I won't deny the results, but I'm going to speak to my intentions and what I perceive as wrongly inferred motivations. I'm not sure where anyone thinks that I got that information from, because it literally took me all of 30 seconds to come across it. It was listed as their business location on their Linkedin page, but they removed it. It's still listed as such on the link above, so hopefully posting this link to their Lensa page advertising for job openings isn't considered doxxing either. I definitely played no hand in them creating that public account for themselves.
My basic point in all of this is that I feel like someone could have simply told me what the issue was and asked me to remove it, rather than threatening to remove me. Hell, I could have even been told that the address was removed and why, if that's the issue. I don't feel like it's difficult to understand why I would assume their address was public information when they've posted it across the internet, while specifically stating that it is.
If my post is major issue worthy of a ban, it's something that should probably be addressed within this thread in front of everyone else, especially since my post had something like 40 positive reactions, if not more. Apparently, that many other members didn't recognize the issue with it, so they should also be alerted about what part of it is a no go on the forum, before they get their own warnings. I believe that I stated that it was the business address, so I clearly believed that. If I was told that it wasn't, I would have apologized. I still believe that it is and, if it isn't, someone else should be answering for why they are listing a private residence and/or apartment complex as their official corporate headquarters for anyone and everyone to find.
By the way, that address is also listed as their corporate headquarters in this link
delivery of vinyl records to club members on a periodic basis
trademark.trademarkia.com
along with this link
I've seen it happen numerous times before, where an issue or concern is addressed in a thread in front of everyone, when it happens. It might be to the community's benefit to have addressed this by stating that we should be careful with those sorts of posts, because they could be considered doxxing. I understand that. I would have removed it, or accepted the reasoning. I accept the reasoning now. Striking the post and privately messaging me without specific details, while telling me that's my first and last warning, doesn't help anyone.
I'm not arguing with whatever the admins have determined is permitted or not. I'd actually like a more specific explanation for exactly what these unwritten guidelines are, so that I can determine if I feel like adhering to them or simply leaving. I'm also not trying to push against whatever these rules are, since they are vague and I still don't know what they are. I am, however, responding to clarify my intentions, since what really bothers me is having my intentions misinterpreted and/or misrepresented.
So, here's what I did and my intention behind it, again.
Usually, when we see somebody reposting links to things that have already been posted, we let them know the posts are redundant. In this instance, I noticed they were all just links for the same retailer, and the user behind them had no other history on here beyond that. So, my immediate reaction was that this must be someone working for that company, simply using the forum to spam in here. I either typed their last name and the company into Google, or the company name and "Austin" -- I can't remember which. What popped up was a Linkedin account that listed a number of businesses, since, based on an Austin Chronicle interview/article, the owners mention being venture capitalists that are involved in various businesses. The Linkedin account listed this specific company with that specific address as the business address. Other businesses were listed that they own, and this was the address listed for THIS business address. So, since the poster's profile was listed as Austin, I just posted the company's address to show that it was in Austin.
I did post everything somewhat backwards, as I found it, though. I was just trying to post that connection. You're in Austin, this place is in Austin. That's your name, that's the name of the owner. I guess that I could have just said, "that company is in the same city." I didn't, because it was -- and is -- listed as public information. If I posted VMP's HQ, I wouldn't consider that doxxing, either.
So, I still don't know if the address is the only issue that I'm being threatened over, or if the admins are pissed that I called someone out, in general? If it's the address, someone should have told me that specifically. Plus, I feel like I've just addressed that now. If it's a broader issue, please let me know.
Since the moment this place started, I've gotten personal messages from members either thanking me for speaking up about something that mattered to them, or expressly asking me to be the one to do it. Early on, I had a number of people bringing weird shit to my attention from areas like the PIF thread, when it seemed like someone was exploiting it, or asking if I could vouch for users they believed might be. I can only guess at the reasons why I'm nominated to do these things. Maybe I don't come across like I care whether or not everyone hates me on here. If so, that's fair. What I know is that a lot of those early conversations when the forum was new, involved discussion of a responsibility members felt for all of us to help self-regulate, after the old forum died.
Actually, I'm over it. I don't feel like posting on here anymore. This shit is corny. I'll wait to see if I'm completely blocked. If not, I'll likely Phantom Of The Opera this place, and people can message me, because I definitely have some ongoing things I still need to tie up with certain people.
EDIT:
This one part is still bothering me. To claim that "Whether it should be considered ‘doxxing’ is beside the point," shows a lack of understanding with my issue, because that is exactly the point. I got an alert stating that my post was expressly removed for "doxxing" accompanied by a DM accusing me of "doxxing" and threatening me with a ban over "doxxing." If I wasn't doxxing, then what's the l supposed problem? I didn't get a message even referencing my inclusion of the address AT ALL, so, for all I know, "doxxing" could simply be referring to the general call out and divulging of who that person is, which is something that feels justified. The claim is either too vague, inaccurate, or both. That's why it's a problem.
Okay. Now, I'm for real done with this.