[FFmpeg-devel] Re: FFmpeg "supporters" doxing

["Rémi Denis-Courmont via ffmpeg-devel" <ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org>]

Le keskiviikkona 29. lokakuuta 2025, 22.38.17 Itä-Euroopan normaaliaika 
Michael Niedermayer via ffmpeg-devel a écrit :
> > When did that happen?
> 
> Wed, 31 Jan 2024

I can't find it any match in the archives. Besides, that was during the 
previous CC and that CC (of which you were a member and I was not) found no 
issues. I fail to see any sane reason to bring this up again now.

> > Doxxing is the publication of personal info against that person's will -
> > not quoting some already public info. I seem to recall Kieran *asking*
> > what actual business stood at a postal address published by NAB (or was
> > it IBC?) under the name of "FFmpeg".
> doxxing is about identifying a specific person and exposing or amplifying
> info in a way that foreseeably invites harassment or harm.

No, that's not what doxxing is. At least according to the wiktionary it is 
either one of:

- To publish personal information of a person without their consent.
- To reveal the operator of an anonymous online account without their
   consent.

Quoting an already already published public info is not publishing, and more 
importantly, "FFmpeg" is not a person. Kieran did not doxx Thilo. This has 
been explained to you several times. I don't need to remind you that 
continuing to spread those accusations could be construed as libel. At least, 
they validate Vittorio's recent claims that you are carrying a personal 
vendetta against Kieran.

> Even a public work address can fit this

Obviously not. If it is already public then by definition it cannot be doxxing. 
And again, the more important aspect here is that Kieran was *asking*, not 
publishing, what *business*, not person, sits at a given already published 
postal address - for the legitimate purpose of identifying who paid for a 
booth in the name of "FFmpeg".

> Especially with hostile framing.

Maybe hostile framing is aggravating circumstances for doxxing. But since 
there was no doxxing in the first place, the matter of aggravating 
circumstances is moot.

FWIW, this is also unprovable if the original emails have been deleted.

> > As for Kieran's quote, Thilo is welcome to thank Kieran for the notice and
> > complain to the conference organisation for their lackluster privacy.
> Kieran posted the address in public. That was not neccessary to inform Thilo
> about it

The question was very relevant to FFmpeg-devel, so of course it was raised 
here. If Thilo subsequently outed himself, that is a proverbial own-goal. If 
someone else outed Thilo, then they are the one(s) having potentially doxxed 
Thilo.



And BTW, your action on Sundays caused people to believe that I was running 
the Twitter account. In turn it led actually me being attacked and defamed on 
social media. Indeed, it was completely illogical to vote against the media 
team delegation as a retaliatory action against me, whom you knew was never 
part of that team. Did I accuse you of doxxing by omission or implication? I 
did not and I will not.

-- 
ヅニ-クーモン・レミ
Suomen Uusimaa



_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list -- ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ffmpeg-devel-leave@ffmpeg.org