I will pay 0.15 to first person who dox Leah McGrath Goodman

[ITsTanked]

Ok guys.  I edit instead of reply.  Please no more talk of assasin or some violence.  She not physical harm him, but invade privacy and show pic of him and his house with his car and driver license plate.  This not fair, now anybody can find his home.  I just want her have same taste.

Before 10 ppl who can not read yell SCAM:
I not asking for people send ME ANY BITCOINS.

I know 0.15 bitcoin is not much for many but yes for me.

Ok, so for me to pay the bounty I want:  Not have to be all, but just need to show good proof it is her.

Some kind public record with address (real estate sale?)
*only put in PM to me, we not need share her address, just I want know for sure*
Phone
Picture of her house (google map is ok)
Somthing else you think of.  

If your "proof" is not able to verify, I am sorry.


Just post her dox here in the thread and also you bitcoin address and if I like the proof, I send you the bounty.

[keithers]

I can find her if she owns any real estate...but I don't want to get involved in posting anyone's private info

[seriouscoin]

I can find her if she owns any real estate...but I don't want to get involved in posting anyone's private info

Its not private info.

Also you never know, sometimes you get unexpected info that can lead to tax evasion. I'm happy to send fund to someone that can do this.

I want everything about her to be post on the internet even her child abortion records.

[crazy_rabbit]

Let's put her on that bitcoin hitlist site 'assassination market', or is that too much? I hate selfish reporters who only think about their own scoops instead of the safety of a person.

Are you kidding me? It's a shitty thing to do, but it's legitimate journalism. Journalists exist to find out all sorts of stories. Sometimes they feel shitty to some people but they are the bedrock of a functional democracy. We need them. even if sometimes we don't like what they say. And there are just as many people who feel legitimately about wanting to know who he is then those who don't.

It's horrible to even think about threatening someones life, just because they maybe did sloppy journalism. Even if it does affect him, it doesn't FOR SURE mean something will happen to him. If it's really him, he knew this day would come. Threatening to kill journalists is horrible.

[MrJoshua]

Are you kidding me? It's a shitty thing to do, but it's legitimate journalism. Journalists exist to find out all sorts of stories. Sometimes they feel shitty to some people but they are the bedrock of a functional democracy. We need them. even if sometimes we don't like what they say. And there are just as many people who feel legitimately about wanting to know who he is then those who don't.

It's horrible to even think about threatening someones life, just because they maybe did sloppy journalism. Even if it does affect him, it doesn't FOR SURE mean something will happen to him. If it's really him, he knew this day would come. Threatening to kill journalists is horrible.

While I disagree that this constitutes legitimate journalism, as pointed out by the ethics violations I've posted elsewhere.  I absolutely agree that retaliation (of any kind) is completely inappropriate. People will lose respect for her, and/or it will negatively effect her career, or perhaps it will just be a slap on the wrist that will help her be a better reporter in the future, but no one here has any right to attack or harass her.

Her life should not be threatened, and her privacy should not be attacked! What argument could you possibly have against her in the first place if you're willing to do that?

[Ivanhoe]

Let's put her on that bitcoin hitlist site 'assassination market', or is that too much? I hate selfish reporters who only think about their own scoops instead of the safety of a person.

Are you kidding me? It's a shitty thing to do, but it's legitimate journalism. Journalists exist to find out all sorts of stories. Sometimes they feel shitty to some people but they are the bedrock of a functional democracy. We need them. even if sometimes we don't like what they say. And there are just as many people who feel legitimately about wanting to know who he is then those who don't.

It's horrible to even think about threatening someones life, just because they maybe did sloppy journalism. Even if it does affect him, it doesn't FOR SURE mean something will happen to him. If it's really him, he knew this day would come. Threatening to kill journalists is horrible.

Of course i wasn't completely serious about that. Although i'm outraged by her action.

[thecarnie]

Funny how people forget just less than two weeks ago, we were all dying for some kind of information about Mt. Gox -- they were silent, closing down, blocking transactions in and out, and not speaking.  Only after some investigative reporting came out did the shit finally hit the fan and they had no choice to go public.

I don't agree with how she did it.  When he stated his famous quote in the news print about no longer being involved with the project, that should have been it.  She could have given all the information, protected the guy's name, left out the pictures, and still had a sensational story (even if people didn't believe it).  But to put out a hit and all the backlash that some members have proposed about her is equally as stupid and irresponsible.  

It's already been noted that these media outlets read the forums - they glean any information they want - and only the parts they like, without two-siding the article or points they cover.  In a time like ours, where we are screaming for acceptance and the ability to change the world, how do you really think it looks that we have this 'wild west' vigilante cult that whenever something happens they don't like, their immediate response is threats, harassment, and so on?  If you wanted to have a professionally usable, widely acceptable, globally supported initiative such as bitcoin/litecoin or whatever-coin - you are going to have to get some f*cking self control and start acting like professionals when dealing with things you feel were handled wrongly.

Rather than post the threats and bounties over this reporter - members should go about 'professionally' submitting to news outlets their thoughts and feelings about the risks and situation this reporter created.  If you people ever learn anything, it should be that the only way to beat the media is to have a better story than they have.  You don't like the news about Satoshi and how he's been doxxed?  Come up with stories that better the coin, promote the coin, and TAKE ATTENTION AWAY from the situation.  But do it professionally - don't act like a teenager who got his ass kicked on the street and decide that your resolve is to get a bigger stick and beat the other person to death.  You get better results when you attack someone 'mentally' than you do 'physically'...

Think about it...

[Lauda]

Are you kidding me? It's a shitty thing to do, but it's legitimate journalism. Journalists exist to find out all sorts of stories. Sometimes they feel shitty to some people but they are the bedrock of a functional democracy. We need them. even if sometimes we don't like what they say. And there are just as many people who feel legitimately about wanting to know who he is then those who don't.

It's horrible to even think about threatening someones life, just because they maybe did sloppy journalism. Even if it does affect him, it doesn't FOR SURE mean something will happen to him. If it's really him, he knew this day would come. Threatening to kill journalists is horrible.

No we're not.
We can do shitty journalism too, make an article about her.She should be target #1 in the bitcoin country. (Not assassination of course, something, less deadly)
She attacked our father.

The chances of him having the same normal life as before is 1 to a million. The chances of nothing happening to him are even slimmer.

[marcus_of_augustus]

Let's put her on that bitcoin hitlist site 'assassination market', or is that too much? I hate selfish reporters who only think about their own scoops instead of the safety of a person.

Are you kidding me? It's a shitty thing to do, but it's legitimate journalism. Journalists exist to find out all sorts of stories. Sometimes they feel shitty to some people but they are the bedrock of a functional democracy. We need them. even if sometimes we don't like what they say. And there are just as many people who feel legitimately about wanting to know who he is then those who don't.

It's horrible to even think about threatening someones life, just because they maybe did sloppy journalism. Even if it does affect him, it doesn't FOR SURE mean something will happen to him. If it's really him, he knew this day would come. Threatening to kill journalists is horrible.

Like Michael Hastings and Stanley McCrystal you mean?

I think Bitcoin is about to blow-up in yet another industries face, i.e. the lamestream media, blinded in its hatred of libertarianism is about to get a harsh lesson in the power of popular backlash, anonymous, internet style.

She's awoken a sleeping beast .... and there are some un-nice people inside this particular beast. I think she can basically kiss goodbye any hope she had of having secure computing devices any more, Probably she's gonna get electronically assassinated at the very least.

[Lauda]

Like Michael Hastings and Stanley McCrystal you mean?

I think Bitcoin is about to blow-up in yet another industries face, i.e. the lamestream media, blinded in its hatred of libertarianism is about to get a harsh lesson in the power of popular backlash, anonymous, internet style.

She's awoken a sleeping beast .... and there are some un-nice people inside this particular beast.

Can't say that she didn't ask for it.

[Ivanhoe]

Funny how people forget just less than two weeks ago, we were all dying for some kind of information about Mt. Gox -- they were silent, closing down, blocking transactions in and out, and not speaking.  Only after some investigative reporting came out did the shit finally hit the fan and they had no choice to go public.

I don't agree with how she did it.  When he stated his famous quote in the news print about no longer being involved with the project, that should have been it.  She could have given all the information, protected the guy's name, left out the pictures, and still had a sensational story (even if people didn't believe it).  But to put out a hit and all the backlash that some members have proposed about her is equally as stupid and irresponsible.  

It's already been noted that these media outlets read the forums - they glean any information they want - and only the parts they like, without two-siding the article or points they cover.  In a time like ours, where we are screaming for acceptance and the ability to change the world, how do you really think it looks that we have this 'wild west' vigilante cult that whenever something happens they don't like, their immediate response is threats, harassment, and so on?  If you wanted to have a professionally usable, widely acceptable, globally supported initiative such as bitcoin/litecoin or whatever-coin - you are going to have to get some f*cking self control and start acting like professionals when dealing with things you feel were handled wrongly.

Rather than post the threats and bounties over this reporter - members should go about 'professionally' submitting to news outlets their thoughts and feelings about the risks and situation this reporter created.  If you people ever learn anything, it should be that the only way to beat the media is to have a better story than they have.  You don't like the news about Satoshi and how he's been doxxed?  Come up with stories that better the coin, promote the coin, and TAKE ATTENTION AWAY from the situation.  But do it professionally - don't act like a teenager who got his ass kicked on the street and decide that your resolve is to get a bigger stick and beat the other person to death.  You get better results when you attack someone 'mentally' than you do 'physically'...

Think about it...

Oh yes, the world is made out of chocolate. I forgot about that

[pening]

Wow.  So much hate.  What exactly is everyones problem with this?  People wonder and ask everyday " who is Satoshi?".  Why hate someone, and not the first, who claims to find out?  Does it change bitcoin?  

Do you *fear* that it might?  That with the author known it loses something?  interesting.

I don't even understand the logic.  People think the report is wrong, yet others want to harm her... presumably because they think she is right?  Some community.

[thecarnie]

Oh yes, the world if made of chocolate. I forgot about that

I understand your statement, truly I do -- I just hope that in the big picture, while we all agree this was WAY out of line, the whole point was that returning the favor "eye for an eye" is not the way we need to handle things when it comes to this stuff...  All that does is make the whole collective look bad in the end.  The media exploits that to no end -

[genjix]

blaa blaa blaa walls of text. this is internet justice at its finest. anyone who leaks her info if they post an address will get lots of donations guaranteed. i don't know what went through her crazy mind to think this was ok. people need to call her and let her know it was wrong.

"this defenseless eccentric old man has $400m and he lives here <photo him> <photo house>."

[Illutian]

Instead of Doxxing her....why not simply contact her "boss" and give them this link: http://www.rcfp.org/browse-media-law-resources/digital-journalists-legal-guide/publishing-highly-personal-and-embarrassi

I like this part of that link:

As a brief recap, you may be liable for invasion of privacy by publication of private facts if you publish information that is:

• so personal and intimate that its disclosure would offend a reasonable person, even if the information is wholly true;

• not generally known to the public;

• not newsworthy; and

• widely communicated, keeping in mind that publication through e-mail could qualify as such.

[/list] (<-why is it insisting putting this orphan closing tag here...)

Obviously, the bolded would directly apply to this person even if this man turns out to not be The Man


Why dox, when you can get them fired for unprofessional and illegal activities

[Lauda]

Yes, because he hasn't been known to the public. Now he's in trouble.

[Taras]

 Um it was wrong but don't kill her

[Come-from-Beyond]

I don't mind to see her naked pics. May pay few satoshis if I like them.

[CryptoDomains]

...

[bitzox]

Why dox, when you can get them fired for unprofessional and illegal activities

Her boss and the legal team at Newsweek definitely approved of this article before it was released. They aren't going to fire her for shit.