We know. For god's sake, of course we know. What do you think, that we are blind? That every stalker has an expensive long-range camera and magical cammo where we can't see him? That you visit one Reddit, but we visit another Reddit? Or that we visit the same Reddit but just can't make the connection that pictures that happen to other girls can happen to us? Do you also think that it's ok to have sex with a girl who's drunk and passed out as long as you clean up afterwards?

Someone visits, recognizes the person, sends the photo to friends, and soon it is circulating in the peer group of the victim, and they are being made the butt of jokes and being harassed.

And that theoretical harassment will pale in comparison to what results when someone tied to something controversial is outed on reddit. It's not really comparable.

1. It's not theoretical that people get bullied and harassed for photos of them found online.

2. Violentacrez is being harassed for unnecessary acts he CHOOSE to do (violating people's privacy). His victims did NOT choose to be violeted by him. He forced himself upon him. You are right that it is not comparable.

3. Violentacrez is an adult. He can change his name and move away for a fresh start, or obtain a firearm for protection. His young victims often will not have neither of those options.

I'm talking about the rule against doxxing in general and why it is necessary. You are are picking a specific person and arguing that the rule shouldn't apply in this case. But that's not how rules like this work and you are taking a shallow view of the issue.