User:PsychoNerd054/The Blind Observers and a Snoo - Revision history

PsychoNerd054: /* Doxing and Documentation */

2025-10-25T17:29:36Z

Doxing and Documentation

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:29, 25 October 2025
Line 316:		Line 316:
	In most other contexts, Snoo sharing clips of the call with her friends wouldn't be treated like its some big achievement, as this is something that goes on quite a bit amongst those that orbit Chris.		In most other contexts, Snoo sharing clips of the call with her friends wouldn't be treated like its some big achievement, as this is something that goes on quite a bit amongst those that orbit Chris.

	==Doxing ~~and Documentation~~==		==Ethics of Doxing==
	<!--===The GiBi Incident===		<!--===The GiBi Incident===
	One of the big reasons for the stigmatization surrounding Snoo's personal information being out there stems from how GiBi decided to cover the incest fallout.		One of the big reasons for the stigmatization surrounding Snoo's personal information being out there stems from how GiBi decided to cover the incest fallout.

PsychoNerd054: I think it's worth talking about how unhelpful it is to put Chris orbiters in "categories" or on scales of how much they "deserve" getting doxed. That's how things like the "Suitress policy" come into existence.

2025-10-25T17:24:30Z

I think it's worth talking about how unhelpful it is to put Chris orbiters in "categories" or on scales of how much they "deserve" getting doxed. That's how things like the "Suitress policy" come into existence.

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:24, 25 October 2025
Line 320:		Line 320:
	One of the big reasons for the stigmatization surrounding Snoo's personal information being out there stems from how GiBi decided to cover the incest fallout.		One of the big reasons for the stigmatization surrounding Snoo's personal information being out there stems from how GiBi decided to cover the incest fallout.

	Though GiBi was also in the wrong for how he covered the incident, I also don't believe any harm should fall upon him like people wished.-->		Though GiBi was also in the wrong for how he covered the incident, I also don't believe any harm should fall upon him like people wished.


			===Categories===-->
	==="Morality"===		==="Morality"===
	Considering all of the above, a major point of discussion surrounding Snoo is the supposed "morality" that comes with covering, documenting or talking about her, as if talking about a person, even one that's important to talk about to understand Christory, to any degree is supposed to be some sort of punishment.<ref>{{Cite farms\|thread=101177\|post=10083143}}</ref> In the case of this circle in particular, where people at a risk of having pizzas sent to their house, I sorta get where people may be coming from with this, but that's only IF you have things like their address or are able to hack into their bank account or some shit. Just showcasing someone's basic personal info (like their name, birthday, etc.) alone doesn't inherently put them at risk. Otherwise, that's their own mess to clean up, and only THEY can make the correct choices for themselves. No one is obligated to avenge or protect people like Snoo on the basis of them getting doxed, especially considering the fact she was able to figure shit out on her own.		Considering all of the above, a major point of discussion surrounding Snoo is the supposed "morality" that comes with covering, documenting or talking about her, as if talking about a person, even one that's important to talk about to understand Christory, to any degree is supposed to be some sort of punishment.<ref>{{Cite farms\|thread=101177\|post=10083143}}</ref> In the case of this circle in particular, where people at a risk of having pizzas sent to their house, I sorta get where people may be coming from with this, but that's only IF you have things like their address or are able to hack into their bank account or some shit. Just showcasing someone's basic personal info (like their name, birthday, etc.) alone doesn't inherently put them at risk. Otherwise, that's their own mess to clean up, and only THEY can make the correct choices for themselves. No one is obligated to avenge or protect people like Snoo on the basis of them getting doxed, especially considering the fact she was able to figure shit out on her own.

PsychoNerd054: Hurtful's done reviewing this. I'm going back to work on this.

2025-08-15T17:55:09Z

Hurtful's done reviewing this. I'm going back to work on this.

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:55, 15 August 2025
Line 2:		Line 2:
	{{Jump}}		{{Jump}}
	{{essay\|PsychoNerd054}}		{{essay\|PsychoNerd054}}
	{{~~HiatusEssay~~}}<br>		{{IncompleteEssay}}<br>

	<center><span style = "font-size:500%;font-family:serif">'''The Blind Observers and a Snoo'''</span></center><br>		<center><span style = "font-size:500%;font-family:serif">'''The Blind Observers and a Snoo'''</span></center><br>

PsychoNerd054: /* The Cult of Snoo */

2025-07-22T20:51:37Z

The Cult of Snoo

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:51, 22 July 2025
Line 272:		Line 272:
	{{Quote\|Oh shit, this is actually happening. I really didn't expect this. Well, I'm not complaining, but it's strange how quick it went from 'The Suitress Policy will be kept up forever' to changing it.\|A CWCki editor when the "Suitress Policy" was starting to get taken down.<ref name = casetalk/>}}		{{Quote\|Oh shit, this is actually happening. I really didn't expect this. Well, I'm not complaining, but it's strange how quick it went from 'The Suitress Policy will be kept up forever' to changing it.\|A CWCki editor when the "Suitress Policy" was starting to get taken down.<ref name = casetalk/>}}
	{{Quote\|Shows the power of using your voice to enact change. Glad that we're moving forward with this.\|Anaxis.<ref name = casetalk/>}}		{{Quote\|Shows the power of using your voice to enact change. Glad that we're moving forward with this.\|Anaxis.<ref name = casetalk/>}}
	As I've said, the "Suitress Policy" is only truly gone in name ~~only~~. Though the censoring on the CWCki was a large portion of it, I think that the "Suitress Policy" is actually more than just that. There was a ~~also~~ general attitude towards Snoo that ~~occurred outside of just~~ my handling of her alone. To a degree, this mindset still persists today. That mindset is that Snoo is some sort of perfect, perpetual victim that you MUST be supportive of and feel bad for on some front. It doesn't matter what else you think of her, just so long as it involves that view in particular. If you stray too much from that, either at best you were flat out wrong or cruel and got downvoted, or at worst in on the conspiracy with Bella.		As I've said, the "Suitress Policy" is only truly gone in name. Though the censoring on the CWCki was a large portion of it, I think that the "Suitress Policy" is actually more than just that. There was also a general attitude towards Snoo that extended beyond my handling of her alone. To a degree, this mindset still persists today. That mindset is that Snoo is some sort of perfect, perpetual victim that you MUST be supportive of and feel bad for on some front. It doesn't matter what else you think of her, just so long as it involves that view in particular. If you stray too much from that, either at best you were flat out wrong or cruel and got downvoted, or at worst in on the conspiracy with Bella.

	The core of the "policy" is an unspoken rule that's been ~~engrained~~ everyone's minds. That being that Snoo should always be protected and looked down upon, no matter the circumstances. The only true difference between anyone ~~that~~ has observed Snoo is how willing they are to adhere to this unspoken rule. Her so called "supporters" just held onto this idea tightly, while her "detractors" viewed her as the inverse of this, as a "ween" that "deserves to be punished". This to me is the overarching issue regarding any sort of coverage surrounding Snoo, or any other Christorical Figure for that matter.		The core of the "policy" is an unspoken rule that's been ingrained in everyone's minds. That being that Snoo should always be protected and looked down upon, no matter the circumstances. The only true difference between anyone who has observed Snoo is how willing they are to adhere to this unspoken rule. Her so-called "supporters" just held onto this idea tightly, while her "detractors" viewed her as the inverse of this, as a "ween" that "deserves to be punished". This, to me, is the overarching issue regarding any sort of coverage surrounding Snoo, or any other Christorical Figure for that matter.

	It's not so much that she's entirely (or "both") a "victim" or a "bad actor", or even that anyone is entirely wrong about her. It's that Snoo is not allowed to be anything besides those two things, or otherwise be anything beyond what we already understand about Christory. Snoo was never allowed to just be her own person amongst the CWCSphere, she had to fit ''some'' archetype. Unless we get this notion out of our heads, and accept Snoo as who she is...as nothing more than just Snoo, I don't think we're ever going to make much progress with regards to portraying or documenting her accurately. Limiting ourselves to understanding things by very specific labels (like "troll", "ween", "white-knight", etc.) does nothing but restrict our ~~understandings~~, especially with people like Snoo who do not fit any such labels in a traditional sense. If we choose to continue doing that, our assumptions will only cloud the truth further, and we will wind up repeating the same mistakes in the future.		It's not so much that she's entirely (or "both") a "victim" or a "bad actor", or even that anyone is entirely wrong about her. It's that Snoo is not allowed to be anything besides those two things, or otherwise be anything beyond what we already understand about Christory. Snoo was never allowed to just be her own person amongst the CWCSphere, she had to fit ''some'' archetype. Unless we get this notion out of our heads, and accept Snoo as who she is...as nothing more than just Snoo, I don't think we're ever going to make much progress with regards to portraying or documenting her accurately. Limiting ourselves to understanding things by very specific labels (like "troll", "ween", "white-knight", etc.) does nothing but restrict our understanding, especially with people like Snoo who do not fit any such labels in a traditional sense. If we choose to continue doing that, our assumptions will only cloud the truth further, and we will wind up repeating the same mistakes in the future.

	In this section, I will explain how I think such assumptions already clouded the truth outside of just the censoring on the CWCki.		In this section, I will explain how I think such assumptions already clouded the truth outside of just the censoring on the CWCki.

PsychoNerd054: /* "Morality" */

2025-07-21T12:46:48Z

"Morality"

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:46, 21 July 2025
Line 326:		Line 326:
	Frankly, I think Snoo's involvement with Chris, and the way that people tried to cover her (both here and elsewhere) also showcases just how utterly retarded and counterproductive it is to think of getting documented on this wiki or elsewhere as a "punishment", or something that one "deserves", kind of like how [[Naught]] did when he "curbed the weens".<ref>[[Midnight's Nightlings and Starettes#Watchmen Raid]]</ref> If you involve yourself with Chris, it's not inherently a good or a bad thing, but you should also expect the ramifications that come with it. In the case of Snoo, she technically didn't do anything "morally" wrong by this community's standards, but she still left a big impact on Christory, thus we ''must'' document her regardless of whether or not we personally like her. To say that her actions are something to "excuse", as suggested by the case against the "Suitress Policy"<ref name = "case"/> is utterly ridiculous, when you think about it. Our goal isn't to larp as detectives that "bring people to justice", as some people like to put it. Our goal is simply to document Chris and those he gets involved with. We document the latter with the intent of understanding how they affected Chris personally, regardless of how we feel about their involvement.		Frankly, I think Snoo's involvement with Chris, and the way that people tried to cover her (both here and elsewhere) also showcases just how utterly retarded and counterproductive it is to think of getting documented on this wiki or elsewhere as a "punishment", or something that one "deserves", kind of like how [[Naught]] did when he "curbed the weens".<ref>[[Midnight's Nightlings and Starettes#Watchmen Raid]]</ref> If you involve yourself with Chris, it's not inherently a good or a bad thing, but you should also expect the ramifications that come with it. In the case of Snoo, she technically didn't do anything "morally" wrong by this community's standards, but she still left a big impact on Christory, thus we ''must'' document her regardless of whether or not we personally like her. To say that her actions are something to "excuse", as suggested by the case against the "Suitress Policy"<ref name = "case"/> is utterly ridiculous, when you think about it. Our goal isn't to larp as detectives that "bring people to justice", as some people like to put it. Our goal is simply to document Chris and those he gets involved with. We document the latter with the intent of understanding how they affected Chris personally, regardless of how we feel about their involvement.

	Preventing people like Snoo from getting documented to collect all relevant information about her role with Chris just because she arbitrarily "doesn't deserve it" just makes it difficult to document what happened during the ~~Everfree~~ and Incest Sagas, as she was a crucial player in both. In addition to that, doing things like censoring certain information about people like Snoo also hampers with the collection and organizing such information, which greatly affects how people perceive the events that occurred. In its own way, it also risks the spreading of more misinformation, since the information that ''could'' provide useful context is now banned from being posted on the site. This also raises questions about whether other Christorical Figures who we already have the doxes of, like Megan; Mary Lee Walsh; or Michael Snyder; deserve a similar treatment.<ref>https://cwcki.club/index.php?threads/the-cwcki-is-back-up.2388/#post-110681</ref>		Preventing people like Snoo from getting documented to collect all relevant information about her role with Chris just because she arbitrarily "doesn't deserve it" just makes it difficult to document what happened during the Twilight and Incest Sagas, as she was a crucial player in both. In addition to that, doing things like censoring certain information about people like Snoo also hampers with the collection and organizing such information, which greatly affects how people perceive the events that occurred. In its own way, it also risks the spreading of more misinformation, since the information that ''could'' provide useful context is now banned from being posted on the site. This also raises questions about whether other Christorical Figures who we already have the doxes of, like Megan; Mary Lee Walsh; or Michael Snyder; deserve a similar treatment.<ref>https://cwcki.club/index.php?threads/the-cwcki-is-back-up.2388/#post-110681</ref>

	Likewise, trying to include every little detail about people like [[GiBi]], literal nobodies like [[Fan visits#e1ectricthunder\|e1ectricthunder]],<ref>https://sonichu.com/w/index.php?title=Fan_visits&diff=prev&oldid=271724</ref><ref>{{Cite farms\|thread=50150\|post=10337656}}</ref><ref>{{Cite farms\|thread=50150\|post=10338403}}</ref> or hell even Snoo herself, on the basis of them "deserving it" helps absolutely nobody, and only clutters things up. People (I would assume, at least) come here to learn about and laugh at Chris, not go on some sort of moralfag crusade. The days of trying to take the piss out of Chris orbiters on here have been gone since the whole Incest incident, and we generally try to portray people as accurately and as close to their involvement with Chris as possible, but the same can't necessarily be said for everyone else.		Likewise, trying to include every little detail about people like [[GiBi]], literal nobodies like [[Fan visits#e1ectricthunder\|e1ectricthunder]],<ref>https://sonichu.com/w/index.php?title=Fan_visits&diff=prev&oldid=271724</ref><ref>{{Cite farms\|thread=50150\|post=10337656}}</ref><ref>{{Cite farms\|thread=50150\|post=10338403}}</ref> or hell even Snoo herself, on the basis of them "deserving it" helps absolutely nobody, and only clutters things up. People (I would assume, at least) come here to learn about and laugh at Chris, not go on some sort of moralfag crusade. The days of trying to take the piss out of Chris orbiters on here have been gone since the whole Incest incident, and we generally try to portray people as accurately and as close to their involvement with Chris as possible, but the same can't necessarily be said for everyone else.

PsychoNerd054: She was basically a Reddit Snoo in the same way I'm a penguin. LULZ

2025-07-21T11:08:09Z

She was basically a Reddit Snoo in the same way I'm a penguin. LULZ

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:08, 21 July 2025
Line 45:		Line 45:
	For the sake of clarity and consistency, I will primarily be referring to Fiona as "'''Snoo'''", both in this essay and wherever else possible. When I started writing this essay, I initially wanted to refer to Snoo as both "Fiona" and "Snoo" interchangeably. However, I've felt that "Snoo" overall felt more authentic and closer to what Fiona ''used to'' be, from what I've gathered. This is also accounting for the fact that "Snoo" '''''WAS''''' her authentic, pre-existing online persona before the incest drama, and especially before the creation of the "Suitress" codename.		For the sake of clarity and consistency, I will primarily be referring to Fiona as "'''Snoo'''", both in this essay and wherever else possible. When I started writing this essay, I initially wanted to refer to Snoo as both "Fiona" and "Snoo" interchangeably. However, I've felt that "Snoo" overall felt more authentic and closer to what Fiona ''used to'' be, from what I've gathered. This is also accounting for the fact that "Snoo" '''''WAS''''' her authentic, pre-existing online persona before the incest drama, and especially before the creation of the "Suitress" codename.

	Also from what I've gathered of her, "Fiona" was only secondary to her in terms of names she used during her online presence, much like how Joshua Conner Moon is usually referred to as "[[Null]]" instead of just "Josh" or his full name. I am also of the opinion that Fiona has changed rather drastically in the four years since she left the Internet (I'll elaborate on that later), so I feel that "Snoo" better articulates the young, rowdy Fiona from the time. Therefore, I only see "Snoo" as the most accurate way to refer to her in this essay. This was also the reason I titled the essay as "and a Snoo",<ref group = note>Snoo's screenname was named after Reddit's alien mascot.</ref> rather than something obvious like "and a Suitress". The person we are trying to understand here is Snoo from the CWCki Discord server, not Fiona as she is now, not "Fifi Vixenhart", and certainly not "The Suitress".		Also from what I've gathered of her, "Fiona" was only secondary to her in terms of names she used during her online presence, much like how Joshua Conner Moon is usually referred to as "[[Null]]" instead of just "Josh" or his full name. I am also of the opinion that Fiona has changed rather drastically in the four years since she left the Internet (I'll elaborate on that later), so I feel that "Snoo" better articulates the young, rowdy Fiona from the time. Therefore, I only see "Snoo" as the most accurate way to refer to her in this essay. This was also the reason I titled the essay as "and a Snoo",<ref group = note>Snoo's screenname was named after Reddit's alien mascot. This was also the primary avatar she took upon when interacting with others.</ref> rather than something obvious like "and a Suitress". The person we are trying to understand here is Snoo from the CWCki Discord server, not Fiona as she is now, not "Fifi Vixenhart", and certainly not "The Suitress".

	===Referring to Snoo as "The Suitress"===		===Referring to Snoo as "The Suitress"===

PsychoNerd054: Adding this portion to make the rest of the essay more accessible to people who come here for the summary, but want to read the rest of the essay.

2025-07-21T11:03:39Z

Adding this portion to make the rest of the essay more accessible to people who come here for the summary, but want to read the rest of the essay.

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:03, 21 July 2025
Line 260:		Line 260:
	==TL;DR==		==TL;DR==

	You probably came to this essay to know why the "Suitress policy" was set in place and later removed. If you're one of these people, but don't have the time or energy to read long-ass paragraphs, this is the section for you.<ref group = note>In this section in particular, I chose to refer to Snoo as "Fiona" for the sake of accessibility, since people would likely read this first before reading my reasoning for my naming preferences.</ref>		You probably came to this essay to know why the "Suitress policy" was set in place and later removed. If you're one of these people, but don't have the time or energy to read long-ass paragraphs, this is the section for you.<ref group = note>For any newbies who stumbled across this essay, I primarily refer to Fiona as "Snoo" in this essay and wherever else it's appropriate. In this section in particular, I chose to refer to Snoo as "Fiona" for the sake of accessibility, since people would likely read this first before reading my reasoning for my naming preferences.</ref>

	{{quotebox\|'''TL;DR''': A bunch of autism about another autist.		{{quotebox\|'''TL;DR''': A bunch of autism about another autist.

PsychoNerd054: /* The "Suitress Policy" */

2025-07-21T10:51:00Z

The "Suitress Policy"

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:51, 21 July 2025
Line 172:		Line 172:

	=The "Suitress Policy"=		=The "Suitress Policy"=
	And now we come to this...where do I even begin? ~~<!--~~(BTW, there's a [[The Blind Observers and a Snoo#TL;DR\|TL;DR]] version of this story)~~-->~~		And now we come to this...where do I even begin? (BTW, there's a [[The Blind Observers and a Snoo#TL;DR\|TL;DR]] version of this story)

	==My Intent==		==My Intent==

PsychoNerd054: The summary is just a copy-paste of a post I made on Reddit, but I think calling Snoo "Fiona" here works for the sake of accessibility.

2025-07-21T04:22:48Z

The summary is just a copy-paste of a post I made on Reddit, but I think calling Snoo "Fiona" here works for the sake of accessibility.

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:22, 21 July 2025
Line 260:		Line 260:
	==TL;DR==		==TL;DR==

	You probably came to this essay to know why the "Suitress policy" was set in place and later removed. If you're one of these people, but don't have the time or energy to read long-ass paragraphs, this is the section for you.		You probably came to this essay to know why the "Suitress policy" was set in place and later removed. If you're one of these people, but don't have the time or energy to read long-ass paragraphs, this is the section for you.<ref group = note>In this section in particular, I chose to refer to Snoo as "Fiona" for the sake of accessibility, since people would likely read this first before reading my reasoning for my naming preferences.</ref>

	{{quotebox\|'''TL;DR''': A bunch of autism about another autist.		{{quotebox\|'''TL;DR''': A bunch of autism about another autist.

PsychoNerd054: /* TL;DR */

2025-07-20T15:45:25Z

TL;DR

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:45, 20 July 2025
Line 264:		Line 264:
	{{quotebox\|'''TL;DR''': A bunch of autism about another autist.		{{quotebox\|'''TL;DR''': A bunch of autism about another autist.

	'''More comprehensive TL;DR''': Basically, people wanted Fiona's head on a pike after Bella framed her, but then one of her friends, whom Naught had doxed, tried to explain her situation, which made people less sour on her, and discouraged doxing of her period. Afterwards, several people got targeted over supposedly being on Bella's conspiracy, and I implemented the Suitress policy on the CWCki as a sort of knee-jerk response to all of the drama that went on, since everyone else was basically obfuscating Fiona. This was done without user input, which created more confusion for everyone involved.		'''More comprehensive TL;DR''': Basically, people wanted Fiona's head on a pike after Bella framed her, but then one of her friends, whom Naught had doxed, tried to explain her situation, which made people less sour on her, and discouraged doxing of her period. Afterwards, several people got targeted over supposedly being on Bella's conspiracy, and I implemented the Suitress policy on the CWCki as a sort of knee-jerk response to all of the drama that went on, since everyone else was basically obfuscating Fiona. This was done without user input, not even from Fiona herself, which created more confusion for everyone involved.

	The most you need to know after this is that the discourse surrounding her became more chaotic after she did her Reddit AMA, and people basically fell into several camps as a result. This was the main reason the policy stayed around for so long, out of concerns for the potential blowback from removing everything at once.}}		The most you need to know after this is that the discourse surrounding her became more chaotic after she did her Reddit AMA, and people basically fell into several camps as a result. This was the main reason the policy stayed around for so long, out of concerns for the potential blowback from removing everything at once. To combat this, I and Hurtful Truth Level agreed to lessen the policy over time before Anaxis came and argued against the entire thing, which led to the policy getting discontinued.}}

	=The Cult of Snoo=		=The Cult of Snoo=