Here in the Great Southern Land of the Holy Spirit, we have some citizen journalists who have risen in profile thanks to the Cabal lunacy that is/was 2020/2021. One of those is a fellow who became a member of the Rebel News Team, the mob out of Canada doing breitbart-esque journalism. Name of Avi Yemini Twiffle account.
(Yes, he is denounced by some quarters as an operative of the Mossad, Mah Jewz, etc., but so far, he's doing a significant amount for the growing Freedom Movement in Australia. Personally, I don't have enough data to really evaluate, but so far he's doing far more good than harm, imo.)
Today he won a court battle to in which the court ordered Twitter to release the details of a particularly nasty shill account that has been spruiking the ... heheh ... virtues of the Marxist CCP Minion Daniel Andrews, who is currently Premier of the state of Victoria (think Newsom in California, or a tiny little state-level Turdeau. You heard me.) and acting anonymously but heck of a lot like an actual PR account (ref: my contribution to the mess): defending the Andrew's regime and attacking those who stand up against it.
I think the premise here is that the twitter account - name of PRguy who uses the image of a Simpson's character (reporter) as his avatar - has defamed Yemini and Yemini intends to bring a defamation suit against him.
So he took it to court, and the court ordered that Twitter has to reveal the details of the account.
This has the Leftist/Marxist shills and squakers all in an uproar. Bad precedent. Yemini's position, however, I think is quite reasonable. He's not doxxing the account; he wants to bring a suit against it and of course, that's not possible if the account remains anonymous. In other words, anonymity is important and fair, but not when it's used to break the law and violate other people's rights.
It's an interesting twist, because we are anons, and we know how destructive doxxing can be.
Is this a local win? Or should the account remain in anonymity?
I'd be interested to hear what the board thinks about this....
Let's put it this way: how many conspiracy theories do you know of that could be considered defamation in court?