This sounds nice but is not a realistic or helpful solution in academic spaces post-George Floyd in Minneapolis. The owner of bipoc.umn saw the opportunity to harm others and created a chaotic, mob-mentality format, where: they can say whatever they want about whomever they want to large, sympathetic audiences; it carries life-changing consequences for the accused; and it borders on impossible to effectively contest it. This was not an accident.

The owner is simultaneously framing their accusations as coming from separate people and playing the plausibly deniable “tone policing”/“fuck the system” card to avoid the fact that their made-up fantasies fall apart when held under any shade of light, including who they are and the fact that literally everyone they run into seems to be a problem for them.

You can make legitimate arguments WRT whether people who have experienced racism should be able to publicly name their abusers without due process, and you can effectively criticize due process systems as ineffective and rigged for BIPOC and women/NB people, but you cannot defend doxxing and publicly humiliating innocent people for petty revenge and that is exactly what is happening here. It is wrong. It’s not tone-policing to say that.