The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Doxing, Not Doxxing
Both "doxing" and "doxxing" are in use, but I want to argue in favor of the one-x spelling, for a simple reason: It's more consistent with the norms of standard English.
To my knowledge, no other standard English words (not counting brand names such as Exxon, or English renderings of Roman numerals) have an "xx" in them. And while the last letter of a verb is sometimes doubled before "-ing" (e.g., "popping," "hitting," and "tanning"), that isn't done for verbs that end with an "x": We write "boxing," "mixing," and "taxing," not "boxxing," "mixxing," and "taxxing."
I appreciate that this is an aesthetic preference, not some rigid law. If enough fellow English speakers come to prefer "doxxing," that will become the standard spelling. But at this early stage, I want to urge people to go with normal English practice.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
In Love With Norma Loquendi.
Double X should be used because it is not standard English. It refers to a new phenomenon.
It should logically be "doxx" as the root verb but the root verb is not often used. It's almost always "doxxing" or "doxxed".
Also, "dox" has preexisting uses (such as slang for "documents") which are not related to the term we're talking about. Which might cause confusion.
Also "vaxxed" and "unvaxxed" seem to have won over "vaxed" and "unvaxed".
Google Ngrams shows "vaxxed" and "doxxed" both asymptotically taking off in the last decade within a year or two of each other, so I'm not sure we're in "won" territory yet as much as "hot new fad." (It also actually shows "doxed" is still the majority usage, so maybe there's hope.)
Yes, vaxxed is also illiterate. English does not use a double-x.
Yeah, the Merriam-Webster site has just variants of "doxx" and "vaxx" in their list of words containing XX.
I've always known it as "docs," and apparently we've figured out how to use contextual clues to distinguish piles of paper from people that walk around with stethoscopes around their necks.
If doxing is new, then that is all the more reason to follow standard English grammar rules.
I always assumed dox was derived from docs, meaning release someone's personal documentation.
That is exactly where it comes from.
Yes, and it probably happened long before computers were invented.
I understand the letter doubling to be a remnant of a phonetic rule where a syllable with more consonants has a shorter vowel. "Do-ping" has a different "o" sound than "pop-ping".
"X" is a single letter that represents two consonants. If we wrote it as two letters the instinct to double it would not kick in.
If "popping" were spelled "poping," an unwary reader might think it was pronounced "pope-ing," which only one person in the world can do at a time, the Avignon popes excepted.
President Trump just made a major law firm, Paul Weiss, agree to "donate" forty million dollars to his favorite causes, for fear of being destroyed. The senior partner of the firm said he agreed to the extortion (he didn't use that word, of course) because other law firms were seeking to steal his firm's clients, while lawyers at Paul Weiss were updating their resumes. Some people might say that the whole thing reflects badly on both Donald Trump and American lawyers. But I guess Professor Volokh has bigger things on his mind.
"Vaxxing" comes from "to vax", not "to vaxx".
I've seen "exxing something out", I think. But not often.
Descriptivists FTW.
The NYT Spelling Bee game allows both doxing and doxxing. My phone's autocorrect likes neither.
I blame Exxon - - - - - -
Which I believe was chosen in order to have a globally trademark-able name that wasn't in use anywhere in the world in any language.
One X is grammatically correct. John F Carr pointed the way.
Double the final consonant when it follows a short, stressed vowel (exceptions: -w, -x and -y)
The phonological explanation prevails, as in why the word Exsultet became Exultet, because the "X' is 'ks' sound and that would be irresolvable to the ear ks-s
Many words with one consonant are split between two syllables as if it were a double consonant
We actually say 'drink -king' not 'drink-ing"
But at this early stage, I want to urge people to go with normal English practice.
If you were still in academic circles you would realize that university kids today are not inclined to go with "normal English practice". They do not use normal spoken English, nor in course papers, heck even university admins use a language at odds with "normal English practice".