Why should they be nervous about doing their job?
Also, one X, not two: https://stallman.org/doxing.html
Also, one X, not two: https://stallman.org/doxing.html
The development of the Exxon exx is shown here:
http://www.logodesignlove.com/exxon-logo-raymond-loewy
It's clearly a double-x rather than any more exotic character, the styling is just that - styling.
The Wikipedia article has it as /ˈɛksɒn/ and that's the pronunciation used in their commercials:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_s80Hbac2b8
So that's way off-topic. But what he says about "dox" vs. "doxx" is as much a preference as "focused" and "focussed", or "busing" and "bussing" - there's no "correct" way, not even if it is the original way.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exxon#History
There's no particular reason to believe they wanted to change the pronunciation as well.
woosh
I don't know why people spell it with two. Maybe they think it looks cooler? But really it's hacker slang for "I accessed and published sensitive information about an individual" and is in most cases horrible.
This is some really advanced trolling, on the level of the emperor's new clothes.
Wikipedia says:
> The company initially planned to change its name to "Exon", in keeping with the four-letter format of Enco and Esso. However, during the planning process, it was noted that James Exon was the governor of Nebraska. Renaming the company after a sitting governor seemed ill-advised, and the second "x" was added to the new name and logo.
No mention of them wanting to name the company with a greek chi but not having that on their typewriters.
To be fair, the wikipedia claim isn't cited. Neither is rms's of course.
...although looking at it more carefully, the doxing article is not dated April 1, and it has the same claim in it. Maybe he forgot what he was doing and successfully trolled himself. I don't know. But yes, the Exxon thing is obviously, demonstrably false.