3 ms·

This is fucked up. I hate that companies are dictating culture. I get that this is really visa and MasterCard but god I can’t wait for online payments to be a s

This is fucked up. I hate that companies are dictating culture. I get that this is really visa and MasterCard but god I can’t wait for online payments to be a solved problem.

SippinLean 8y ago
What's fucked up about a private company not doing business with neo-nazis?
- adamnemecek 8y ago
  It seems like this was over nsfw content tho. It's fucked up even if it's neonazis (but I disagree with your usage of that term). It sets a precedent that you can willy nilly drop customers that might be relying on you. Amazon did something similar to me a while back. I was livid.
  - minikites 8y ago
    Why should you get to dictate the actions of another private business?
    - adamnemecek 8y ago
      Because when a business gets to a certain size, they might become an essential part of life. What if say, all the ISPs in your area dropped you as a customer because of that one time you looked up holocaust denial on wikipedia. What's your stance on the gay wedding cake supreme court case btw?
    - MBCook 8y ago
      Because they signed a contract giving you that right? When gab.com decided to use Stripe, they willingly agreed to abide by those terms. It’s not like Whole Foods came out of left field, having no relationship to things at all, and all of a sudden said “you have to close your website.”
      - adamnemecek 8y ago
        Provisions of a contract can be one sided. It's the same reason why loan sharks are illegal.
  - SippinLean 8y ago
    > It sets a precedent that you can willy nilly drop customers that might be relying on you It doesn't set the precedent (any private company can drop customers) and it wasn't "willy nilly" as you clearly acknowledge ("this was over nsfw content")
Barrin92 8y ago
Surely the free speech heroes at Gab will understand that everyone else has also the freedom to not associate with them.
- adamnemecek 8y ago
  It's a double edged sword. It will backfire big time.
  - SpecialistEMT 8y ago
    No it won't. Its literally a non problem. If an action like this will be applied unreasonably we will literally change it with a flip of a finger.
- jlawson 8y ago
  "Freedom to speak" Does not imply: "Freedom to use power to silence other people arbitrarily". In fact it implies the opposite: "Responsibility to uphold speech even if you disagree with it."
  - Barrin92 8y ago
    Freedom of speech does by no means entail that anybody has to a) listen to your speech, b) host you on their platform or do business with you.
    - jlawson 8y ago
      It doesn't imply A), but it does imply B) to some degree. To believe a right exists means to believe it should be upheld, which means you should uphold it.
      - ubernostrum 8y ago
        OK. So make a list for me of causes and ideas you hate the most. I'll arrange for you to tithe in support of organizations promoting those causes. I'll also arrange for someone to show up at your home, every day, and deliver a one-hour lecture on the ideas you dislike. I'm sure you'll do this because, after all, you believe in free speech and you believe you must "uphold" it by requiring people to support ideas with which they disagree, Yes?
MBCook 8y ago
So let me see if I understand this. 1. Gab.com signs up with Stripe, agreeing to “no-NSFW” rule in the TOS/contract 2. Gab.com allows NSFW content 3. They get mad when caught 2 years later This seems pretty cut and dry. Are they claiming this is some sort of censorship and the NSFW thing is a straw man reason? Maybe they shouldn’t have provided Stripe with such an obvious TOS violation. What did they think was going to happen?
- adamnemecek 8y ago
  It's the fact that there even is a such a provision.
  - MBCook 8y ago
    Adult services are NOTORIOUS for a HUGE number of chargebacks. Almost every payment processing company doesn’t want to touch that with a 100 foot pole because of that. There’s nothing special going on here.
    - Xamayon 8y ago
      There is a huge difference between something like a porn site, and a service which just happens to have adult content on it due to users sharing such content. The first, which involves paying for adult content explicitly, may have a higher chargeback rate due to things like embarrassment about the charge showing up on a bill. The second has no such issue, the user is paying for a service which is unrelated to the content being shared by the service's users. Payment processors treating both identically is complete bullshit. Some people just hate porn, and they are trying to force their views on the world. Sadly, because there are no competitive competitors (adult payment processor fees are outrageous) they have no incentive to change their policies.

This is fucked up. I hate that companies are dictating culture. I get that this is really visa and MasterCard but god I can’t wait for online payments to be a solved problem.

SippinLean 8y ago

What's fucked up about a private company not doing business with neo-nazis?

adamnemecek 8y ago
It seems like this was over nsfw content tho. It's fucked up even if it's neonazis (but I disagree with your usage of that term). It sets a precedent that you can willy nilly drop customers that might be relying on you. Amazon did something similar to me a while back. I was livid.
- minikites 8y ago
  Why should you get to dictate the actions of another private business?
  - adamnemecek 8y ago
    Because when a business gets to a certain size, they might become an essential part of life. What if say, all the ISPs in your area dropped you as a customer because of that one time you looked up holocaust denial on wikipedia. What's your stance on the gay wedding cake supreme court case btw?
  - MBCook 8y ago
    Because they signed a contract giving you that right? When gab.com decided to use Stripe, they willingly agreed to abide by those terms. It’s not like Whole Foods came out of left field, having no relationship to things at all, and all of a sudden said “you have to close your website.”
    - adamnemecek 8y ago
      Provisions of a contract can be one sided. It's the same reason why loan sharks are illegal.
- SippinLean 8y ago
  > It sets a precedent that you can willy nilly drop customers that might be relying on you It doesn't set the precedent (any private company can drop customers) and it wasn't "willy nilly" as you clearly acknowledge ("this was over nsfw content")

Barrin92 8y ago

Surely the free speech heroes at Gab will understand that everyone else has also the freedom to not associate with them.

adamnemecek 8y ago
It's a double edged sword. It will backfire big time.
- SpecialistEMT 8y ago
  No it won't. Its literally a non problem. If an action like this will be applied unreasonably we will literally change it with a flip of a finger.
jlawson 8y ago
"Freedom to speak" Does not imply: "Freedom to use power to silence other people arbitrarily". In fact it implies the opposite: "Responsibility to uphold speech even if you disagree with it."
- Barrin92 8y ago
  Freedom of speech does by no means entail that anybody has to a) listen to your speech, b) host you on their platform or do business with you.
  - jlawson 8y ago
    It doesn't imply A), but it does imply B) to some degree. To believe a right exists means to believe it should be upheld, which means you should uphold it.
    - ubernostrum 8y ago
      OK. So make a list for me of causes and ideas you hate the most. I'll arrange for you to tithe in support of organizations promoting those causes. I'll also arrange for someone to show up at your home, every day, and deliver a one-hour lecture on the ideas you dislike. I'm sure you'll do this because, after all, you believe in free speech and you believe you must "uphold" it by requiring people to support ideas with which they disagree, Yes?

MBCook 8y ago

So let me see if I understand this. 1. Gab.com signs up with Stripe, agreeing to “no-NSFW” rule in the TOS/contract 2. Gab.com allows NSFW content 3. They get mad when caught 2 years later This seems pretty cut and dry. Are they claiming this is some sort of censorship and the NSFW thing is a straw man reason? Maybe they shouldn’t have provided Stripe with such an obvious TOS violation. What did they think was going to happen?

adamnemecek 8y ago
It's the fact that there even is a such a provision.
- MBCook 8y ago
  Adult services are NOTORIOUS for a HUGE number of chargebacks. Almost every payment processing company doesn’t want to touch that with a 100 foot pole because of that. There’s nothing special going on here.
  - Xamayon 8y ago
    There is a huge difference between something like a porn site, and a service which just happens to have adult content on it due to users sharing such content. The first, which involves paying for adult content explicitly, may have a higher chargeback rate due to things like embarrassment about the charge showing up on a bill. The second has no such issue, the user is paying for a service which is unrelated to the content being shared by the service's users. Payment processors treating both identically is complete bullshit. Some people just hate porn, and they are trying to force their views on the world. Sadly, because there are no competitive competitors (adult payment processor fees are outrageous) they have no incentive to change their policies.