4 ms·

> If you want to use your platform for good, you do good no matter the time. Why? It's a business not a "platform for good" > It´s not like CF went on a clean

> If you want to use your platform for good, you do good no matter the time. Why? It's a business not a "platform for good" > It´s not like CF went on a cleaning spree and dropped hundreds of shady clients that are faaaaaar worse and much much nastier than 8chan So what? Maybe recent events struck a personal chord with the owners and they said "fuck it, we don't need their businesses, it's one small thing we can do to offer our support to the victims". If they're hosting "much nastier" customers than 8chan then it's fair to ask them to do better or call out their hypocrisy and ask them to rectify the situation. > this wasn´t a "do good / patriotic moment". I never said it was. > I´d like to know in case you´d make that same argument for the Bakery/gay wedding case I followed this case closely and my views on it are complex. It's not as simple as most people like to suggest. In short, I think the SCOTUS made the right ruling specifically because of the reasoning put forth by Kennedy in the majority opinion; in particular, that the colorado commissions board demonstrated a hostility towards religion in their application of the state anti-discrimination laws. The opinion even goes as far as to say that the ruling could have went the other way if the commission had more evenly applied the anti-discrimination laws in past cases. Further, I agree with the reasoning that suggests forcing the baker to create a bespoke cake-to-order is a form of artistic expression and should be protected by the first amendment and that his speech should not be compelled. However, the baker in this case specifically argued that homosexuals should be prohibited even from purchasing pre-made off-the-shelf cakes that were not made-to-order. This clearly crosses the line into discrimination of a protected class, so in my view he ultimately got away on a technicality, but the SCOTUS had no choice. > either it´s mere PR move and I despise that type of behavior If it's "a mere PR move" then who cares? CF is a private businesses and it's their prerogative to operate their business in a fashion that is beneficial to their PR image.

blockmarker 7y ago
>However, the baker in this case specifically argued that homosexuals should be prohibited even from purchasing pre-made off-the-shelf cakes that were not made-to-order. This clearly crosses the line into discrimination of a protected class, so in my view he ultimately got away on a technicality If political ideology was a protected class, would you be opposed to Cloudfare dropping 8chan?
- root_axis 7y ago
  I reject the idea that political ideology should be a protected class, but if it were, I would still support CF in this case since this ban was in response to acts of violence endorsed and enacted by the 8chan community, not as a blanket ban on all white supremacist content.
  - blockmarker 7y ago
    EDIT: Rewrote the comment a few times. It wasn't enacted by the 8chan community, it was enacted by the shooter only. And endorsed, well, I have seen many people on Reddit and Twitter who say that all Republicans are evil and should be killed, yet when Steve Scalise was shot, they weren't banned for their support of terrorism and assassination. The same principles you apply to your side should be applied to the other side.
    - root_axis 7y ago
      > It wasn't enacted by the 8chan community It was enacted by a member of the community and other members of the community voiced support for the acts before, during, and after the attacks. > I have seen many people on Reddit and Twitter who say that all Republicans are evil and should be killed You can find anyone saying anything anywhere on the internet, but it's very obvious to anyone who has actually used 8chan that it's a particularly toxic community that is generally friendly to violent ideologies.

blockmarker 7y ago

>However, the baker in this case specifically argued that homosexuals should be prohibited even from purchasing pre-made off-the-shelf cakes that were not made-to-order. This clearly crosses the line into discrimination of a protected class, so in my view he ultimately got away on a technicality If political ideology was a protected class, would you be opposed to Cloudfare dropping 8chan?

root_axis 7y ago
I reject the idea that political ideology should be a protected class, but if it were, I would still support CF in this case since this ban was in response to acts of violence endorsed and enacted by the 8chan community, not as a blanket ban on all white supremacist content.
- blockmarker 7y ago
  EDIT: Rewrote the comment a few times. It wasn't enacted by the 8chan community, it was enacted by the shooter only. And endorsed, well, I have seen many people on Reddit and Twitter who say that all Republicans are evil and should be killed, yet when Steve Scalise was shot, they weren't banned for their support of terrorism and assassination. The same principles you apply to your side should be applied to the other side.
  - root_axis 7y ago
    > It wasn't enacted by the 8chan community It was enacted by a member of the community and other members of the community voiced support for the acts before, during, and after the attacks. > I have seen many people on Reddit and Twitter who say that all Republicans are evil and should be killed You can find anyone saying anything anywhere on the internet, but it's very obvious to anyone who has actually used 8chan that it's a particularly toxic community that is generally friendly to violent ideologies.