3 ms·

They discuss this very thoughtfully in the blog post from when they kicked the daily stormer to the curb. https://blog.cloudflare.com/why-we-terminated-daily-s

• zemo 7y ago
  yes, a long post defending neutrality. What I'm accusing them of is exactly what this post espouses: that they think that neutrality is de facto virtuous no matter the stakes and no matter who is endangered, so I don't see how this post is counter to my claim that they would be neutral in the face of Sauron. > we have followed the law and remained content neutral as a network. This blog post essentially says "if Sauron wanted to set up shop to recruit and use our services, that would be fine unless Sauron said that we liked him, if we were under public pressure to drop him, or if it were literally illegal for us to front his network": > The tipping point for us making this decision was that the team behind Daily Stormer made the claim that we were secretly supporters of their ideology. It doesn't say "we would be opposed to Sauron using our services because he intends to enslave Middle-Earth and we don't think we should help him do that". I think that having no regard for the consequences of your actions reflects poorly on the tech industry. I don't think that being neutral is values-agnostic, I think that neutrality benefits the oppressive and those already in power, and that adhering to neutrality at all costs is a form of fundamentalism.