4 ms·
I'm going on the article above. It alleges that crimes have been committed. If there is no crime that is great and they might have a reasonable claim to libel.
by xupybd 4y ago
I'm going on the article above. It alleges that crimes have been committed. If there is no crime that is great and they might have a reasonable claim to libel.
I guess my point is that any action against them should be for specific crimes committed by law enforcement. Not de-platforming by an angry mob. The nice thing about falling back on the justice system is you need to prove your claims. So if there is no crime here then there is no action required against Kiwi Farms. But if there is then there is a valid path to justice that doesn't involve the mob getting their way without any due process.
- HereIGoAgain 4y agoI get what you're saying now. Truly criminal actions should always be investigated and nobody should get favorites. It's funny how the people and media pushing these narratives here fail to mention the full logic of their arguments.. CF provides DDOS protection, they want KF to lose that protection so the DDOS attacks that are going on even now, take the site offline. That is literally the entire goal of this CF demand... To make the site susceptible to unquestionably illegal DDOS attacks which they know authorities don't and wouldn't lift a finger to stop/punish. You also have to remember where those claims are coming from.. Vice isn't exactly the most unbias or trustworthy source. Just barely above clickbait in quality and more overtly political on these types of issues.
- psyc 4y ago[dead]