4 ms·

It would be outrageous for CloudFlare to cut off service to this company/organization or its members over simple allegations, or anything short of a court order

It would be outrageous for CloudFlare to cut off service to this company/organization or its members over simple allegations, or anything short of a court order, wouldn't it? Surely you can understand this?

mschuster91 4y ago
> It would be outrageous for CloudFlare to cut off service to this company/organization or its members over simple allegations The behavior of Kiwifarms and their users has been documented often and deep enough to say that this is no longer a "he said they said" territory.
- simiones 4y ago
  So if enough people believe OJ killed his ex-wife, we should shun him from society because it's no longer in "he said they said" territory? The rule of law and due process are important factors. While you are personally free to refuse your own business to anyone based on any criteria you like, demanding and expecting others to do so based on what is ultimately hearsay is pure entitlement.
  - mschuster91 4y ago
    It is not too much to expect of a dozens-of-billions-of-dollars worth multinational corporation to conduct an investigation based on that "hearsay" and to react on that investigation. Operating a global business does not absolve the business from the need to prevent harm caused by it, in fact some form of abuse management has been expected from any good Internet citizen since its inception, e.g. in Usenet [0] or e-mail in general [1]. Or for a real-life equivalent: if I were to stand outside of the home of a person and blaring into a megaphone that she deserve to die... I'd at least get the cops called on me for a noise violation or a harassment charge, and if I were to incite others or coordinate their behavior, I would get a conspiracy charge. Why should Internet trolls enjoy legal protection for the same behavior? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet_Death_Penalty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet_Death_Penalty [1] https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2142.txt https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2142.txt
    - simiones 4y ago
      > Or for a real-life equivalent: if I were to stand outside of the home of a person and blaring into a megaphone that she deserve to die... I'd at least get the cops called on me for a noise violation or a harassment charge, and if I were to incite others or coordinate their behavior, I would get a conspiracy charge. Why should Internet trolls enjoy legal protection for the same behavior? They shouldn't, but why would a coffee-shop down the street be held responsible for not serving them? This is the equivalent of what some people are asking of Cloudflare. I fully support people suing, or demanding the police or whoever is responsible investigate, KF. By most accounts, they are a horrible organization that are attacking and causing harm in the world. But we call the police when someone harasses us, we don't ask strangers to stop doing business with our harasser.
    - reset-password 4y ago
      > It is not too much to expect of a dozens-of-billions-of-dollars worth multinational corporation to conduct an investigation based on that "hearsay" and to react on that investigation. Who is to say that they haven't done this already? It's been almost an entire week - not taking action could be very well be the reaction. Albeit not the one you are hoping to see. They don't owe you or anyone an explanation and anything they state could just be turned around against them by the next angry Twitter mob next week. > Or for a real-life equivalent: if I were to stand outside of the home of a person and blaring into a megaphone No. That is not equivalent to what is happening here. It's more like a bunch of people making fun of someone in a backyard, with the subject frequently walking by, taking offense, and then calling for the offender's landlord to break their lease with the occupant for allowing mean things to be said. If someone in real life called the police over this they'd be laughed at and told to walk down a different street next time. > Why should Internet trolls enjoy legal protection for the same behavior? They don't. If an internet troll commits a crime then they have no special protection from prosecution. And on the civil side if an internet troll is posting untrue defamatory content then there is also recourse for the victim. In fact as far as the legal system is concerned, the call by "Keffals" to attempt to intentionally damage the business relationship that kiwifarms has with Cloudflare falls dangerously close to tortious interference [0] in the US and something similar in Canada. The owner of kiwifarms may even have a civil case against them. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference
  - terminatornet 4y ago
    you picked the absolute worst example. OJ 100% killed his wife.
    - cdelsolar 4y ago
      why didn't the glove fit
      - _-david-_ 4y ago
        Allegedly he didn't take some medication which caused his hand to swell up and not fit.
- psyc 4y ago
  It's been documented by very angry, frustrated people who feel personally attacked. I don't trust people with all of their own skin in the game to tell the truth. I expect them to say whatever they have to. People have been going after Kiwi Farms for at least 8 years now, relentlessly. Why can't any of these mobs turn all of this documentation into a court order? Kiwi Farms has been sued repeatedly, close to ten times I think. They're being sued right now. Every case but one has been thrown out immediately. That other one took 3 days to also be thrown out.
  - mschuster91 4y ago
    The problem is, similar with 4chan, 8chan and others, that being an asshole and literally bullying people to suicide is not illegal under US laws. The only thing that will lead to consequences on the Internet even in the US is anything relating to CSAM, drug and weapons trafficking, terrorism and evading US trade sanctions and financial regulations. Everything else, no matter how morally reprehensible or how illegal it is in every other civilized nation, is a free-for-all. The problem is, trolls always escalate their behavior if left unchecked - the best example is actually 4chan. Eventually the most notorious user base moved over to 8chan/8kun, and then Christchurch happened. Or they hound people so aggressively that they see no other option to escape than killing themselves, because the police can't help when hundreds of peopple call in pizzas, delivery services or the police themselves. Hell even moving away doesn't help, some stalkers doxxed Keffals from the linen pattern of her hotel bed, others have doxxed people based off on reflections in their window.
    - psyc 4y ago
      Ok. I don't think I disagree with anything you wrote. But you seem to just assume that "Kiwi Farms does/did such an such to so and so" is a fitting description of events that, just for example, a court of law would reach. And that hasn't been demonstrated. I'm well aware that your insinuations are considered documented facts among those on that side of the issue. But in the big picture, they're accusations, narratives, interpretations, assumptions, etc. Don't bother trying to persuade me it's fact - I've spent seven years and hundreds of hours closely and critically following many a Kiwi saga. I'm acquainted with volumes of details about how they operate over a long period of time. And I'm also well aware that my interpretation of why they do what they do will never be acceptable to at least 90% of the types of people who visit here, and the rest wouldn't get into that can of worms publicly, not even me. And just for the record, that's not me being crypto-anything. I am 100% NOT on board with the persecution of any half-decent person absolutely regardless of their identity, in the current colloquial use of "identity". But you lot would not accept my definition of "persecuted" either so there we are. What the hell was I trying to say... Oh. Yeah I really didn't want to get into the moral side, but I had to say a bit. What I really wanted to say here is simply that you will never hear one single word of protest from me if law enforcement ever investigates Lolcow LLC, charges, and convicts. Or any individual user for that matter. The admin himself has made it as clear as anyone can to his users that if they commit crimes he won't hesitate to hand over evidence if he has it. And as I said elsewhere, do not make the mistake of thinking that's some wink, wink, nudge joke to him. The guy is already tied up in litigation constantly and he doesn't enjoy it. I'm just sick and fucking tired of mob justice on the internet and in the media, and I am neither a pragmatist nor a consequentialist so to me the ends don't justify the means unless my own blood family are in the crosshairs. Sort it the fuck out legally, preferably without trashing the US Constitution.
tmottabr 4y ago
Why should it be outrageous?? When cloudflare accept provinding service to a customer they are linking their brand to whatever their customer do.. Should they not have the right to stop serving this customer if they are doing indirect damage to cloudflare business?? If someone get murdered because someone did something in a site hosted by cloudflare, sure cloudflare is not direct responsible for causing that murder but they do share the moral repercutions of it.. it sure get people asking, would that person not have being murded if cloudflare did not provide this site with the plataform they used to achieve this murder?? Having their brand linked to a site like this can be damaging to their brand\business\moral stance and they would be totally within their right to stop proving service for that.. as for the site/company/organization, cloudflare is not the only player around, if cloudflare stop providing service they can move somewhere else, they can even buy their own servers and host it themselves if no third-party hosting is willing to provide then services..
- Rufhfhs3747rhe7 4y ago
  I for one would stop using Cloudflare if they caved to the pressure and starting dropping clients based on some people being offended by their content. If you don't like a website, don't use it. Don't try to prevent others from using it.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- bauruine 4y ago
  >Having their brand linked to a site like this can be damaging to their brand\business\moral stance and they would be totally within their right to stop proving service for that.. Sure Cloudflare could drop them but the reason people want Kiwi Farms to loose Cloudflare is because they are DDoSing them. What is a DDoS protection worth if all it takes to circumvent it are a few people screeching on social media? >buy their own servers and host it themselves They are doing it already [0] [0]: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2021-10-28/where-sidewalk-ends-death-internet https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2021-10-28/where-sidewalk-end...

mschuster91 4y ago

> It would be outrageous for CloudFlare to cut off service to this company/organization or its members over simple allegations The behavior of Kiwifarms and their users has been documented often and deep enough to say that this is no longer a "he said they said" territory.

simiones 4y ago
So if enough people believe OJ killed his ex-wife, we should shun him from society because it's no longer in "he said they said" territory? The rule of law and due process are important factors. While you are personally free to refuse your own business to anyone based on any criteria you like, demanding and expecting others to do so based on what is ultimately hearsay is pure entitlement.
- mschuster91 4y ago
  It is not too much to expect of a dozens-of-billions-of-dollars worth multinational corporation to conduct an investigation based on that "hearsay" and to react on that investigation. Operating a global business does not absolve the business from the need to prevent harm caused by it, in fact some form of abuse management has been expected from any good Internet citizen since its inception, e.g. in Usenet [0] or e-mail in general [1]. Or for a real-life equivalent: if I were to stand outside of the home of a person and blaring into a megaphone that she deserve to die... I'd at least get the cops called on me for a noise violation or a harassment charge, and if I were to incite others or coordinate their behavior, I would get a conspiracy charge. Why should Internet trolls enjoy legal protection for the same behavior? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet_Death_Penalty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usenet_Death_Penalty [1] https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2142.txt https://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2142.txt
  - simiones 4y ago
    > Or for a real-life equivalent: if I were to stand outside of the home of a person and blaring into a megaphone that she deserve to die... I'd at least get the cops called on me for a noise violation or a harassment charge, and if I were to incite others or coordinate their behavior, I would get a conspiracy charge. Why should Internet trolls enjoy legal protection for the same behavior? They shouldn't, but why would a coffee-shop down the street be held responsible for not serving them? This is the equivalent of what some people are asking of Cloudflare. I fully support people suing, or demanding the police or whoever is responsible investigate, KF. By most accounts, they are a horrible organization that are attacking and causing harm in the world. But we call the police when someone harasses us, we don't ask strangers to stop doing business with our harasser.
  - reset-password 4y ago
    > It is not too much to expect of a dozens-of-billions-of-dollars worth multinational corporation to conduct an investigation based on that "hearsay" and to react on that investigation. Who is to say that they haven't done this already? It's been almost an entire week - not taking action could be very well be the reaction. Albeit not the one you are hoping to see. They don't owe you or anyone an explanation and anything they state could just be turned around against them by the next angry Twitter mob next week. > Or for a real-life equivalent: if I were to stand outside of the home of a person and blaring into a megaphone No. That is not equivalent to what is happening here. It's more like a bunch of people making fun of someone in a backyard, with the subject frequently walking by, taking offense, and then calling for the offender's landlord to break their lease with the occupant for allowing mean things to be said. If someone in real life called the police over this they'd be laughed at and told to walk down a different street next time. > Why should Internet trolls enjoy legal protection for the same behavior? They don't. If an internet troll commits a crime then they have no special protection from prosecution. And on the civil side if an internet troll is posting untrue defamatory content then there is also recourse for the victim. In fact as far as the legal system is concerned, the call by "Keffals" to attempt to intentionally damage the business relationship that kiwifarms has with Cloudflare falls dangerously close to tortious interference [0] in the US and something similar in Canada. The owner of kiwifarms may even have a civil case against them. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortious_interference
- terminatornet 4y ago
  you picked the absolute worst example. OJ 100% killed his wife.
  - cdelsolar 4y ago
    why didn't the glove fit
    - _-david-_ 4y ago
      Allegedly he didn't take some medication which caused his hand to swell up and not fit.
psyc 4y ago
It's been documented by very angry, frustrated people who feel personally attacked. I don't trust people with all of their own skin in the game to tell the truth. I expect them to say whatever they have to. People have been going after Kiwi Farms for at least 8 years now, relentlessly. Why can't any of these mobs turn all of this documentation into a court order? Kiwi Farms has been sued repeatedly, close to ten times I think. They're being sued right now. Every case but one has been thrown out immediately. That other one took 3 days to also be thrown out.
- mschuster91 4y ago
  The problem is, similar with 4chan, 8chan and others, that being an asshole and literally bullying people to suicide is not illegal under US laws. The only thing that will lead to consequences on the Internet even in the US is anything relating to CSAM, drug and weapons trafficking, terrorism and evading US trade sanctions and financial regulations. Everything else, no matter how morally reprehensible or how illegal it is in every other civilized nation, is a free-for-all. The problem is, trolls always escalate their behavior if left unchecked - the best example is actually 4chan. Eventually the most notorious user base moved over to 8chan/8kun, and then Christchurch happened. Or they hound people so aggressively that they see no other option to escape than killing themselves, because the police can't help when hundreds of peopple call in pizzas, delivery services or the police themselves. Hell even moving away doesn't help, some stalkers doxxed Keffals from the linen pattern of her hotel bed, others have doxxed people based off on reflections in their window.
  - psyc 4y ago
    Ok. I don't think I disagree with anything you wrote. But you seem to just assume that "Kiwi Farms does/did such an such to so and so" is a fitting description of events that, just for example, a court of law would reach. And that hasn't been demonstrated. I'm well aware that your insinuations are considered documented facts among those on that side of the issue. But in the big picture, they're accusations, narratives, interpretations, assumptions, etc. Don't bother trying to persuade me it's fact - I've spent seven years and hundreds of hours closely and critically following many a Kiwi saga. I'm acquainted with volumes of details about how they operate over a long period of time. And I'm also well aware that my interpretation of why they do what they do will never be acceptable to at least 90% of the types of people who visit here, and the rest wouldn't get into that can of worms publicly, not even me. And just for the record, that's not me being crypto-anything. I am 100% NOT on board with the persecution of any half-decent person absolutely regardless of their identity, in the current colloquial use of "identity". But you lot would not accept my definition of "persecuted" either so there we are. What the hell was I trying to say... Oh. Yeah I really didn't want to get into the moral side, but I had to say a bit. What I really wanted to say here is simply that you will never hear one single word of protest from me if law enforcement ever investigates Lolcow LLC, charges, and convicts. Or any individual user for that matter. The admin himself has made it as clear as anyone can to his users that if they commit crimes he won't hesitate to hand over evidence if he has it. And as I said elsewhere, do not make the mistake of thinking that's some wink, wink, nudge joke to him. The guy is already tied up in litigation constantly and he doesn't enjoy it. I'm just sick and fucking tired of mob justice on the internet and in the media, and I am neither a pragmatist nor a consequentialist so to me the ends don't justify the means unless my own blood family are in the crosshairs. Sort it the fuck out legally, preferably without trashing the US Constitution.

tmottabr 4y ago

Why should it be outrageous?? When cloudflare accept provinding service to a customer they are linking their brand to whatever their customer do.. Should they not have the right to stop serving this customer if they are doing indirect damage to cloudflare business?? If someone get murdered because someone did something in a site hosted by cloudflare, sure cloudflare is not direct responsible for causing that murder but they do share the moral repercutions of it.. it sure get people asking, would that person not have being murded if cloudflare did not provide this site with the plataform they used to achieve this murder?? Having their brand linked to a site like this can be damaging to their brand\business\moral stance and they would be totally within their right to stop proving service for that.. as for the site/company/organization, cloudflare is not the only player around, if cloudflare stop providing service they can move somewhere else, they can even buy their own servers and host it themselves if no third-party hosting is willing to provide then services..

Rufhfhs3747rhe7 4y ago
I for one would stop using Cloudflare if they caved to the pressure and starting dropping clients based on some people being offended by their content. If you don't like a website, don't use it. Don't try to prevent others from using it.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
bauruine 4y ago
>Having their brand linked to a site like this can be damaging to their brand\business\moral stance and they would be totally within their right to stop proving service for that.. Sure Cloudflare could drop them but the reason people want Kiwi Farms to loose Cloudflare is because they are DDoSing them. What is a DDoS protection worth if all it takes to circumvent it are a few people screeching on social media? >buy their own servers and host it themselves They are doing it already [0] [0]: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2021-10-28/where-sidewalk-ends-death-internet https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2021-10-28/where-sidewalk-end...