4 ms·

They want cloudflare to drop them so they can be DDoSed? Reading the related article I thought cloudflare was providing hosting or caching but it seems they ar

They want cloudflare to drop them so they can be DDoSed? Reading the related article I thought cloudflare was providing hosting or caching but it seems they are (or were) providing DDoS protection. Harassing Keffals is wrong. DDoS is wrong. Who’s right here?

colejohnson66 4y ago
KiwiFarms does more than just harass Keffals. Whether you agree with her views or not is irrelevant. At least 3 suicides have been caused by them. After the swatting incident, Keffals stayed in a hotel one night. KiwiFarms were able to track her down in a matter of hours. With nothing more than a photo on her Discord that happened to include the hotel bedsheets. Their vitriol isn’t something that you can just “grow thicker skin” against. These people will harass you until the day you die, and never give up.
- UncleEntity 4y ago
  So they will stop the harassment by DDoSing them? I’m not defending them and what they’re doing to Keffals is beyond wrong but what does this hope to accomplish? Dragging cloudflare through the mud might seem like a good idea until someone else whips up the twitter mob to get them to drop <random cause you support> so they can be DDoSed off the interwebs. Next time they pressure cloudflare they have a playbook to go off of to get what they want.
  - ironick09 4y ago
    Maybe you should actually read cloud flares blog post. Their decision to remove KF has nothing to do with the community pressuring them to remove KF, and everything to do with many credible, illegal threats of violence towards real people over the past two weeks since Cloudflare’s last blogpost on this situation.
  - miragecraft 4y ago
    It’s not some “cause”, it’s the base of operations for an online harassment group. And what playbook? Oh so Cloudflare decided to kick one site off now they “have to” kick everyone else off? Why? Are they legally obligated to? Cloudflare can decide to do whatever it wants on a case by case basis, it’s a business not a court. Precedents be damned.
  - arinlen 4y ago
    > I’m not defending them and what they’re doing to Keffals is beyond wrong but what does this hope to accomplish? The whole gay cakes debacle resulted in jurisprudence that supports the right of businesses to refuse service on the grounds of "a genuine objection in conscience".
- polski-g 4y ago

colejohnson66 4y ago

KiwiFarms does more than just harass Keffals. Whether you agree with her views or not is irrelevant. At least 3 suicides have been caused by them. After the swatting incident, Keffals stayed in a hotel one night. KiwiFarms were able to track her down in a matter of hours. With nothing more than a photo on her Discord that happened to include the hotel bedsheets. Their vitriol isn’t something that you can just “grow thicker skin” against. These people will harass you until the day you die, and never give up.

UncleEntity 4y ago
So they will stop the harassment by DDoSing them? I’m not defending them and what they’re doing to Keffals is beyond wrong but what does this hope to accomplish? Dragging cloudflare through the mud might seem like a good idea until someone else whips up the twitter mob to get them to drop <random cause you support> so they can be DDoSed off the interwebs. Next time they pressure cloudflare they have a playbook to go off of to get what they want.
- ironick09 4y ago
  Maybe you should actually read cloud flares blog post. Their decision to remove KF has nothing to do with the community pressuring them to remove KF, and everything to do with many credible, illegal threats of violence towards real people over the past two weeks since Cloudflare’s last blogpost on this situation.
- miragecraft 4y ago
  It’s not some “cause”, it’s the base of operations for an online harassment group. And what playbook? Oh so Cloudflare decided to kick one site off now they “have to” kick everyone else off? Why? Are they legally obligated to? Cloudflare can decide to do whatever it wants on a case by case basis, it’s a business not a court. Precedents be damned.
- arinlen 4y ago
  > I’m not defending them and what they’re doing to Keffals is beyond wrong but what does this hope to accomplish? The whole gay cakes debacle resulted in jurisprudence that supports the right of businesses to refuse service on the grounds of "a genuine objection in conscience".
polski-g 4y ago