3 ms·
The hosting provider is free to decide who they want to host and who they don't want to host. If they're fine with being known for knowingly hosting the scum of
by proto_lambda 4y ago
The hosting provider is free to decide who they want to host and who they don't want to host. If they're fine with being known for knowingly hosting the scum of the earth, more power to them; but they are also absolutely allowed to nope out of that.
- nottorp 4y agoThat's the "ISPs are not common carriers" point of view. Tends to go away when their machine learning bans you for an unspecified reason.
- ElCheapo 4y agoThe christian bakery owner is free to decide who they want to make cakes for and who they don't want to make cakes for. If they're fine with being known for knowingly hosting the scum of the earth (homosexuals), more power to them; but they are also absolutely allowed to nope out of that.
- proto_lambda 4y agoNeonazis are not a protected class (or equivalent in your jurisdiction).
- ElCheapo 4y agoSo freedom of expression only applies to arbitrary "protected classes"? How about suing people who post illegal stuff and leaving the matter to the courts? Having to pay tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines will deter unlawful people more than having to change hosting provider every few years
- comfypotato 4y agoI think a classic rebuttal is "would you be OK with a bakery owner turning down people of color based on religion"? How is turning down homosexuals any different? Genuinely curious what your take is. I think the topic of the bakery owners is so widely known because of this. As the other reply said, and your discussion has continued: I believe that it ultimately comes down to what has "arbitrarily" been decided as a protected group. ("Arbitrarily" in quotes because it is ultimately the American political system in this case, and that's not really arbitrary.)