4 ms·
Codeberg recently took down the repository for Wikiless project without any explanation to the project. It was only days after the project maintainer contacted
by forgotmypw17 4y ago
Codeberg recently took down the repository for Wikiless project without any explanation to the project.
It was only days after the project maintainer contacted them that they wrote something back about an IP complaint from Wikimedia foundation.
- YetAnotherNick 4y agoI really don't get why do every org do this. A simple mail about the takedown to the owner with few lines explaining the situation shouldn't be difficult, and I would say it is the best ROI to prevent PR damage like this.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- aliqot 4y agoAny service known for not proactively removing content will be overburdened as users from other services who submit 'complaint-generating' content will flock to your service. When people who submit these complaints don't feel like you acquiesced in their favor they will assemble and call you out. Your service will be known as a safe harbor for groups of ill repute and eventually you may be forced to shutter the service because you're now known as the person enabling groups of ill repute. I'm not saying it's right, I'm saying that's the cycle that history shows takes place. It seems effective at chilling the content in question and the service providers who serve it. Examples: voat, rumble, Nchan, Nch, parler, the list goes on.
- kmeisthax 4y agoIn this particular case - at least from the meager scraps of information I can gather - Wikiless was taken down on trademark infringement concerns, and the creator hasn't had the time to do the necessary modifications to properly debrand their fork. The general cycle of "abusive users look for platforms that look the other way, while non-abusive users insist on platforms that don't" still applies. But the concern is less "Nazi[0] bars" and more "The Pirate Bay". [0] FWIW I do not believe that it is possible to censor a Nazi.
- forgotmypw17 4y agoa) They just turned the page into a 404, without any notice about what had happened to the repo. b) They did not notify the repo owner, and took several days to respond. c) I realize that it's a relatively new service, and they may not have a lot of experience dealing with this type of thing
- YetAnotherNick 4y agoI am not saying don't remove content. I am saying that mailing 5 sentence reasoning would just take 5 minutes and would save lot of pain specially for complex and effort taking content like code repository where the volume of removal is likely less than handful per day.
- spookie 4y agoWikiless isn't any of that, though?
- ipaddr 4y agoTaking down content immediately based on one party making a claim is ripe to be abused. Take down the wrong person and masses will gather and call you out as well. This site has a question mark after they did this. Just based on that information I wouldn't rush to this service because someone will have an easier time shutting the project down here than elsewhere
- aliqot 4y ago> Taking down content immediately based on one party making a claim is ripe to be abused. I absolutely agree, and in my opinion we already see this with DMCA.
- Egoist 4y agoContext: https://orenom.fi https://orenom.fi
- RamblingCTO 4y agoThank you, that's actually very important information. So it wasn't taken down, it was just set to private: > the repository has been made private (only contributors will be able to access the repo for now) Huge difference and imho quite ok until things are clear.
- forgotmypw17 4y agoWell, from the owner's perspective, it was marked private, without any additional communication. From a visitor's perspective, it just became a 404 page, also without explanation, so effectively taken down.
- RamblingCTO 4y agoI understand taken down as removed, but I can see that one could also define it as "unavailable".
- forgotmypw17 4y agoFrom a site visitor's perspective, what is the difference?