13 ms·
> How about this: try posting an URL for kiwifarms or stormfront or whatever right here, in this thread. See if it stays up. See who's willing to tolerate it.
by Cyberdog 4y ago
> How about this: try posting an URL for kiwifarms or stormfront or whatever right here, in this thread. See if it stays up. See who's willing to tolerate it.
Man, I almost did. But people just get so irrationally angry about words on the internet nowadays that I decided against tempting fate. I don't need people trying to destroy my career because I don't irrationally hate the right people right now.
Yes, Kiwi Farms exists and has information and opinions you might not like. It certainly has ones that I don't like. But at the end of the day, it's just words on the internet; the stuff about "organized harassment campaigns" and all that is a media lie. I really wish people would just visit the place and realize that it's just a bunch of shitposters with a clear "look, laugh, but don't touch" mentality and not the demonic bogeyman the press has made it out be. But I realize that irrational hatred is faster and easier, so…
- dale_glass 4y ago> I don't need people trying to destroy my career because I don't irrationally hate the right people right now. You don't "irrationally" hate them probably because you happen not to fit the target profile. EDIT: And are you serious? You truly think that KiwiFarms is a quirky, harmless place that just collects info to do nothing with it, and at the same time believe that on HN you'd be targeted by people who'd try to ruin your life? What force keeps such nasty people off kiwifarms but allows their presence here, I wonder? > Yes, Kiwi Farms exists and has information and opinions you might not like. It certainly has ones that I don't like. But at the end of the day, it's just words on the internet; There's no such thing as "just words on the internet". Words express beliefs and intent. I take them seriously. > the stuff about "organized harassment campaigns" and all that is a media lie. Of course. The sort of people that compile elaborate profiles on people including personal information are some sort of enlightened beings that despite obsessively tracking down and compiling every embarrassing or weird thing about another person would never actually use that information for anything at all.
- haroldp 4y ago> There's no such thing as "just words on the internet". Words express beliefs and intent. I take them seriously. How do you decide which words people should be allowed to read, and which words they should not be allowed to read?
- dale_glass 4y agoI wasn't talking about that, but since you asked: My personal views and morals, just like everyone else. If you're on something I host, then I make the rules on my property.
- haroldp 4y agoSo immoral things should be excised from wikipedia?
- dale_glass 4y agoThat's for Wikipedia to decide. I'm not a member.
- haroldp 4y agoBut if you owned wikipedia, you feel it would be best to remove immoral things from it?
- dale_glass 4y agoDepends on what you mean. If you mean documenting its existence, then no, because we have to learn from history. So I wouldn't have an issue with an article on antisemitism or the like. But if I found out that something I own actually helps Nazis, then yes, I'd do my best to stop that from happening. If I suddenly ended up owning Stormfront or Kiwifarms, I would absolutely pull the plug and burn it all to the ground with no warning.
- 4y ago
- Cyberdog 4y agoOh, God, I'm being dragged into this debate again. > There's no such thing as "just words on the internet". Words express beliefs and intent. I take them seriously. Intent? Find me a post on KF stating intent to harm someone in real life which wasn't either downvoted or promptly deleted. Go ahead. > Of course. The sort of people that compile elaborate profiles on people including personal information are some sort of enlightened beings that despite obsessively tracking down and compiling every embarrassing or weird thing about another person would never actually use that information for anything at all. Create an alt account on KF and post in a lolcow's thread saying that you want to harm that person in real life. You'll be downvoted into oblivion, probably banned, possibly doxed if you used the same username as you use elsewhere, and possibly reported to law enforcement. You can believe what you're told by people with motivation to lie, or you can discover the truth. Up to you.
- howenterprisey 4y agoThey post contact information, links to profiles where the user can be contacted, and so on, right? If so, they're complicit in whatever people do with that information, even if they don't talk about it on the forums.
- haroldp 4y agoI think that is a fair line of reasoning. Most online forums have rules against doxing. Then again, most online forums have problems with anonymous users making false claims. Is wikipedia likewise complicit for publishing articles on nefarious topics? How about linking to macdonalds.com, who is surely complicit in more deaths than kiwifarms?
- howenterprisey 4y agoSure, it's also complicit, but the cost-benefit analysis favors Wikipedia, whereas KF has a much higher bar of utlity to clear because it's publishing information that would be trivial to use to hurt specific individuals. What value could KF provide that's worth that pain? I don't think there's any.
- LastTrain 4y agoHey when you think that everyone else is being irrational guess what?