7 ms·

Hello - I am the author of this article. Yes, my choice of pronoun was deliberate. I will allow you to determine why. In regards to the litigation, your interp

Hello - I am the author of this article. Yes, my choice of pronoun was deliberate. I will allow you to determine why. In regards to the litigation, your interpretation is wrong. The main reason why the default was granted is that LFJ lied in the affidavits to the court. It was stated under penalty of perjury that the IPs were absolutely necessary for the site to be able to stay up. The site is still up and you may access it on the normal Internet with a normal browser. No IPs from Flow Chemical are in use. Therefore, LFJ's claims that the IPs were necessary are a lie. The other claim significant to the litigation is that I am unserviceable. That the need to sue Vincent was that there is no way to sue me. I am currently involved in two, soon three, separate ongoing civil litigations in the United States. My attorney's address can be found by a link present on every single page of the Kiwi Farms. Simply put, LFJ lied that there is no way to service me. Perhaps, if my website was Australian, it would be within the Court's jurisdiction to object to its contents and order it removed. Fortunately, it is American. I hope this helps.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
spondylosaurus 2y ago
[flagged]
- blastersyndrome 2y ago
  [flagged]
- sunflour_beans 2y ago
  Is there some great and noble reason to police people’s language?
- ChuckDeMar 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
    Im impressed by your psychic ability to read a person’s chromosomes just by looking at their face, cause if I saw them out of context I’d assume they were female.
    - byyll 2y ago
      > if I saw them out of context I’d assume they were female No need to be this much disingenuous, you can express support in other ways.
      - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
        I went to the article and looked at the profile pic. I don’t care a ton; if she didn’t pass I’d have made a different argument.
- retrolumi 2y ago
  It is an article about censorship. If someone in the USSR were writing an article about censorship, it would be in line with the articles themes to criticize the government. To make explicit the things being censored. It's the same here.
  - spondylosaurus 2y ago
    How is it anti-censorship to deliberately refer to someone incorrectly? If you call a pelican a seagull, I'm not censoring you if I tell you that it's actually a pelican. And if you continue to call it a pelican because you have a problem with seagulls and think they suck, I'm also not censoring you if I point out you're being a jerk. Free speech goes both ways!
    - lizthegray 2y ago
      [dead]
    - ldipj 2y ago
      This is more like a seagull that wants everyone to call it a pelican on the dubious basis that it claims to have a 'pelican identity', despite not actually being a pelican. There's nothing wrong with rejecting that demand and continuing to refer to it as a seagull, is there?
- rpmisms 2y ago
  My amusement at a HN user trying to teach Jersh a lesson by misgendering her is impossible to overstate. This is such a a collision of worlds.
johnny22 2y ago
It does not help or explain anything about the misgendering. If you fix that, then people might take it more seriously. At the moment it looks more like you have an axe to grind.
- ranger_danger 2y ago
  > it looks more like you have an axe to grind Well of course they do. The whole point of the argument is that LFJ is so hellbent on trying to take Josh's site down in any and all ways possible, every single day, continually for years, and people are letting them get away with it. They both have axes to grind with each other.
  - johnny22 2y ago
    Yes, but only one looks terrible while doing it and it's not Liz. I'll never take what this guy says seriously because of it.
    - ranger_danger 2y ago
      If you had swarms of people that wished you dead and did everything they could to mess with you for years and years, you'd get angry at people too. You may not agree with his conduct but I think he is still fighting a good fight nonetheless. It's not like he has fled the country for no good reason.
      - thrwaway1234567 2y ago
        If he just wanted kiwifarms to be a gossip forum he could have banned doxxing. He doesn't allow doxxing out of a commitment to free speech. The forum doesn't actually have that much free speech. If you criticize him you will get banned pretty fast. There isn't much transparency either. Banned users aren't marked as being banned. And bans are often done without public notification. So unlike most forums, you can't tell if someone has been banned.
        2y ago
thrwaway1234567 2y ago
In your article you state that kiwifarms has rules against harassment: >If I ask Google Gemini to describe the Kiwi Farms in a sentence, it tells me “a controversial web forum known for its users' online harassment and stalking campaigns against various individuals and communities”, despite the Kiwi Farms having explicit and enforced rules against contacting people off-site (i.e. harassment). Could you comment on the contradictory statements you have said elsewhere? Such as the ones where you admit that you turn a blind eye to harassment: https://old.reddit.com/r/keffals/comments/1bkp9my/proof_kf_harassed_people/ https://old.reddit.com/r/keffals/comments/1bkp9my/proof_kf_h... Why weren't these rules enforced against users such as "Not Based and Redpilled" when he hacked the game developer of Yandere Simulator? You were aware of it and described it as a violation of federal law. In fact, the only user who was punished was someone who criticized the hack: https://archive.is/dr0MR#10% https://archive.is/dr0MR#10%

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

spondylosaurus 2y ago

[flagged]

blastersyndrome 2y ago
[flagged]
sunflour_beans 2y ago
Is there some great and noble reason to police people’s language?
ChuckDeMar 2y ago
[flagged]
- BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
  Im impressed by your psychic ability to read a person’s chromosomes just by looking at their face, cause if I saw them out of context I’d assume they were female.
  - byyll 2y ago
    > if I saw them out of context I’d assume they were female No need to be this much disingenuous, you can express support in other ways.
    - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
      I went to the article and looked at the profile pic. I don’t care a ton; if she didn’t pass I’d have made a different argument.
retrolumi 2y ago
It is an article about censorship. If someone in the USSR were writing an article about censorship, it would be in line with the articles themes to criticize the government. To make explicit the things being censored. It's the same here.
- spondylosaurus 2y ago
  How is it anti-censorship to deliberately refer to someone incorrectly? If you call a pelican a seagull, I'm not censoring you if I tell you that it's actually a pelican. And if you continue to call it a pelican because you have a problem with seagulls and think they suck, I'm also not censoring you if I point out you're being a jerk. Free speech goes both ways!
  - lizthegray 2y ago
    [dead]
  - ldipj 2y ago
    This is more like a seagull that wants everyone to call it a pelican on the dubious basis that it claims to have a 'pelican identity', despite not actually being a pelican. There's nothing wrong with rejecting that demand and continuing to refer to it as a seagull, is there?
rpmisms 2y ago
My amusement at a HN user trying to teach Jersh a lesson by misgendering her is impossible to overstate. This is such a a collision of worlds.

johnny22 2y ago

It does not help or explain anything about the misgendering. If you fix that, then people might take it more seriously. At the moment it looks more like you have an axe to grind.

ranger_danger 2y ago
> it looks more like you have an axe to grind Well of course they do. The whole point of the argument is that LFJ is so hellbent on trying to take Josh's site down in any and all ways possible, every single day, continually for years, and people are letting them get away with it. They both have axes to grind with each other.
- johnny22 2y ago
  Yes, but only one looks terrible while doing it and it's not Liz. I'll never take what this guy says seriously because of it.
  - ranger_danger 2y ago
    If you had swarms of people that wished you dead and did everything they could to mess with you for years and years, you'd get angry at people too. You may not agree with his conduct but I think he is still fighting a good fight nonetheless. It's not like he has fled the country for no good reason.
    - thrwaway1234567 2y ago
      If he just wanted kiwifarms to be a gossip forum he could have banned doxxing. He doesn't allow doxxing out of a commitment to free speech. The forum doesn't actually have that much free speech. If you criticize him you will get banned pretty fast. There isn't much transparency either. Banned users aren't marked as being banned. And bans are often done without public notification. So unlike most forums, you can't tell if someone has been banned.
      - 2y ago

thrwaway1234567 2y ago

In your article you state that kiwifarms has rules against harassment: >If I ask Google Gemini to describe the Kiwi Farms in a sentence, it tells me “a controversial web forum known for its users' online harassment and stalking campaigns against various individuals and communities”, despite the Kiwi Farms having explicit and enforced rules against contacting people off-site (i.e. harassment). Could you comment on the contradictory statements you have said elsewhere? Such as the ones where you admit that you turn a blind eye to harassment: https://old.reddit.com/r/keffals/comments/1bkp9my/proof_kf_harassed_people/ https://old.reddit.com/r/keffals/comments/1bkp9my/proof_kf_h... Why weren't these rules enforced against users such as "Not Based and Redpilled" when he hacked the game developer of Yandere Simulator? You were aware of it and described it as a violation of federal law. In fact, the only user who was punished was someone who criticized the hack: https://archive.is/dr0MR#10% https://archive.is/dr0MR#10%