thrwaway1234567

6 ms·

1.
by thrwaway1234567 2y ago
>(b) No person may knowingly and intentionally disclose, cause to be disclosed or threaten to disclose, with the intent to harass, intimidate, threaten, humiliate, embarrass, or coerce, an image of another which shows the intimate parts
2.
by thrwaway1234567 2y ago
It's like I explained above. It's safe to assume they don't care that much about free speech, because Null has banned people for dissent. An example: https://ghostarchive.org/archive/JcaLQ I don't t
3.
by thrwaway1234567 2y ago
>He doesn't allow doxxing out of a commitment to free speech. To rephrase that sentence: Free speech isn't the reason he allows doxing on the forum.
4.
by thrwaway1234567 2y ago
He also hasn't lost any cases yet. Other than Melinda Scott, all the other lawsuits against him are ongoing.
5.
by thrwaway1234567 2y ago
Service providers have already been policing websites. It didn't start with kiwifarms. If you go on twitter and look at the profiles of registrars like namecheap, you'll often see them stating they will drop service to websites
6.
by thrwaway1234567 2y ago
>imo some sort of safe harbor mechanism is a reasonable compromise. we can't expect the host to prevent every single instance of abusive content, but we should require them to make some kind of reasonable effort. I'd say Kiwifa
7.
by thrwaway1234567 2y ago
> Well for starters that Kiwifarms killed Byuu. There is no evidence that it was bullying or harassment from kiwi farms that caused his him to commit suicide. Byuu/Near is the one who blames kiwifarms in their suicide note on twitte
8.
by 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 b
9.
by thrwaway1234567 2y ago
>In other words, an open internet. Doxxing is not illegal if your intent is not considered harassment or threatening (if it's just for "public shame" or ridicule, that's allowed). If the website or Josh's conduct
10.
by thrwaway1234567 2y ago
I don't think he'd qualify for the good faith moderation mentioned in section 230. He's only won cases against Melinda Scott.
11.
by thrwaway1234567 2y ago
What unfounded allegations about the site have been allowed?
12.
by thrwaway1234567 2y ago
Some of the examples are rather recent, and there's no evidence of the site's behavior changing. The point is that the site has allowed harassment, contrary to what the owner claims. How have the complaints against him been tortio
13.
by thrwaway1234567 2y ago
That page I linked lists all of the laws in the usa about revenge porn. Kiwifarms isn't based in nevada as far as I am aware, I believe it's west virginia or florida.
14.
by thrwaway1234567 2y ago
It's archived links to things the owner of the site has said. Instead of complaining about keffals, why don't you address the complains there.
15.
by thrwaway1234567 2y ago
>Revenge porn isn't generally illegal to post. Posting pornography as revenge is the illegal bit, generally speaking. IIRC, there are laws against sharing revenge porn in 48 states. They don't require you to be the person it wa
16.
by thrwaway1234567 2y ago
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/09/03/kiwifar... Her Social security number was posted on KF, and this is something that came up in her leaked complaint emails.
17.
by thrwaway1234567 2y ago
I assume part of the confusion that people have is that kiwifarms harassment is not (always) blatantly obvious. Most of the time, they don't outright say "go harass this person" (unlike other sites). The users claim they have
18.
by thrwaway1234567 2y ago
Plenty of that stuff is more recent. >He's fine with stolen credit card and social security numbers being posted to the forum: https://archive.fo/rOKai That is from last year. But I accidentally posted the wrong arc
19.
by 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 camp
20.
by thrwaway1234567 2y ago
Some news articles about kiwifarms might get a few minor details wrong. I've seen one mix up the timeline of the site's founding. But they describe the site's content accurately. The wikipedia article for kiwifarms seems fair
21.
by thrwaway1234567 2y ago
There are things on the website aren't legal speech or are at least legally questionable. Harassment is illegal for one. The owner is fine with revenge porn being posted, and this has gotten him blocked by some hosts. He's also s
22.
by thrwaway1234567 2y ago
Kiwifarms and it's owner are well known to be transphobic. They have a subforum specifically for making fun of transgender people. Aside from what you mentioned in regards to the court case, there's plenty of other issue with kiwi
23.
by thrwaway1234567 2y ago
He's somewhat misrepresenting the content of his forums: https://old.reddit.com/r/keffals/comments/1bkp9my/proof_kf_h... Keep that in mind when discussing how kiwifarms relates to the open internet
24.
by thrwaway1234567 3y ago
I disagree with certain statements the article made. Null, the site's admin, didn't merely post the text and email conversation of the copyright claim after refusing to take down the material, he also insults and mocks the person
25.
by thrwaway1234567 3y ago
I disagree with certain statements the article made. Null, the site's admin, didn't merely post the text and email conversation of the copyright claim, he also insults and mocks the person involved. Null also stated that "In
26.
Kiwi Farms ruling sets "dubious" copyright precedent, expert warns(arstechnica.com)
8 points by thrwaway1234567 3y ago|2 comments
27.
by thrwaway1234567 3y ago
Null, the admin of the site, outright said he was ok with users posting stolen financial information, such as Social Security Numbers and Credit card numbers. Source: https://archive.is/0fOcS . There are other examples of p
28.
by thrwaway1234567 3y ago
They just bring up the unsympathetic ones as a defense for what they are doing. A lot of their targets are more sympathetic. For instance, the moderators have said they are ok with doxxing children: https://ghostarchive.org/
29.
by thrwaway1234567 3y ago
I think Kiwifarms is (borderline) criminal. Null, the admin of the site, outright said he was ok with users posting stolen financial information, such as Social Security Numbers and Credit cards. Source: https://archive.is/0
30.
by thrwaway1234567 3y ago
>a fairly small forum with a bunch of mean-spirited people telling mean-spirited "jokes". That is true, but that is only part of the story. If that was all, the website would not be so notorious. Kiwifarms, now banned, official

More ›