you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]filbs111 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (12 children)

If we did suppose that cloudflare has a consistently applied policy that has only ever been infringed 3 times, it would seem quite a big coincidence that the infringing post was made on kiwifarms so shortly after cloudflare had posted a blog about the site.

[–]Site_rly_sux 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

It's not a coincidence at all,.nobody is saying that it's a coincidence

https://blog.cloudflare.com/kiwifarms-blocked/

Beginning approximately two weeks ago, a pressure campaign started with the goal to deplatform Kiwifarms. That pressure campaign targeted Cloudflare as well as other providers utilized by the site

...

However, as the pressure campaign escalated, so did the rhetoric on the Kiwifarms site. Feeling attacked, users of the site became even more aggressive. Over the last two weeks, we have proactively reached out to law enforcement in multiple jurisdictions highlighting what we believe are potential criminal acts and imminent threats to human life that were posted to the site.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

This is what he means, look at this timeline. https://i.imgur.com/ChzaT89.jpg

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

You're the guy who believes search result pages are information which you can source in an argument. No wonder you fell for another image macro.

Here you are assuming that you and the kiwi admins are correct in the suspicion that you know what content cloudflare objected to. There's not even a tiny doubt that you might be wrong about which post a cloudflare exec saw in his private browsing?

Cloudflare already said they had been in touch with cops multiple times about worrying content.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You're the guy who believes search result pages are information which you can source in an argument.

I was trying to point you to some basic information gathering. There seems to be an issue at a basic level of you finding info and properly analyzing it. With a better technique you can improve your abilities, maybe, you might just be dumb.

Here you are assuming that you and the kiwi admins are correct in the suspicion that you know what content cloudflare objected to. There's not even a tiny doubt that you might be wrong about which post a cloudflare exec saw in his private browsing?

You're assuming the opposite and defending that stance with no evidence. 🤦‍♀️

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

basic information gathering

No buddy, we already covered this, I cannot make an extraordinary claim (like, your mom abused you) and tell you my proof lives in Google, or in the entire corpus of mankind's written word, that's not how it works

With a better technique you can improve your abilities

Oh ok - you think, that is how it works.

Okay, you are in an incestual relationship with your mom, and here's the proof

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=muskrat+mom

You're assuming the opposite and defending that stance with no evidence.

Yeah I have evidence and I already dropped a link in the post you replied to. It's the written word of the CEO and decision maker at cloudflare 🤦‍♀️

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

K buddy, have a good day.

[–]filbs111 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

I smell bullshit. They're incentivised to make a marketing story like that.

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

They have the same incentives all day every day but have only done it three times. That just doesn't make any sense. Why doesn't the same incentive apply to every other hate site?

And what marketing have they done? Where do you see adverts like "sign up for cloudflare, because we kicked out kiwifarms"

Now you're just making shit up

[–]filbs111 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

The people who want to prevent people communicating freely on sites like Kiwifarms are organised. The pressure exerted is not constant in time, nor aimed at everywhere at once.

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Ok let's see. So cloudflare kicked dailystormer for fairly obvious reasons. And 8kun after the Nth time a mass murderer used it to spread their manifesto.

So I don't think "The people who want to prevent people communicating freely on sites like Kiwifarms" were behind those two.

So, according to your theory, there's a group of organised people, who organise to prevent people from communicating freely on sites like kiwifarms, and their organisation has produced exactly one result so far, and it just so happens, that that one result was also up to murdery business. But that murdery business was unrelated to their removal from cloudflare, in your theory? Then why does the CEO write that it was precisely because of the co-happening murdery talk, and not because of this organised group?

Meanwhile this organised group, who in the history of their organisation have gotten precise one website kicked from cloudflare, happened to target a website which was already engaged in exactly the type of murdery talk which the CEO was watching and reporting to the cops. Wouldn't this organisation have gotten the exact same effect (of getting KF removed as a CF customer) by doing precisely nothing and just watching as the murder chat bothered the CEO enough to pull the plug?

Do you see how your theory makes zero sense? Why do we need to introduce some new organisation to the mix, when they're already doing enough murder-talk to get themselves removed? The removal is sufficiently explained by the murdery-chats and doesn't need some new theory about an organisation.

And wait - a few minutes ago you were really sure there was some marketing which CF had made which referenced KF? Where is this marketing? Did you forget that you had already made that theory? Are you walking it back? Why did you think there was some marketing?

[–]filbs111 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I make no claim of an organisation dedicated to attacking sites through cloudflare that is continually trying to do that. I claim that a push is being made now, by various "any means necessary" scumbags, some of whom may even think they are doing "the right thing", to deplatform, and now even erase from history, the site "Kiwi Farms".

Marketing is perhaps a misleading word. Optics, brand management may be more apt.

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I claim that a push is being made now, by various "any means necessary" scumbags, some of whom may even think they are doing "the right thing"

But the point you are missing is - reality is sufficiently explained without needing to posit that there is some group out there.

Even if this group does exist as you describe - they didn't need to do ANYTHING at all given the CF CEO was ALREADY watching and reporting murderous chat on KF....this group could have watched passively as the murder threats that KF naturally generates were alone enough to get them taken off CF