[killyourcar]

Kiwi Farms has killed and swatted people and had resulted in many direct threats of violence to individuals. It's not really a slippery slope at all. All three sites are way, way beyond the pale.

Calling it harassment is like calling the moon a "space rock" - technically true I guess, but missing the magnitude.

[MockObject]

As someone who fears and despises Kiwi Farms, I would be dishonest if I didn't recognize the slippery slope certainty that the bar of acceptability would decrease over the next few years.

[killyourcar]

You realize the fallacy here, right? Terminating commercial agreements with three origins of stochastic terrorism is not some ratchet towards new speak. It's just three cases where Cloudflare decided that sheltering terrorism wasn't in their best interest.

[phpisthebest]

>stochastic terrorism

stochastic terrorism is new speak itself, if redefining inaction to be action, is it redefining silence to be violence, it transitioning from a society focuses on first party liability (i.e am i only responsible for my own actions not the actions of others) to a collectivist mentality of not only am I responsible for my own actions but for the actions of everyone connected to me

[killyourcar]

It's not new speak. It's a more accurate set of words to describe what we used to call "lone wolves". Stochastic means random, statistically measurable but not predictable.

The term "stochastic terrorism" means terror attacks like school shootings, swattings, and driving trucks into protestors that happen with a certain statistical likelihood, but whose individual events cannot be predicted.

[MockObject]

The phrase is the result of a slippery slope on the definition of "terrorism", which once referred to guerrilla groups driven by a religious or political ideology, to violent individuals lacking any ideology at all.

But the slippery slope I had in mind, however, was that once Cloudflare submits to the pressure of Keffals against this odious site, that precedent will be set, and then another pressure group will emerge targeting a slightly less odious site, etc.

[phpisthebest]

Citation. On the swatting I hope we are not believing MTG now.. that would be doubley ironic

Also there is a big difference between actions of people that also happen to be members of a website and activity taking place on the website. I abhor third party liability

In the case os 8chan and daily stormer they were banned for actions and content on the site. Not for actions of people that may be affiliated with the site as anonymous users

[killyourcar]

The London police arrested a trans activist and later apologized after she was targeted by kiwi farms.

https://london.ctvnews.ca/doxed-transgender-activist-twitch-...

There's one citation.

Byuu/Near, the author of the incredible bsnes project, was harassed to suicide by kiwi farms.

https://kotaku.com/the-brilliant-snes-emulator-creator-known...

The site posted the video and manifesto of the Christchurch shooting.

https://www.news.com.au/technology/online/website-kiwi-farms...

So there, three different citations that, themselves link out to other news and reputable primary sources showing the site, including the owner of the site, are involved in stochastic terrorism and, quote, "the exploitation of the mentally handicapped for amusement".

[phpisthebest]

>>The site posted the video and manifesto of the Christchurch shooting.

Ok, and? I 100% disagree with the active censorship around current events we see every day, from police shootings to terrorism people should be forced to confront the raw reality of the world not a candy coated version put through the filters of main stream media.

>So there, three different citations that,

No those are claims that do not really have a fact based narrative behind them, further even if the claims are taken at face value you are blaming the site for actions of people off the site that may be members, 3d party liability.

Going back to the 8Chan, and Daily Stormer they were banned for illegal content ON THE SITE, not because members of the site did things off that site.

Posting mean or even offensive things on a website should never be a bannable event, and to the extent people are taking actions offsite, or offline to the point of direct harassment, swatting etc those INDIVIDUALS should be criminally prosecuted for their own actions

[killyourcar]

Posting video of the Christchurch massacre is illegal.

And if you don't think the London police department didn't put out a fact based narrative about three swatting, you are straight up unwilling to engage in any sort of reasoned discussion, and are appealing purely to your emotional attachments to your ideals.

[phpisthebest]

>>Posting video of the Christchurch massacre is illegal.

Not in the US it is not.

>>if you don't think the London police department didn't put out a fact based narrative about three swatting,

Nothing in the London story has any comments from the police dept at all, it is all third party accounts by the target of the swatting who they claim with out evidence that it was a member of Kiwi Farms.

Even if that is true i bet that same person has a Twitter account, Facebook account, Reddit account, Amazon Account, and probably accounts at several other sites. Are we going to ban every site that a person commits a swatting has a membership at? or just the site that are small and do not align with your personal politics?

>appealing purely to your emotional attachments to your ideals

There is a lot of appeals to emotions when it comes to this story, I am not one of them, I have a firm principle stand in support for Free Speech to include speech that people find offensive or even "harmful" or "hateful".

[killyourcar]

The reason you aren't finding police comments is because you aren't looking.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/sorrenti-keffals-swatt...

The police confirm the swatting and confirm it was a mistake.