Conversation

Replying to

and

It's you who doesn't do your research. I suggest reading twitter.com/DanielMicay/st. Cloudflare using content blocking lists from far right evangelical groups who consider LGBTQ content immoral and therefore 'adult content' is not a mistake by Cloudflare. They still use those lists.

Quote Tweet

Daniel Micay

@DanielMicay

Sep 2

I know several people working as software engineers at Cloudflare. According to one of them, this incident (blog.cloudflare.com/the-mistake-th) was hardly a mistake. Cloudflare is including block lists sourced from far right evangelical groups as part of their 'family friendly' DNS service.

Show this thread

This Tweet was deleted by the Tweet author. Learn more

Replying to

and

That blog post is about the 1.1.1.3 'family friendly' DNS service and has NOTHING TO DO with Cloudflare banning sex worker sites from using their DDoS protection service. Cloudflare banned sites like Switter from DDoS protection. Cloudflare doesn't ban Kiwi Farms from it.

Replying to

and

So, Daniel, what you are implying is that you want the Americans to revoke #Section230 of the Communications Decency Act so that platforms share liability for what their users say, so therefore then #Cloudflare can block them under Terms of Use?

en.wikipedia.org

Section 230 - Wikipedia

Replying to

and

Once again, you're making a completely disingenuous and dishonest argument. Kiwi Farms doesn't have an issue with moderation. It has plenty of moderation. Kiwi Farms actively organizes doxxing, harassment and libel campaigns against trans and autistic people. You're full of shit.

Replying to

and

> Kiwi Farms actively organizes doxxing, harassment and libel campaigns The platform company, and/or its officers? That sounds like something which - if proven - would be catastrophic for them.

Replying to

and

As I've stated previously, I strongly recommend that you actually visit the site and look at what they do there and the involvement of the admins / moderators of the site in doxxing and harassment campaigns. This is not something subjective and is very plainly visible there.

Replying to

and

> "the admins / moderators of the site" So, those are platform company officers? Paid? Contractual obligations, that sort of thing?

Replying to

and

The person who hosts the site directly engages in doxxing, harassment and libel campaigns. They've selected targets for people to harass themselves. When their site was having load issues they put up a page with a selection of targets and libel about them. Go look at the site.

Replying to

and

You're talking about this as if the issue is that they don't have enough moderation or choose not to moderate this content. The explicitly stated purpose of the site is doxxing and harassment campaigns. The owner/admin of the site is explicitly involved and encouraging that...

Replying to

and

Do you think it would be legal if someone in the US created a site about you posting your address, other personal information and the same for your extended family / friends along with a whole bunch of libel about all of you? You're arguing that's protected speech and legal.

10:03 PM · Sep 3, 2022Twitter Web App