Thank you for the lead. Whether I like the sites they block or not, it's troubling to see vendors try to claim both sides of the section 230 legislation. Either be a content provider _OR_ a platform, not both.
Redefining "who should decide who gets to harass and dox people for fun" as "who should decide what you're allowed to read" is an interesting USA brainworm.
I vaguely remember there was some sort of system in place to investigate, evaluate and sanction criminal offenses such as harassment. Might have been the Cloudflare Trust and Safety team, I don't quite remember.
Sorry, no. Censorship is when the government decides what you are allowed to read. A private company that isn't legally discriminating can choose who to associate with.
Cloudflare has a history of caving to censorship demands, eg Kiwifarms
Thank you for the lead. Whether I like the sites they block or not, it's troubling to see vendors try to claim both sides of the section 230 legislation. Either be a content provider _OR_ a platform, not both.
Awe your poor doxing and harrassment website got shut down?
Who should decide what you're allowed to read?
Redefining "who should decide who gets to harass and dox people for fun" as "who should decide what you're allowed to read" is an interesting USA brainworm.
I vaguely remember there was some sort of system in place to investigate, evaluate and sanction criminal offenses such as harassment. Might have been the Cloudflare Trust and Safety team, I don't quite remember.
Well, if you knew the answer, why ask.
Me
That's actually the point. Censorship means someone else (not you) is deciding what you are allowed to read.
Sorry, no. Censorship is when the government decides what you are allowed to read. A private company that isn't legally discriminating can choose who to associate with.
Back in the day you could just send emails pretending to work at company XYZ and they would give you direct IP addresses.