zlacker

[parent] [thread] 6 comments
1. syshum+(OP)[view] [source] 2019-05-05 00:52:36
Or you know you Piss off CloudFare CEO and he directs them to censor a site... Which has happened in the past
replies(2): >>fapjac+k1 >>zimmun+Ga
◧
2. fapjac+k1[view] [source] 2019-05-05 01:14:47
>>syshum+(OP)
Exactly. If it's not "the right kind" of content behind a domain, it doesn't even take a court order for CloudFlare to censor it.
replies(1): >>valkum+Pm
◧
3. zimmun+Ga[view] [source] 2019-05-05 03:56:02
>>syshum+(OP)
Can you cite any source on this?
replies(2): >>dlgeek+Dg >>syshum+Ai
◧◩
4. dlgeek+Dg[view] [source] [discussion] 2019-05-05 06:06:16
>>zimmun+Ga
It's a reference to https://www.businessinsider.com/the-daily-stormer-got-pushed...
◧◩
5. syshum+Ai[view] [source] [discussion] 2019-05-05 06:55:14
>>zimmun+Ga
https://blog.cloudflare.com/why-we-terminated-daily-stormer/
◧◩
6. valkum+Pm[view] [source] [discussion] 2019-05-05 08:39:32
>>fapjac+k1
that is not censorship.
replies(1): >>ddalex+gn
◧◩◪
7. ddalex+gn[view] [source] [discussion] 2019-05-05 08:53:28
>>valkum+Pm
No, it's not. However it breaks the trust in the Cloud Flares integrity they so proudly mention in this thread. Once they banned something, how can you trust them to not ban something else, perhaps a bit more silently next time?
[go to top]