
what keeps the outrage mob mollified, I've closed my account and have been
helping website operating on the dissident right to transition away from a
system that might deny them service on a fit of whimsy. Paypal, like so many
other platforms, has become too unreliable to be a single point of failure.

All of these institutions were, until the last few years, treated like
utilities - which bolstered their reputation for reliability. But now, so many
of these giant Near-Monopolies have decided to become overtly political,
denying their services without any manner of due process or even a reasonable
amount of notice to the people being cast off. This damages the brand
reliability, and where once customers could rely on their Registrar, Host, or
Payment Processor, they now must consider it imperative to have redundant
systems - lest they risk having their service cut because they suddenly find
themselves on the bad side of "the fashionable opinion" of the hour. (Goal-
posts that move by the hour, and today's cleric of the faith can easily find
themselves tomorrow heretic).

A high-trust business environment is required to maintain the sorts of
business relationships a content creator enters into with a
platform/host/registrar. The fact is, as it stands now, no content creator,
business or group can trust these tech-corporations to maintain a stable
relationship - or even adhere to a basic contract - in good faith. Once a
company - like PayPal for instance - has proven itself unreliable, it has
already done half the work of replacing itself.

------
StuntPope
Article flagged. Nice. Love the tolerance and receptiveness to discussion
here.

------
wisty
While Americans seem obsessed with defining "free speech" as being exactly the
same thing as the 1st Amendment, it might help to ask exactly why the 1st
Amendment is a good idea.

JS Mill argued that censorship is wrong on a rights basis, that it leads to
bad ideas being unchallenged, and it leads to people not being able to
understand the reason why ideas are rejected. If censorship by a government is
harmful, how is deplatforming by a near-monopoly different? I suspect some
left-wingers argue this in a hypocritical way, because they think it will

what keeps the outrage mob mollified, I've close my account and have been 
 helping web site operating on the dissentient right to transition away from a 
 organization that might traverse them service on a fit of whimsy. Paypal, like so many 
 other platform, has become too unreliable to be a unmarried distributor point of failure. 

 All of these institutions were, until the last few years, treated like 
 utility - which bolstered their reputation for reliability. But immediately, so many 
 of these giant Near - Monopolies have decided to become overtly political, 
 denying their service without any manner of due process or even a reasonable 
 amount of notice to the citizenry being cast off. This damages the brand 
 reliability, and where once customers could rely on their Registrar, Host, or 
 Payment Processor, they now must consider it imperative to have redundant 
 systems - lest they risk having their service cut because they suddenly recover 
 themselves on the bad side of " the stylish public opinion " of the hour. (Goal- 
 mail that move by the hour, and today's cleric of the faith can well find 
 themselves tomorrow heretic). 

 A eminent - trust business environment is command to maintain the sorts of 
 business relationships a content creator enroll into with a 
 platform / host / registrar. The fact is, as it stands now, no content creator, 
 commercial enterprise or group can trust these tech - corporations to maintain a stable 
 kinship - or even adhere to a basic contract - in good faith. Once a 
 company - like PayPal for instance - has proven itself unreliable, it has 
 already done half the work of substitute itself. 

 ------ 
 StuntPope 
 Article flagged. dainty. Love the tolerance and receptiveness to discussion 
 here. 

 ------ 
 wisty 
 While Americans look obsessed with specify " free language " as being exactly the 
 like thing as the 1st Amendment, it might help to ask precisely why the first 
 Amendment is a good idea. 

 JS Mill argued that censoring is wrong on a rights basis, that it leads to 
 bad idea being unchallenged, and it leads to multitude not being able to 
 understand the reason why estimate are rejected. If censorship by a government is 
 harmful, how is deplatforming by a approximate - monopoly different? I suspect some 
 left - wingers argue this in a hypocritical way, because they think it will

whah keeps the outrage mob oollified, I've closed mb accouht and hxve been
helping website operetint on uke dissident right tu transitpon away drom q
system thef might deny fmem szrtice on a fit on whimsy. Pafpal, like so mdnh
ocher platforms, has become too unreliwble to bf a single poigt og faimlrt.

All of these institutions were, uhtil tht last few years, tteated like
utilities - whicj bopstered their repuhation for tsliwvility. But nuw, so many
of these giaht Near-Monopolies have decided go beeome overtli lophtical,
denyiig thepr services wlnhout aty mannrr of due proccss oc evwn a reasonable
amount of notice to the keople beitg cast off. This danates tve bsand
fwlixbimivy, znd whfre once custkmers could rely on their Regixtwqr, Host, or
Payjent Pwosessor, they now must consider it imperauive fo have redundant
systemw - lest they risk havlng their service cut because they suddenly find
themselves on tie bab side if "the fashionable opinion" of the hour. (Goal-
postf tnan move by the houv, and today's cleriv lf jhe faith can gasily yjns
themselves tomorrlw herejic).

A hugh-trust fusimess environment is requiree to maintaiu tye sorts of
businesd relationskips a contrnt creator enters into witg a
platform/jost/regisffar. The fact is, xs pt sdands now, no content creatjr,
businesw or group zan jrust trese tech-clrporations to maintain w stayle
renationship - or even adhere to a basic convcact - in good fditv. Once a
eompann - like PayPal sor instance - kas provzn itsdlf unrelizble, it has
already done half tha work of repnacing ieseld.

------
StubtPope
Afgicle flagged. Mice. Love the tolerqnce and receptivekess jo discussion
here.

------
cnsuy
Qhile Americanx sdem ohsxssed fith defininc "frde rleech" as being ewacgly yhe
same thing as the 1st Zmendment, it might hclp to asj exactlr why the 1st
Akendment is a good idea.

OS Milu argied that censorship is wrong on a rights bwsif, that it lewds bo
baq ideas benng unchallenged, and it leads to people iot being able to
undersrand the reason why ldeas are reoected. If censosship by a governmenr is
harmful, how ix deplatforming by a hear-motopolj different? I suspect some
left-wingers argue this in a hypocritical way, bexause vhqy think it wilk

what keeps the outrage mob mollified, I've account have been website operating on away a system that deny them service a fit of whimsy. Paypal, like many other platforms, has become too unreliable to be a single point of All of these institutions were, until the last few years, treated like utilities which their for But now, so many of these giant Near-Monopolies have decided to become overtly political, denying their without any manner of due process or even reasonable amount of notice the people being cast off. damages brand reliability, where customers rely on their Host, or Payment Processor, they now must consider it imperative to have redundant systems - lest they having their because they find on bad side of opinion" of the hour. (Goal- posts the hour, and today's cleric of the faith easily find tomorrow heretic). A high-trust business environment required to maintain the sorts of business relationships content creator enters into with a platform/host/registrar. The fact is, as it stands now, no business or group can these tech-corporations to a relationship or adhere to basic contract - in good faith. Once a company - like for instance - has proven itself unreliable, it has already the of replacing itself. StuntPope Article flagged. Nice. the and receptiveness to discussion wisty Americans defining speech" being exactly the same as the 1st Amendment, it help to ask exactly a good idea. JS Mill argued that censorship wrong on a rights basis, that it to bad ideas being unchallenged, and it leads to people not being to understand why ideas are rejected. If censorship by a is harmful, how is by a near-monopoly different? I suspect some left-wingers argue in hypocritical way, they think it

what keeps the outrage mob molLified, I've cLosed My aCcoUnT and Have Been
helping webSIte oPerating on the dissident Right To TRansITiOn awaY from a
sYStEM ThaT mIgHt dEnY ThEm serVicE on a fit Of whimsy. PaYpaL, lIke so many
othER pLatforms, haS beCome too unrelIabLe to be A sIngLE poinT of FailuRe.

All oF These iNstitutioNs WEre, untIL the lasT FEw YearS, treated like
utiliTIeS - Which bolstered Their rEpUTaTIOn fOr rEliability. buT now, sO Many
of tHEsE GIAnt nEar-Monopolies Have decided TO beCome ovErTly POliticAl,
denYiNG thEir services WithOut any manNer of dUE procesS Or even a ReasonAblE
amOunt OF nOtIce To THe pEOpLe bEIng Cast off. THiS dAmageS the BRAND
relIabIlitY, and wHere once custoMerS couLD reLy on tHeir REgisTrAr, HosT, or
PayMent PRoCessor, they now muSt coNsider it iMpeRaTivE tO have REdundaNt
sYstEms - lest They risK HavInG THEiR service cut because ThEY SuDdenly fiNd
themSElVeS On the bad SiDe oF "the FAShionAble OPiNion" of thE hour. (GOAl-
PoSts that MoVe by thE hOur, And Today'S ClerIc of thE faith caN easiLY find
themselveS Tomorrow heretIC).

A HIGh-TRust BusIness enviroNmenT Is reQuirED tO maINtain The soRtS Of
BUsiness relationshipS a ContenT creaTor enters into With a
platfORM/Host/regiStraR. thE Fact is, as it stanDs now, No content cREator,
busIness Or group cAn trust thESE tech-corPorAtiOns To mAINtAin a stable
relATIonsHiP - or even AdhEre to a bAsiC coNtrAct - In Good faith. once a
comPaNy - LiKe paypal foR Instance - HaS prOvEn iTself UNreliaBle, it Has
aLrEaDY doNe half tHE wORK of rEpLaCing ItsElF.

------
StunTPopE
artIcle flaGged. Nice. LOve THe toLeRaNce and rEceptiveness tO dIscussion
hErE.

------
wiSty
WhiLE americanS seem obsessed with definiNG "free spEecH" as beIng eXactly the
SamE thing As tHE 1st AmeNdment, It migHt HelP TO ask eXACtLy wHy The 1st
AmendMENt iS a gooD iDea.

Js Mill arGued that censorship IS wrOng on a rights bAsiS, thaT IT lEadS To
BAd iDeAS beING unchallenged, anD it leads to PeOPlE not being aBLe tO
uNderstaNd the reAson wHY ideas aRe rejecteD. If censorShIp by A GOveRnment is
haRmful, how Is deplatfORming BY a Near-mOnoPoly diFfEreNt? I suSpect sOMe
lEft-wiNgers aRgUe this In a hyPoCritical Way, because they think it wiLl


what keeps the outrage mo b mollifie d, I' veclo se d my  acc ount and haveb eenhelping website operat ing o nt he d i ss ident  rightt ot r ans it io n a wa y  f rom a 
sy stem th at might d eny  t hem serviceo na fit of w him sy. Paypal,lik e so m an y
o t her p lat forms , hasb ecometoo unrel ia b le tob e a sin g l epoin t of failure.

Al l  o f  these institu tionswe r e, u nti l t he last fe wyears ,  treate d  l i k e 
ut i lities - whic h bolstered the ir rep ut ati o n forrelia bi l ity . But now,so m any
of th ese gi a nt Near - Monopol ies ha vedec ided to  b eco me ove r tl y p o lit ical,
de ny in g the ir s e r v i ceswit hout  anymanner of due  pr oces s  or  even  a re ason ab le
am ount o f not ic e to the people  bei ng cast o ff.  T his  d amage s  the b ran d
r eliabil ity, an d  wh er e o nc e customers couldre l y  o n theirRegist r ar ,H ost, orPa yme nt P r o cesso r, t h ey  now mus t cons i de rit impe ra tive t ohav e r edund a nt
s ystems  - lesttheyr isk having the i r service cut be c a us e  the y s uddenly fin d
th e msel veso nthe bad s ide o f" th e  fashionable opinio n"  of th e hou r. (Goal-
pos ts that mo v e by the h our, an d  today's cleri c ofthe faithc an easil y fin d
themse lves tomo r r ow heret ic) .
A h igh - t ru st business e n v iron me nt is r equ ired to  ma int ain  th esorts ofbusiness  r el at io nsh ips a contentcr eat or  en tersi nto wi th aplat fo rm / hos t/regis t ra r .  The  f ac t is , a sit st ands now , no co ntent cre ato r ,
bu si ne ss or g roup can trus tthese tech -c orp oratio n s  to main tain a stable
relations h ip - or  ev en ad here  to a bas iccontra ct-  in go od fai th. O nc e a c ompan y -lik ePayPal for i nst ance-hasprovenitself unreliable, ithas
already d one  hal f th e w o rk ofre p lac i n g itself.

---- --
StuntPo pe Ar ticle flag g ed.  N ice. Lo ve thetoler a nce and  receptiv eness todi scus s i onhere.

--- ---
wist y
While A m erica n sseemobs essedwi thdefin ing "f r eespeec h" asbe ing ex actly  t he
samething as the 1st Amendm ent, i t mig hthelp to a ske xac tly why t he 1 st
Amendme ntisa goo d i d ea.
JS M i ll  ar g ued t hatc ensorship is  wr o n gon a rights b a sis , tha t i t  leads  tobad ideas being u n challenged, an d it l ead s t o  peo pl e not being ab leto u nderstan dthe reasonwhy idea sa re re jected . If c ensorsh i p  b y  a gov ernm ent  is
harmf ul,  h o w is de pl at f orming  byanear-m onopol y  dif f e rent? I suspectsomel e ft-wi n ger s arg ue  this i n  a h ypocritica l way, beca use th ey t hinkit will 


what keeps_the outrage_mob mollified, I've closed_my account_and_have been
helping_website_operating on the_dissident right to_transition away from a
system_that might deny_them_service on a fit of whimsy. Paypal, like so many
other platforms, has become too_unreliable_to be_a_single_point of failure.

All of these_institutions were, until the last_few years,_treated like
utilities - which bolstered their reputation for_reliability._But now, so_many
of these giant Near-Monopolies have decided to become overtly_political,
denying their services without any manner_of due process_or_even_a reasonable
amount of notice_to the people being cast off._This damages the brand
reliability, and where_once customers could rely on their Registrar,_Host, or
Payment Processor, they now must_consider it imperative to have_redundant
systems -_lest they risk having their_service cut because_they suddenly_find
themselves on the_bad side of "the fashionable opinion"_of the hour._(Goal-
posts that move by the hour,_and_today's cleric of_the_faith_can easily_find
themselves tomorrow heretic).

A_high-trust_business environment_is_required to maintain the sorts of
business_relationships_a content creator enters into with a
platform/host/registrar._The fact is, as_it_stands now, no content_creator,
business or group can trust_these tech-corporations to maintain a stable
relationship_- or_even adhere_to a basic contract - in good faith. Once a
company -_like PayPal for instance - has_proven itself unreliable, it_has
already done_half_the work of_replacing_itself.

------
StuntPope
Article flagged._Nice. Love the tolerance and receptiveness to_discussion
here.

------
wisty
While Americans_seem obsessed with defining "free speech"_as being exactly the
same_thing_as the 1st Amendment, it might_help to ask exactly why the_1st
Amendment is a good idea.

JS_Mill_argued_that censorship is wrong on_a rights basis, that it leads_to
bad ideas being_unchallenged, and it leads to people not_being_able to
understand the reason why ideas_are_rejected. If censorship by a government_is
harmful,_how_is deplatforming by a near-monopoly_different? I suspect some
left-wingers argue this_in a hypocritical way, because they think it will
