Social Network Gab.com being threatened by GoDaddy: 24 hours to transfer or suspension

[domainguy50]

backstory: Gab is a social network alternative to twitter. their selling point is free speech (all speech is welcome, including what you believe might be hate speech.) which is basically is the first amendment. no unlawful material is allowed, but virtually any speech is. recently they purchased the "gab com" domain for $220k.

this site is very controversial as a result, with mainstream media outlets claiming it is popular with nazi and anti-semite messages. the site has 800,000 users and has experienced modest growth recently so it really isnt all bad hate speech. regardless, those disgusting messages on the site by some users are also lawful no matter how distasteful they are. as a result of these media attacks, (and the recent revelation that the synagogue shooter in pittsburgh yesterday had an active gab profile) gab is being unfairly targeted by smear campaigns online reporting the site as "a hate speech site" via email to gab's service providers.

gabs host (microsoft) revoked its contract with gab a few months ago

gabs payment providers (paypal and stripe) just revoked their services

just a few minutes ago, godaddy has said they will stop working with gab:
(i cant post the image or link idk why)
"BREAKING: Godaddy is threatening to suspend our domain (which is worth six figures) if we do not transfer to a new provider by tomorrow. This is madness."

the complexity of the situation is compounded by the fact that Gab is on a payment plan to fully own the domain since they recently purchased it. the broker/escrow agent control this which makes it even more difficult for the company to transfer to a new registrar by EOD tomorrow.

I understand that Godaddy is a private business and its clauses may allow it to do this, but this seems extreme overreaction. "24 hours to transfer or else" is a very menacing way of doing business.

-if you were in charge of gab what would you do? create your own payment processor, host, and DNS? they got deplatformed quickly... i guess they could try to get an offshore Hosting company or invest in native hosting.

-what is the most "free speech" friendly DNS provider there is?

-is it fair for internet infrastructure companies to de-platform a small upstart social network because of controversial speech? or should companies like DNS and hosting should be regulated and allow any customer as long as it is lawful content being hosted.

 

[.X.]

Do you have data to the contrary?

do you??

 

[Internet.Domains]

do you??

I have already stated my desire to find and analyze data. I have seen no data and no facts to either support or vilify. For those that choose to vilify, where is the facts, the evidence?

 

[.X.]

Fucking A, I want to see it too, I also want the OP to answer my questions

 

[bmugford]

Do you have data to the contrary?

Well, that question makes absolutely no sense as I did not dispute the data itself.

I took what he said at face value and pointed out it was a "pretty rudimentary way to analyze data".
Which is true, as there is no frame of reference.

He is the one who presented the data then said "That means its likely the same amount on other social networks" without any further supporting data.

Brad

 

[domainguy50]

Well, that question makes absolutely no sense as I did not dispute the data itself.

I took what he said at face value and pointed out it was a "pretty rudimentary way to analyze data".
Which is true, as there is no frame of reference.

He is the one who presented the data then said "That means its likely the same amount on other social networks" without any further supporting data.

Brad

why is it rudimentary? What other words would describe anti-Semitic sentiment? There really aren't as many words as you think there are.

What exactly would you have done differently? Keep in mind it was a professional data analyst that did the work you're calling rudimentary

 

[JB Lions]

Well, here are all kinds of stats. Top 20 users, top 20 words used in descriptions etc.:

http://www0.cs.ucl.ac.uk/staff/G.Stringhini/papers/gab-CYBERSAFETY2018.pdf

"By looking at the posts for hate words, we also found that 5.4% of
the posts include hate words"

Just a brief look at the Top 20 by number of followers, it looks like everyone is to the right.

 

[.X.]

Well, here are all kinds of stats. Top 20 users, top 20 words used in descriptions etc.:

http://www0.cs.ucl.ac.uk/staff/G.Stringhini/papers/gab-CYBERSAFETY2018.pdf

"By looking at the posts for hate words, we also found that 5.4% of
the posts include hate words"

Perfect JB, Thank You!

 

[domainguy50]

Well, here are all kinds of stats. Top 20 users, top 20 words used in descriptions
"By looking at the posts for hate words, we also found that 5.4% of
the posts include hate words"

Few things to note:

1. That study ended in january. Gab has had extensive growth since then, incl from many users in countries like Brazil and kenya. That would mean the percentage is outdated & wrong now

2. How do they define "hate word?" I remember many businesses consider "maga" to be a hate word and they'll ban patrons for wearing the maga hat. Couldn't find their definition of hate word. Let me know if you find the list of what they consider hate (it doesn't exist). but it Seems arbitrary. subjective and ambiguous.

 

[JB Lions]

Few things to note:

1. That study ended in january. Gab has had extensive growth since then, incl from many users in countries like Brazil and kenya. That would mean the percentage is outdated & wrong now

2. How do they define "hate word?" I remember many businesses consider "maga" to be a hate word and they'll ban patrons for wearing the maga hat. Couldn't find their definition of hate word. Let me know if you find the list of what they consider hate (it doesn't exist). but it Seems arbitrary. subjective and ambiguous.

So are you a mod or something there? Since you seem to know the inner workings of the place. And you go with the information at hand. If you have something more current, post it. But do you really think the top 20 has changed and all of a sudden it's not a right leaning place anymore? Why? Simply look at the top 20 in number of followers, it seems pretty clear to me. It's not like things have calmed down this year in that aspect, if anything, gotten worse.

 

[.X.]

@domainguy50 are you going to answer my questions or no? are you a member or affiliated with Gab.com?? why didn't you just use your regular account??

 

[domainguy50]

So are you a mod or something there? Since you seem to know the inner workings of the place. And you go with the information at hand. If you have something more current, post it. But do you really think the top 20 has changed and all of a sudden it's not a right leaning place anymore? Why? Simply look at the top 20 in number of followers, it seems pretty clear to me.

Why does it matter if the majority of the top users is right leaning? what are you Trying to get at?

 

[JB Lions]

Why does it matter if the majority of the top users is right leaning? what are you Trying to get at?

It's kind of trying to sell itself as a free speech hangout for everybody and in the sense that anybody can join that may be true but look at the ones with the most followers. All right wing. Even Anglin was posting on his site about it.

"We collect and analyze 22M posts produced by 336K users between August 2016
and January 2018, finding that Gab is predominantly used for the
dissemination and discussion of news and world events, and that it
attracts alt-right users, conspiracy theorists, and other trolls. We
also measure the prevalence of hate speech on the platform, finding
it to be much higher than Twitter, but lower than 4chan’s Politicall Incorrect board."

 

[domainguy50]

@domainguy50 are you going to answer my questions or no? are you a member or affiliated with Gab.com?? why didn't you just use your regular account??

I already said I’m a member of gab

You haven’t answered whether you’ll move out of the US, the country that "gives a platform to hate speech" by granting "hate speech" special civil protections by the constitution. You said you won't condone hate speech platforms but you seem to condone it by paying taxes to a government that gives it special protections that many other countries don't give it.

 

[Internet.Domains]

Well, that question makes absolutely no sense as I did not dispute the data itself.

I took what he said at face value and pointed out it was a "pretty rudimentary way to analyze data".
Which is true, as there is no frame of reference.

He is the one who presented the data then said "That means its likely the same amount on other social networks" without any further supporting data.

Brad

How does asking for data "make no sense"? I wasn't trying to disprove anything, I am legitimately asking for some sort of evidence showing that the Gab platform is what you and others say.

Where's the proof, the facts, the evidence?

I ask in a non emotional context and only in an analytical form with no judgment in either direction. If that makes "no sense" to you than so be it.

 

[domainguy50]

It's kind of trying to sell itself as a free speech hangout for everybody and in the sense that anybody can join that may be true but look at the ones with the most followers. All right wing. Even Anglin was posting on his site about it.

"We collect and analyze 22M posts produced by 336K users between August 2016
and January 2018, finding that Gab is predominantly used for the
dissemination and discussion of news and world events, and that it
attracts alt-right users, conspiracy theorists, and other trolls. We
also measure the prevalence of hate speech on the platform, finding
it to be much higher than Twitter, but lower than 4chan’s Politicall Incorrect board."

Twitter in 2008 was 90% left-leaning users. This is a reasonable assumption Because The vast majority of twitters first users were tech workers based in san Francisco and silicon valley where it became popular (read the book "Hatching Twitter")

Did that 90% initial liberal userbase on twitter prevent conservatives from joining twitter? No.

So how is gab not a free speech hang out? There's nothing stopping left leaning users from joining gab, just like nothing stopped right leaning users to join twitter

 

[.X.]

Hell no I won't move out of my country, why would I ?? I told you I tolerate the stupid BS, I may not agree with it, But I tolerate it without incident, let freedom be.

My issue is the actions that took place, killing innocent people, that could have been avoided.

 

[JB Lions]

So how is gab not a free speech hang out?

I didn't say it wasn't, actually read my post. I said it seems mainly a hangout for the right.

"There's nothing stopping left leaning users from joining gab"

I know, but why would they? When they see some of the stuff that's posted there.

 

[domainguy50]

I didn't say it wasn't, actually read my post. I said it seems mainly a hangout for the right.

"There's nothing stopping left leaning users from joining gab"

Why would they? When they see some of the stuff that's posted there.

What stuff ? Like Sarah jeong wishing for genocide of white people via hundreds of messages posted over a span of 5 years (and getting a verification badge as a reward)? That wasn't on gab, that was on Twitter

 

[Internet.Domains]

I didn't say it wasn't, actually read my post. I said it seems mainly a hangout for the right.

"There's nothing stopping left leaning users from joining gab"

I know, but why would they? When they see some of the stuff that's posted there.

In all fairness, the same could be said vice versa.

Why would someone right leaning join Twitter or Facebook?

 

[bmugford]

How does asking for data "make no sense"? I wasn't trying to disprove anything, I am legitimately asking for some sort of evidence showing that the Gab platform is what you and others say.

Where's the proof, the facts, the evidence?

I ask in a non emotional context and only in an analytical form with no judgment in either direction. If that makes "no sense" to you than so be it.

I am not sure what you are having a hard time understanding. As I said I have never even visited Gab.

I took the data that was present at face value, whether true or not. Why would I have any data to the contrary as I am not disputing the data that was presented? That makes no sense.

The way it is analyzed has no frame of reference. I seriously doubt Facebook or Twitter has 2% of comments containing the same word list. Since the poster is the one who said "That means its likely the same amount on other social networks" the ball is in his court to provide the citation to back up that claim.

There is also no frame of reference in what was said in each post. Just using a word itself means very little out of context. Someone could use the terms in completely different context.

Brad

 

[JB Lions]

What stuff ? Like Sarah jeong wishing for genocide of white people for via hundreds of messages posted over a span of 5 years (and getting a verification badge as a reward)? That wasn't on gab, that was on Twitter

What stuff? The stuff I linked to at the beginning of the thread.

"that it attracts alt-right users, conspiracy theorists, and other trolls"

Why would they want to spend time with that? They can just hop on Twitter, FB, other places. Why go to some right leaning place?

 

[JB Lions]

Why would someone right leaning join Twitter or Facebook?

Because there is no shortage of right leaning people on those networks, actual volume. Ask them why they are there, it's pretty obvious.

 

[domainguy50]

What stuff? The stuff I linked to at the beginning of the thread.

"that it attracts alt-right users, conspiracy theorists, and other trolls"

Why would they want to spend time with that? They can just hop on Twitter, FB, other places. Why go to some right leaning place?

Sarah jeong said equal or worse racist stuff, and it didn't stop people from joining twitter. I saw her being celebrated by the left. They even hired her AFTER her racist messages went viral as an editorial board member at the new york times... I see zero reasons why the tolerant left wouldn't tolerate a free speech network that upholds constitutional free speech values online

 

[Internet.Domains]

I am not sure what you are having a hard time understanding. As I said I have never even visited Gab.

I took the data that was present at face value, whether true or not. Why would I have any data to the contrary as I am not disputing the data that was presented? That makes no sense.

The way it is analyzed has no frame of reference. I seriously doubt Facebook or Twitter has 2% of comments containing the same word list. Since the poster is the one who said "That means its likely the same amount on other social networks" the ball is in his court to provide the citation to back up that claim.

Brad

Apparently that makes two of us that is having a "hard time understanding".....

 

[JB Lions]

Sarah jeong said equal or worse stuff, and it didn't stop people from joining twitter. I saw her being celebrated by the left. They even hired her as an editorial board member at the new york times... I see zero reasons why the tolerant left wouldn't tolerate a free speech network that upholds constitutional free speech values online

Twitter has everybody on it, GAB is more right leaning. So why would it stop people from joining. They have a bigger audience.