IT.COM

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

NameSilo
Watch

domainguy50

Established Member
Impact
185
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.
 
Last edited:
6
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
This appears to be a "free speech issue". I am not sure you can put this aside.

Sure you can. Companies make decisions all the time based on their bottom line and how it will be effected.

Brad
 
1
•••
Sure you can. Companies make decisions all the time based on their bottom line and how it will be effected.

Brad
Regardless of their bottom line, they opened the can of worms. This is a free speech issue and it's a slippery slope here on out.
 
1
•••
Regardless of their bottom line, they opened the can of worms. This is a free speech issue and it's a slippery slope here on out.

For GD it probably is a business decision - the lost of reputation and loss of revenue for keeping it seems too high to them.

Freedom of speech could be an issue at domain level, at hosting level, at advertiser level - whether service providers are willing to carry the speech. Or at legal level - whether it violates applicable laws and any action results.

This is just the domain - the site can go to another domain, look at how the pirate bay changes domains.

You may be free to say what you like, up to a point, but not every platform has to carry you.

Complaints to advertisers have been known to destroy the business models of sites that many object to.
 
Last edited:
1
•••
Regardless of their bottom line, they opened the can of worms. This is a free speech issue and it's a slippery slope here on out.

Everything is a slippery slope. I don't really know enough about Gab.com in particular to say much about that. However in general, the "we are just the platform" argument only takes you so far. There have been multiple examples of where bad behavior has been shut down at platform level, such as the Silk Road for example.

Also, it is a free speech issue if a company does not want to do business with someone. If I am a printer should I be forced to make materials for the KKK? This is a much deeper debate though.

Brad
 
5
•••
Yup, certainly not a decision I would take lightly. However, sometimes the mainstream media echo-chamber goes too far in throwing out a baby with the bathwater, which is why I am willing to take a look and hear the guy out. The issue is one of precedent. If they can take down Gab because one nut publishes nutty content, then we have a problem.

It's not one nut. It's where to go for these types. Just a lot of companies are not going to associate with this type of stuff.Especially after what just happened. They'll probably just move to now.top, where the other one went.

https%3A%2F%2Fblueprint-api-production.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Fcard%2Fimage%2F872418%2Fbab718f6-a4f4-4ced-8dbe-cd675bac6ef9.png
 
Last edited:
0
•••
.
Yup, certainly not a decision I would take lightly. However, sometimes the mainstream media echo-chamber goes too far in throwing out a baby with the bathwater, which is why I am willing to take a look and hear the guy out. The issue is one of precedent. If they can take down Gab because one nut publishes nutty content, then we have a problem.
Gab relies on section 230 immunity for a large part. They also have a TOS with posting rules that gab says is virtually identical to twitters rules circa 2015 He had an interview with npr today that explains a lot about the site: twitter (dot)com/getongab/status/1056744525274566656?s=21
 
1
•••
. Gab relies on section 230 immunity for a large part. They also have a TOS with posting rules that gab says is virtually identical to twitters rules circa 2015 He had an interview with npr today that explains a lot about the site: twitter (dot)com/getongab/status/1056744525274566656?s=21
At this time GAB is on Twitter, so clearly not violating their terms.
 
0
•••
It's not one nut. It's where to go for these types. Just a lot of companies are not going to associate with this type of stuff.Especially after what just happened.
Its sad that american big tech companies won't side with Gab, so they're forced to go to an overseas country webhost company. Truly sad day in America when free speech is upheld by a Swedish web host because a webhost in san Francisco doesn't support it
 
3
•••
At this time GAB is on Twitter, so clearly not violating their terms.
I should have been clear,.
Everything is a slippery slope. I don't really know enough about Gab.com in particular to say much about that. However in general, the "we are just the platform" argument only takes you so far. There have been multiple examples of where bad behavior has been shut down at platform level, such as the Silk Road for example.

Also, it is a free speech issue if a company does not want to do business with someone. If I am a printer should I be forced to make materials for the KKK? This is a much deeper debate though.

Brad
At this time GAB is on Twitter, so clearly not violating their terms.
I Should have been more clear: During his interview with NPR, andrew Torba ceo of gab explains that his website gab has rules. The rules surprisingly are virtually the same rules that twitter had for users prior to the year 2015 (anything goes except spam and illegal material.)
 
3
•••
I should have been clear,.


I Should have been more clear: During his interview with NPR, andrew Torba ceo of gab explains that his website gab has rules. The rules surprisingly are virtually the same rules that twitter had for users prior to the year 2015 (anything goes except spam and illegal material.)
I should have been more clear. It's ironic that GAB broke Godaddy's terms, but not Twitter's.
 
2
•••
I should have been more clear. It's ironic that GAB broke Godaddy's terms, but not Twitter's.

What Twitter terms do you think they're breaking? I just took a quick look, didn't see hate speech on their account. The ones that do break Twitter terms, go to Gab.
 
1
•••
I should have been more clear. It's ironic that GAB broke Godaddy's terms, but not Twitter's.
Gab was actually just banned from Medium for no reason. Gabs ceo usually didn't post much there except his statement praying for the victims of
I should have been more clear. It's ironic that GAB broke Godaddy's terms, but not Twitter's.
in 24 hours gab has been banned from joyent, PayPal, stripe, medium, and go daddy.

Medium actually banned him for no reason, and PayPal didn't tell him a reason for their ban either. (oddly PayPal did tell a journalist when asked for comment on the gab situation that the reason was hate speech and violent content but PayPal showed no direct examples of such content)
 
3
•••
What Twitter terms do you think they're breaking? I just took a quick look, didn't see hate speech on their account. The ones that do break Twitter terms, go to Gab.
I agree, I haven't seen the hate speech either.
 
1
•••
And I mentioned the bans because it reminds me of when Alex Jones was wormholed from the internet in the span of 2 days. If you are a threat to big techs lf big medias agenda, they will collude together to un-person you off the internet. this just my opinion. Both Alex Jones and gab represent free speech and conservative values online. Alex Jones was #2 news app on iOS and android, yet it was banned because Tim cook deemed him unreasonable. 3 companies all in san Francisco are deeming what we can view online
 
4
•••
3 companies all in san Francisco are deeming what we can view online

Deciding which platforms of theirs you can use.

There are many platforms and many domains available to use.
 
1
•••
And I mentioned the bans because it reminds me of when Alex Jones was wormholed from the internet in the span of 2 days. If you are a threat to big techs lf big medias agenda, they will collude together to un-person you off the internet. this just my opinion. Both Alex Jones and gab represent free speech and conservative values online. Alex Jones was #2 news app on iOS and android, yet it was banned because Tim cook deemed him unreasonable. 3 companies all in san Francisco are deeming what we can view online
Right, it's about big tech deciding what we can and can't view. Up to this point there is no evidence to support that GAB is condoning or instigating violence. If they are doing that, it would be criminal.
 
Last edited:
2
•••
So did Gab encourage violence, or was it a user of Gab who encouraged violence?

This question being answered is at the root of the free speech debate.

+1
Free speech does not always encourage violence
 
1
•••
Right, it's about big tech deciding what we can and can't view. Up to this point there is no evidence to support that GAB is condoning or instigating violence. If they are doing that, it would be criminal.
Correct me if wrong but its only criminal if they make no effort to remove "violence instigation" type of material. From what I've seen, the rules on gab are clear- no violence or illegal material allowed. If gabs made aware they delete it

gab ceo also said during an interview he forwarded all of the shooters gab profile data to the fbi before the fbi even asked which led me to start thinking- is that proper procedure? I was under the impression warrants are required then the website can hand the data. Or maybe its at their discretion. I know apple has declined to give the FBI the "keys" to their iPhone security holes even during criminal investigations which is what got me thinking during this whole thing.... it seemed like gab gave the data in an "unsolicited" manner manner almost like a violation of personal Privacy and data. I have no sympathy for the shooter but I wonder if that may be used by the defense in some way. At the time, the shooter was still an alleged shooter (he still technically is). Gab says they handed the data before the guy even surrended idk if it was exaggeration or true
 
2
•••
Site doesn't let me edit:
I'm sure there's a clause in gabs TOS that lets him do this, then again most social networks probably upload all their user data to the Nsa and FBI on a daily basis
 
0
•••
And I mentioned the bans because it reminds me of when Alex Jones was wormholed from the internet in the span of 2 days. If you are a threat to big techs lf big medias agenda, they will collude together to un-person you off the internet. this just my opinion. Both Alex Jones and gab represent free speech and conservative values online. Alex Jones was #2 news app on iOS and android, yet it was banned because Tim cook deemed him unreasonable. 3 companies all in san Francisco are deeming what we can view online

Exactly, The EU just set precedent with a free speech ruling too the other day with the Austrian Woman and her comments about a religion that seems to be sensitive to negative comments. Yet, all other religions are open season. It makes little common sense.

This is crazyland world anymore. Either fall in line, or get the public attacking you.

In America, Nobody has a right to NOT be offended, but private monopolies can rally their own political views however they want. They don’t need to follow the first amendment because it’s their territory. It isn’t really public. This is why free speech is under attack due to platforms and large corporations. If the web returned back to independent websites, and open minded small webhosts then it would be much easier. This social media world is polluted with all ranges of opinion, and the wrong place for free speech.

The silicon swamp is growing. Selective Censoring, banning, preventing anyone who isn’t in agreement with them. GD is a public company, they have shareholders just like Twitter who they must answer to. Godaddy hosts Black Lives Matters, which is controversial but to the narrative that is somehow acceptable.

Somehow starting riots and Yelling to kill police, Black Lives Matter a domestic terror group fits in the terms of service, but they should be banned too if Godaddy was morally correct, but of course that would be all over the news, be called racist, etc. Politically correct world.

https://whoisip.ovh/184.168.138.1

https://whoisip.ovh/blacklivesmatter.com
 
6
•••
It's not one nut. It's where to go for these types. Just a lot of companies are not going to associate with this type of stuff.Especially after what just happened. They'll probably just move to now.top, where the other one went.

https%3A%2F%2Fblueprint-api-production.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Fcard%2Fimage%2F872418%2Fbab718f6-a4f4-4ced-8dbe-cd675bac6ef9.png

He sounds like a very pleasant individual! (sarcasm)

You can't have absolute free speech. A classic example is that you can't yell out "There's a fire!" in a crowded movie theatre, because it will probably cause a stampede and people would get seriously hurt.

I say think of it like a basketball game: You can't wildly swing your elbows around if there are other players near you - you will get called for a foul and rightly so. Those actions are therefore curtailed and may result in a flagrant foul.

Similarly, if you allow a cesspool to fester where psychos are allowed to radicalize themselves in an echo chamber and create an atmosphere that quite obviously harms others, that's harmful to society, and that type of free speech also needs to be curtailed.

And it does harm others: it creates harmful social behaviours and turns some people into jerks and makes pre-existing jerks even worse, and some of them do end up acting violently towards others. Even the ones who don't get physically violent are harmful in many other ways.

They are a cancer upon society.
 
Last edited:
5
•••
against the left, blatant racism, antisemitism
Sorry, i usually like what you are saying, but this time can't agree with you at all. Left are the worst antisemits. So if it's against the left - it's good for Jews. Period. Free speech is good for Jews. Period.
 
0
•••
You should never, ever, have your domain registration and hosting with the same company.

Exactly. But more than that: you should never ever have your own domain registered with GD, and/or your own site hosted on GD. When i grab a domain there for my own use, not for sale, i only start developing a site on it once i successfully transferred this domain out of GD.

Also i always suggest all my clients against using GD.

free speech includes hate, sorry... Freedom 101

You cannot have real freedom when you are telling others what to do, as long as they do not initiate actual violence.

Exactly!

support-support-free-speech-physics-just-not-hate-speech-gravity-37105706.png


In fact, it was the free press that exposed Trump for the fallen man that he was. Whether or not he is rehabilitated now, God only knows. Funny enough, the Jews in Israel compare Trump to the Persian King Cyrus, circa 530 BC. Look that one up sometime. You might learn something. It is secular history.

Rob, i never had any business with Epic, but now i shall look at your site and maybe move all my new regs there.
 
5
•••
Left, right, centre whatever your political persuasion is if you are intolerant, or tow some party line just for the sake of it then you are a lemming and can go and jump off the cliff with all your other fellow lemmings.

Free speech is an illusion, the minority rule as they always have done and always will do.
The dominant minority has existed since humans started to group together to form the first towns and cities, all that has happened recently is the power has become more concentrated on a global level - no big deal.

We live in a world governed by law where those with money/power will manipulate those laws to their own ends - basic survival of the fittest mentality, so I will just keep plodding along and making sure I do my exercises.......
 
0
•••
5
•••
Back