news Free Speech

[Bernard Wright]

Many seem to think freedom of speech should be a protection offered only to those with popularly-held beliefs, which I find ironic. Here is my logic. Perhaps you can tell me where it is flawed.

There is evil in the world. Most of us would rather there not be. I think that's a fair premise.

However, evil, on its face, is not objective, and what falls under "evil" cannot be relegated to any governing body, even if that body were democratically elected. Moreover, ostracizing "evil" from polite society will create resentment and an underground network where it is out of sight and out of mind, until it rears a very large head.

But, for the sake of argument, let's say banning certain modes of thought and communication from the internet is effective. I think there have been examples of popular figures whose prominence has waned after being deplatformed by Twitter, so maybe the method does work. Is this not a precedent that could (and in time, likely would) lead to unforeseen consequences that hit closer to home as cultural pendulums swing?

So, 10/10 on the bad scale gets banned today. Maybe next month we work our way down to 8/10 on the bad scale. So, in a few months, we're all content with everything on the internet being a 1 to 7. Feels good to be a 1! The powers that be really like you 1s. ...Look out 6s.

But some people reeeealy want those 7s gone, and they lobby. So the governing body that draws the line declares all 7s gone. No internet presence for you. But now concern arises among even those who are proponents of the system. It's becoming scary to see how quickly a 7 can lose their voice and be banned from the marketplace of ideas, just for going against popular opinion. But this is only a minority of people who hold this concern. Most people are fine with it. In turn, that minority gets put under the microscope, and who would have thought? They're SEVENS. Boot 'em.

In my hypothetical world, consensus is somehow reached that 7 shall remain the line. However, what is defined as a 6 or a 7 can change over time, and once someone is deemed a 7, there is no turning back because they have been ostracized. You can't come back in 7s! And the 8s, 9s, and 10s are out of sight, out of mind.

Are the 7s, 8s, 9s, and 10s, still alive? You bet they are. And that's a lot of people, and some of them are not only evil, they are intelligent and capable.

This is an oversimplification. There is much nuance and complexity in the real world, and that is the point. We cannot draw straight lines between good and evil, and who we should let participate in society. I see the only solution to keeping things from unraveling into utter chaos to be allowing some chaos and dissent to remain the in the system. Allowing any group of people, or any political faction to dominate, might actually result in short-term benefits. I'm not saying it won't work in the short term. My point is, who draws the line, and who decides what falls on either side of the line, is not something I am comfortable placing in the hands of others, even if they are elected officials. Don't be so naive as to think that the politicians are going to get it right and create utopia. And don't think you will either. The world is complex.

Road to Hell. Good intentions.

 

[frank-germany]

No, that's not true. People who share a video of a crime don't necessarily support the crime. That distinction should be obvious to anyone. Such actions might be illegal in some places, but it seems very unlikely that they are illegal everywhere. As far as I know, that action isn't illegal in the USA.

I am done with you

you use by far too many words

to justify an unjustifiable behavior

nice try
but I get bored

 

[Bernard Wright]

Frank, I value your engagement in this thread. I hope anyone reading this thread does not interpret any content as an endorsement or downplaying of any tragedy that has occurred at any time in human history.

All emotions aside, I posed a logical thought experiment in my first post, and I elaborated on that same topic in my third post. They are lengthy posts but they are the topics I am most concerned with in this thread. I would like the logic to be followed, and any member may refute this scenario. In fact, I hope you will. I hope to learn from this as an exercise in logic. If my logic is flawed or the conclusion is false, I hope someone will bring it to my attention. This thread was never intended to be a place for members to express their sentiments about particular events. It was, and remains, an attempt to address the overarching principles on which the landscapes of our physical and online realities have been built. It is an attempt to discern the possible outcomes that would result if these overarching principles were not defended, by both individuals and entities who participate in these realities.

I will refrain from any further posts in hopes someone will acknowledge this intent and engage accordingly. I hope someone will.

 

[frank-germany]

If my logic is flawed or the conclusion is false, I hope someone will bring it to my attention.

where you are wrong in my opinion is:
-------------------------------------------------

you want to avoid a potential future thread

and in order to avoid that
you help actually existing murderers to be nourished in executing their plans


that is putting the potential cause of a potential future danger ( the government )
at the same level as the real existing danger
of actual murderers


you help these criminals to effectively promote their ideas

if they would not be able to do so
there would be no reason to continue with these crimes


this is what you sacrify
based on the idea
that a ( potential ) evil government
will do harm in the future


I would suggest instead
to fight the real existing murderers first

and then fight the government in your pessimistic future outcome
when it will have happened

-maybe there will be no problem that you want to fight now-
who knows

but the actual crime is real now

 

[Rob Monster]

I am joining a bit late to this thread.

First of all, I want to thank @Bernard Wright for starting this thread. The topic of free speech is important. It certainly deserves its own thread as many in the domain industry have important roles to play in this area.

Second, I want to acknowledge Bernard for using his real name rather than an alias. I realize that there are many Bernard Wright's in the world. I take it on faith that he is one of them! I hope others will do the same.

As I reflected on the past week, I realize my actions last weekend offended some. My intent was never to offend. To those who were offended by my actions, I apologize to you.

The context of the personal Tweet was one of being personally attacked on my personal Twitter by two people from the embattled SPLC that has lost its second top executive this month due to internal scandal.

In retrospect, I should never have taken the Twitter bait. A lesson was certainly earned there. For this reason, I am taking a break from Twitter both personally and generally.

As for my role at Epik, I plan to continue as CEO as we work to grow Epik.com, Anonymize.com, and BitMitigate.com. We will equally serve any lawfully-engaged content producer, without bias or preference.

 

[bmugford]

As I reflected on the past week, I realize my actions last weekend offended some. My intent was never to offend. To those who were offended by my actions, I apologize to you.

I am not going to say the your apology in insincere, but there is a big difference between directly apologizing for your actions and just apologizing if someone was offended. It was perfectly reasonable for someone to be offended.

On a side note, I am not sure posting as "Epik" on Gab is real great for your brand.
Let's look at some comments in response to your post - https://gab.com/epik/posts/aVh4U1lTR1dueWJoT2dBN3l2RnU2dz09

They need to silence us.

This false flag attack was designed to push disarming the population and silence Gab/Dissenter and 4 & 8 Chan. The fact that they targeted 8chan is to make Q and Q research inaccessible.

DemoKKKrats are Nazis

Better a Nazi than a cuck. Fuck those dumbasses. Go stay on Twitter, Instagram and Facebook. Gab ain’t a safe space for the beta Liberals.

 

[Rob Monster]

On a side note, I am not sure posting as "Epik" on Gab is real great for your brand.
Let's look at some comments in response to your post - https://gab.com/epik/posts/aVh4U1lTR1dueWJoT2dBN3l2RnU2dz09

Gab is an Epik client and arguably an oppressed one at that. If you look at my opening post there, my condition for allowing them to continue to be an Epik client is that they clean up their act.

Anyone who compares the Gab of today versus the Gab of October 2018 can see a notable difference. The booting of Chris Cantwell by Gab last week was overdue in my view but it was not decision.

For some the mere existence of Gab, Dissenter, BitChute, Infowars, etc. are objectionable. However, their content is lawful and they do have terms of service and are governing themselves accordingly.

 

[bmugford]

Gab is an Epik client and arguably an oppressed one at that. If you look at my opening post there, my condition for allowing them to continue to be an Epik client is that they clean up their act.

Anyone who compares the Gab of today versus the Gab of October 2018 can see a notable difference. The booting of Chris Cantwell by Gab last week was overdue in my view but it was not decision.

For some the mere existence of Gab, Dissenter, BitChute, Infowars, etc. are objectionable. However, their content is lawful and they do have terms of service and are governing themselves accordingly.

Fair enough.

If you think posting as "Epik" on there is the best business move go for it.

Though it does seems contrary to what Joseph Peterson was trying to spin that Rob Monster and Epik are different entities. That just reinforces Rob Monster is Epik, and Epik is Rob Monster.

Brad

 

[Corey]

@Rob Monster thank you for your apology, I appreciate it.

Cheers
Corey

 

[offthehandle]

Rob, can you start a new thread or a blog regarding your new product summary and what philosophy is behind them and they are going to do to for the internet? I am very much pro free speech and interested as well as probably many of those who are silent about seeing where this anti censorship thing is heading. I am anti big tech monopoly as it stands now, so new small nimble companies are needed to make change.

 

[Rob Monster]

Fair enough.

If you think posting as "Epik" on there is the best business move go for it.

Though it does seems contrary to what Joseph Peterson was trying to spin that Rob Monster and Epik are different entities. That just reinforces Rob Monster is Epik, and Epik is Rob Monster.

Brad

Well, I am known at Gab as @EPIK there. I use my personal photo there. My activity on Gab is out in the open. I promote tolerance and free speech. If folks want to monitor my posts there, by all means that is fine. There is no duplicity and I am leading by example. I think it will be apparent, I am promoting non-violent, responsible, and lawful free speech and take issue with those who wish to take that right away.

Although I am less active there these days at Gab, I did make it a point to establish credibility not just specifically for Gab but among all who stand for free speech and privacy. The result has been to gain the trust and confidence among several groups where I am aware of the leadership. As such, I believe I can appeal to them when I need to do so though I do respect the sovereignty of any client.

Incidentally, I tried very hard to do the same exercise of trust-building with ANTIFA and SPLC among other groups. In retrospect, my leaps of faith or blind trust, were met with opportunistic exploitation. There is no question in my mind that those who advocate for hate or violence are fighting the wrong battle. Just FYI, this includes NamePros members who message me privately about their views.

 

[Rob Monster]

Rob, can you start a new thread or a blog regarding your new product summary and what philosophy is behind them and they are going to do to for the internet? I am very much pro free speech and interested as well as probably many of those who are silent about seeing where this anti censorship thing is heading. I am anti big tech monopoly as it stands now, so new small nimble companies are needed to make change.

That is a good question.

In brief I believe is now the only company with an integrated technology stack for:

Domain Registry and Registrar
Anycast DNS
Hosting
4096-bit SSL issuance
DDoS mitigation
Content Delivery Network (CDN)
Anonymize VPN with AES-256 cipher

Once someone installs the Anonymize VPN or uses the Anonymize DNS resolver we can resolve anything, even if local ISPs delist a domain or even a domain is removed from a registry. This is the other reason for advocating for Forever registrations as it creates a contractual obligation on Epik to resolve a domain perpetually so long as they are complying with our ToS.

As for CDN, BitMitigate can be a serious player in those markets. The CDN market alone is huge -- projected to be $27 billion by 2023 up from $7 billion last year. As folks know who tested it, the BitMitigate CDN is already very good with pages loading in less time than some take just to resolve the DNS, i.e. about 100 ms to load an entire page. If anyone is at CloudFest next week, @NickLim will be there and can demo.

As for DDoS, last week we saw a really big test. We had 10 million IPs attack us including 200,000 IPs that nobody had seen before. BitMitigate prevailed. This was before a planned 30x capacity increase which should finish in the next week. So, there again, I think we see a significant capability to empower lawful free speech, on a level likely better than CloudFlare, and without logging.

I am hoping there will be more to come there as we attract more exceptional engineering talent to the effort.

 

[GILSAN]

I really don't see what all the uproar is about. I don't see were the hoax is from his tweet or from the fact that he put the video up to be seen.

This reminds me of the Covington boys hoax... nothing more than a Nothing Burger intentionally made to destroy Rob.

Since September 11, 2001, I've seen, on hundreds of occasions, from different cameras and different angles two towers coming down after being hit by two planes, killing almost 3000 people, including seeing people jumping off to their deaths from way up there. To this date I haven't seen the leftists going apesh*t and demanding that all those videos be banned...

And what about all those videos of beheadings by ISIS still available to be seen on Youtube? If you are gonna ban the NZ video then all the other ultra violent videos should also be banned!

I'm with Rob Monster... to hell with all the intolerant naysayers...

And for all of you that think that New Zealand and their Government are perfect, take a look at this video about chemical 1080... it may just change your mind...

Rescue Helicopters Used to Poison Deer - Tourists Speak Out - Mt Aspiring National Park

 

[Kate]

There were 2 components:

(1) Video footage of a massacre
(2) A claim that the video was a hoax

Your train of thought is always very detailed and balanced, I sense that you are striving for a sense of justice and fairness, but I think that you are ultimately whitewashing the actions of your employer.
You forgot the 3rd component:
(3) disseminating video footage of a massacre while dismissing it as a possible hoax to promote his IPFS service

This is hard to forgive.
In this very thread, on this very page, promotion continues, it's already business as usual and contrition is in short supply. This is insensitive and out of touch.

As an executive of the company you are not only morally but also legally liable for what the company does. Even if you disagree with some decisions you still own them.

After this long discussion I fear that nothing will change. Maybe the boss/founder/owner will tone down for a while, but Epik will continue doing business as usual, that is to hurt people and help people hurt other people. Who you decide to court as clients tells a lot about your affinities and priorities.

I am convinced that Rob is not a Monster, but a decent, caring human being - but this is a moot point. What truly matters is what he does, not what he thinks.
While the unfavorable coverage of Epik may look Slanted at the moment, it is important to keep in mind that the company is not being singled out for an isolated incident but a pattern of conduct.

Finally, domainers are not the victims. So, Epik should reach out to the real victims. To this day, Epik has not done so. This would be the right think to do.
But if the company does not realign itself, it's no use coming up with more excuses. Talk is cheap.

Disclaimer: I have zero domains at Epik.

PS: I was going to try to end on a conciliatory note but some people here are desensitized and disgusting.
Maybe I should take a break from domaining.

 

[xynames]

When clients go into criminal court there are those who are genuinely sorry and those who are sorry they got caught....

I am not going to say the your apology in insincere, but there is a big difference between directly apologizing for your actions and just apologizing if someone was offended.

Many defendants don’t comprehend that it’s not that hard to see through them.

 

[DN Playbook]

I really don't see what all the uproar is about. I don't see were the hoax is from his tweet or from the fact that he put the video up to be seen.

See below.

How this guy thinks?? Lol
One minute he's saying From what I gather he's a non Christian fighting a holy war !!
Next minute he's saying Nothing makes sense, looks like low budget CGI....Nobody rushes him.. Shell casings disappear...... This is why they are banning the video.....

Now his sycophants here say he did not explicitly say it was fake, so all good

Show attachment 113359

 

[DN Playbook]

@Rob Monster Would love to get your thoughts on this:

Rob, you claim that you are a Bible-believing Christian. So you know that the second greatest commandment is to "love your neighbor as yourself", as stated by Jesus Christ, who as we know was both a Jew and the founder of Christianity.

The Jewish scholar who asked Jesus that question about the greatest commandment followed up with "Who really is my neighbor?"

Jesus' answered with one of his most famous parables. The one about the Good Samaritan. I don't think I have to go into details because we all know it. The Samaritan who found a Jew half dead, by the robbers, and then helped him to full recovery. All the while a priest and a Levite saw him but then wondered by and ignored this poor man.

In Jesus' day, Samaritans were hated by the Jews because although they descended from a Hebrew blood-line they became mixed with other nations. Yet he said they are to be loved as one loves himself. Today there is no Samaritan nation. So if Jesus gave this parable of the Good Samaritan today, what nation in existence would he use instead? It would more than likely be a Good Palestinian. A muslim.

So how would you answer "who really is my neighbor"?

Now why would you go and rub salt into the wound of our beloved neighbors whose tears from the loss of their loved ones have yet to dry off?

Why would you suggest that the death of 50 unarmed men, women, and children is a hoax? While real families and friends are still mourning their deaths?

Whether you actually answer these questions, or continue to remain silent, the answer will be loud and clear.

 

[Rob Monster]

I am not apologizing for protecting lawful free speech nor for enabling the search for truth. I believe in constitutional liberty. I also believe that people who disagree with something should have equal opportunity to lawfully project their views and indeed they are able to do both at Epik and elsewhere.

My controversial Tweet-reply was aimed squarely at the SPLC bullies that were trying to get me to drop Gab as a client by tying NZ to Gab.The SPLC hates free speech. So rather than give them what they wanted, I gave them what I thought was a potent riposte: uncensorable evidence for empowering public scrutiny.

I don't think there is anything wrong with allowing discerning people to investigate official narratives and present their findings, especially if the official narrative calls for major policy changes. Anyone who has studied the well-documented history of Hegelian dialectics as a public policy tool will understand why.

However, no question that disseminating this information to people who were still processing the news was not demonstrating empathy. Also, implying that IPFS file adoption could be monetized by Epik through sale of .IPFS domains would be tactless in the eyes of anyone who was grieving.

 

[DN Playbook]

I am not apologizing for protecting lawful free speech nor for enabling the search for truth. I believe in constitutional liberty. I also believe that people who disagree with something should have equal opportunity to lawfully project their views and indeed they are able to do both at Epik and elsewhere.

My controversial Tweet-reply was aimed squarely at the SPLC bullies that were trying to get me to drop Gab as a client by tying NZ to Gab.The SPLC hates free speech. So rather than give them what they wanted, I gave them what I thought was a potent riposte: uncensorable evidence for empowering public scrutiny.

I don't think there is anything wrong with allowing discerning people to investigate official narratives and present their findings, especially if the official narrative calls for major policy changes. Anyone who has studied the well-documented history of Hegelian dialectics as a public policy tool will understand why.

However, no question that disseminating this information to people who were still processing the news was not demonstrating empathy. Also, implying that IPFS file adoption could be monetized by Epik through sale of .IPFS domains would be tactless in the eyes of anyone who was grieving.

Are you responding to any particular post? Or just posting in general?

 

[GILSAN]

See below.

When I first saw that video on the same day it happened, it looked like those violent video games type of video. And it wasn't just me. Lots of people were saying and commenting the same... that it didn't look real. Only after seeing the video again on TV stations and on the internet did I accept that it was real.

But now that it's been banned all over, we'll never be able to analyze it, like we can the 9/11 videos or all the other violent trash on youtube or even all the violent and disgusting movies that Hollywood produces, which seems perfectly fine by most people.

And banning the killers manifesto is a joke as well. As if the next mass murderer or terrorist is so dumb that he needs a copy of a manifesto to help him go on a terror rampage. As long as Mein Kampf is available at Amazon and bookstores all over the world, then I believe that banning this bastards manifesto is pointless.

 

[DN Playbook]

When I first saw that video on the same day it happened, it looked like those violent video games type of video. And it wasn't just me. Lots of people were saying and commenting the same... that it didn't look real. Only after seeing the video again on TV stations and on the internet did I accept that it was real.

But now that it's been banned all over, we'll never be able to analyze it, like we can the 9/11 videos or all the other violent trash on youtube or even all the violent and disgusting movies that Hollywood produces, which seems perfectly fine by most people.

And banning the killers manifesto is a joke as well. As if the next mass murderer or terrorist is so dumb that he needs a copy of a manifesto to help him go on a terror rampage. As long as Mein Kampf is available at Amazon and bookstores all over the world, then I believe that banning this bastards manifesto is pointless.

I hear you @GILSAN. However there are key differences:

9/11 footage is not from the perspective of the terrorists. You don't hear them speaking. You don't see what they want you to see. It is official news footage. The NZ terrorist has made the footage in a way that glorifies his acts to those who hold the same views (ie, hate immigrants). It was disgusting and disturbing. The NZ footage was made to put him on a pedestal of like-minded people and encourage copycats (as he himself is a copycat).

I never read Mien Kampf. So I can't comment on the impact on those that would read it. I would agree with you there. Especially with the fact there are so many neo-nazis in the worId. I don't support its propagation either. But it does not justify publishing the NZ terrorist's manifesto. Much less his video feed.

 

[DN Playbook]

...

 

[DN Playbook]

...

 

[BRANDERX]

I am joining a bit late to this thread.

First of all, I want to thank @Bernard Wright for starting this thread. The topic of free speech is important. It certainly deserves its own thread as many in the domain industry have important roles to play in this area.

Second, I want to acknowledge Bernard for using his real name rather than an alias. I realize that there are many Bernard Wright's in the world. I take it on faith that he is one of them! I hope others will do the same.

As I reflected on the past week, I realize my actions last weekend offended some. My intent was never to offend. To those who were offended by my actions, I apologize to you.

The context of the personal Tweet was one of being personally attacked on my personal Twitter by two people from the embattled SPLC that has lost its second top executive this month due to internal scandal.

In retrospect, I should never have taken the Twitter bait. A lesson was certainly earned there. For this reason, I am taking a break from Twitter both personally and generally.

As for my role at Epik, I plan to continue as CEO as we work to grow Epik.com, Anonymize.com, and BitMitigate.com. We will equally serve any lawfully-engaged content producer, without bias or preference.

Thank you for the apology!

 

[DN Playbook]

As I reflected on the past week, I realize my actions last weekend offended some. My intent was never to offend. To those who were offended by my actions, I apologize to you.

Of your entire post, this is the apology part. Does this mean you are changing your positions on hate-mongering/hate-speech? Or just sorry we're offended by it? Please be specific so we know.

 

[.X.]

I saw the complete video of the nz shooting, at first glance, it was very video game looking to me, although I knew it wasn't a video game and very very real, This is the world we live in today, the video footage was the pure reality we live in today. mass shootings, street violence, hate, and evil are a harsh reality in today's times. I prayed and continue to pray for all the people and families that paid the ultimate price simply for their religion.

Ok, Free Speech, I feel like "free speech" has been taken to another level as opposed to the 1970s thru the 1990s. of course, I do not oppose free speech, but I do oppose the hate and violence that comes with it in today's world.

each and every week the world is exposed to more mass killings, more street violence, more hate and I believe the worlds human race is becoming desensitised to the weekly reoccurring events. I think we as humans adapt to our surroundings and change to protect our minds. otherwise, we would either go crazy or have a nervous breakdown from severe anxiety and fear.

I do not condone hate speech in any manner, it simply spreads the disease IMO