What's going on with Epik and Rob Monster?

[MapleDots]

I'm catching the tail end of this, seems to be some kind of controversy...

https://domaingang.com/domain-news/rob-monster-off-twitter-after-christchurch-massacre-controversy/

Must be something odd to evoke this type of a response from one of our members.

 

[NameLlama]

if indeed you have evidence that he is deliberately saying the video is a hoax while actually knowing it's not, then I'd be the first to stand with you against him.

Read a little more, write a little less?

 

[Tia Wood]

But to him and others it's "create a safe haven for freedom of speech"

Freedom of speech doesn't and should never mean "anything goes".

Freedom of speech means the government won't go after you for what you say - with certain limits. But it doesn't mean companies have to respect Freedom of Speech. (example, GoDaddys right to kick ppl off their platform).

So, I'm sorry, I don't buy it.

https://www.uscourts.gov/about-fede...ational-outreach/activity-resources/what-does

Freedom of speech includes the right:

• Not to speak (specifically, the right not to salute the flag).
  West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943).
• Of students to wear black armbands to school to protest a war (“Students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate.”).
  Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 U.S. 503 (1969).
• To use certain offensive words and phrases to convey political messages.
  Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971).
• To contribute money (under certain circumstances) to political campaigns.
  Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976).
• To advertise commercial products and professional services (with some restrictions).
  Virginia Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Consumer Council, 425 U.S. 748 (1976); Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977).
• To engage in symbolic speech, (e.g., burning the flag in protest).
  Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989); United States v. Eichman, 496 U.S. 310 (1990).

Freedom of speech does not include the right:

• To incite actions that would harm others (e.g., “Shouting ‘fire’ in a crowded theater.”).
  Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919).
• To make or distribute obscene materials.
  Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957).
• To burn draft cards as an anti-war protest.
  United States v. O’Brien, 391 U.S. 367 (1968).
• To permit students to print articles in a school newspaper over the objections of the school administration.
  Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988).
• Of students to make an obscene speech at a school-sponsored event.
  Bethel School District #43 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986).
• Of students to advocate illegal drug use at a school-sponsored event.
  Morse v. Frederick, __ U.S. __ (2007).

http://www.ala.org/advocacy/intfreedom/hate

"The First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects speech no matter how offensive its content. To be clear, the First Amendment does not protect behavior that crosses the line into targeted harassment or threats, or that creates a pervasively hostile environment. But merely offensive or bigoted speech does not rise to that level, and determining when conduct crosses that line is a legal question that requires examination on a case-by-case basis."

 

[carob]

What is permitted by the law to say is not necessarily good for a particular situation or a cohesive society or public safety, or good for one's business and reputation.


Posted in another thread but worth repeating:
https://www.namepros.com/threads/so...er-or-suspension.1107245/page-21#post-7157837


Even in the USA there are limits to Freedom of Speech, namely:

• Obscenity
• Fighting words
• Defamation (including libel and slander)
• Child pornography
• Perjury
• Blackmail
• Incitement to imminent lawless action
• True threats
• Solicitations to commit crimes
  
  
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions

 

[Ategy]

Read a little more, write a little less?

Read what? Why are some of you rushing to judge me when I specifically wrote "That being said .. is it really enough for me to be able to 100% guarantee that Rob is not a white supremacist? Admittedly not ..."

The whole point of my posts was NOT to say that any of you are right or wrong .. in fact .. I've said several times that I don't have enough facts to judge ... I posted here to share my experience to hopefully be one part of a bigger picture to help everyone figure this out his true motives. If you all have evidence that shows his intentions are deceitful then by all means please post them ... I AM NOT SAYING THAT SARCASTICALLY NOR TO BE CONFRONTATIONAL .. I'm saying that because I honestly just truly want to see what you all have seen .. instead of belittling others please do post actual facts that show his intent.

I'm not even saying that the facts aren't there .. it's just that some of us haven't followed everything from the start and don't know where to look. I don't visit Gab .. I'm almost never on twitter .. this is exactly the type of thing I'm talking about .. people who just immediately rush to judge other people's intentions without knowing all the facts. Seems like some of you have wrongly judged my intentions here.

I haven't been following this to the same extent as many of you obviously .. I simply thought that my recent contact with Rob could be helpful to some in shinning a light on things .. as one piece of the puzzle. It isn't absolute hard evidence .. and I've specifically repeated that I need more facts .. based on the likes/dislikes I'm getting it's clear that there are other people who would like more information and facts as well ... instead of wrongly assuming everyone has picked a side in this ... if you have strong reasons to have chosen a side .. now is the time to share the all facts and information to help others, including myself, come to a fully informed conclusion.

 

[Ategy]

Freedom of speech doesn't and should never mean "anything goes".

No offence @Tia Wood .. but you obviously haven't taken the time to read some of my posts on the subject. If you did you'd very quickly find that we are pretty much exactly on the same page when it comes to what should and what shouldn't be protected by free speech. ... On multiple occasions I very adamantly stress those exact same things.

I'm not a lawyer, but I have had an interest on the subject for a long time .. I've read books on the subject ... I'm above average familiar with the definitions, the limits, the nuances and laws/policies.

I do not need a lesson in that ... all I'm asking for is the actual evidence of examples specifically of Rob Monster deliberately doing things that admittedly should not be protected by the false "but it's Freedom of Speech" excuse.

Again .. I'm not arguing that those facts aren't there .. I'm not saying that he is right nor justified .. I'm just asking to see the evidence that is leading you all to come to the conclusion that he is guilty of being deliberately deceptive. I simply had a couple of conversations with him many months ago right before Gab went to Epik .. aside from that I don't follow Gab, nor Rob outside of NamePros .. I'm not confronting you all asking for proof just to be smug or challenge you all thinking you really don't have any proof. I genuinely want to see more information but just don't know where to look .. all the links I've found going to twitter so far lead to removed information .. I'm just asking that you all share the exact information that led you to your definitive conclusions so that I and others can learn from the information.

 

[NameLlama]

If he wasn't posting to spread doubt and deceive, then he appears as insane as Alex Jones

It can be about the ego for such people, appearing as a maverick
Like an edgy teenager
Oh everyone else is saying 50 people were massacred? Look at me look at me, I am saying it might not have happened..
Oh everyone else is refraining from sharing a horrific video, well look at me, I will post it publicly
Praise be to the Jesus of the free speech movement
Look how bold he is! And facing such persecution for his actions..How honorable

 

[Grego85]

why even post that screen shot? Nothing there. I'm seeing accusations but not any evidence of what was actually said.

 

[dirk]

why even post that screen shot? Nothing there. I'm seeing accusations but not any evidence of what was actually said.

All I could find is that he said there are some inconsistencies in the footage. I didn't see him calling it a hoax, nor denying it happend. I'm curious to know where people get that info from.

 

[topdom]

If you say "kill jews" it is a hate crime, and a racist thing. It doesn't matter whether the word jew refers to a religion or a race.

But if you say "there is no holocaust" it should not be a crime. By making saying "there is no holocaust" a crime, you might be hiding some historical facts, distorting history. Of course here I don't say there is no holocaust. There are some obvious lies in history. Someone may question validity of official history and let them do it. Let them show their evidence, if any, disprove them if you can. Some obvious lies in recent history are Apollo Moon landings, 9/11 official story, probably also Titanic's sinking after hitting an iceberg.
Hitler was an evil guy, but certainly he didn't target all jews, and actually he was puppet of people who are known as jews. Was Einstein inventor of relativity theory..or did he do part of it, or did he steal it all. Einstein was one of my childhood heros, but now I have suspicions.

 

[golan]

Russia is far too powerful

What a bad joke.

 

[dirk]

If
Some obvious lies in recent history are Apollo Moon landings, 9/11 official story, probably also Titanic's sinking after hitting an iceberg.
Hitler was an evil guy, but certainly he didn't target all jews, and actually he was puppet of people who are known as jews. Was Einstein inventor of relativity theory..or did he do part of it, or did he steal it all. Einstein was one of my childhood heros, but now I have suspicions.

... seriously?

 

[JB Lions]

why even post that screen shot? Nothing there. I'm seeing accusations but not any evidence of what was actually said.

All I could find is that he said there are some inconsistencies in the footage. I didn't see him calling it a hoax, nor denying it happend. I'm curious to know where people get that info from.

And some others. It's amazing to see people not reading but that doesn't stop them from giving an opinion. Just on this one:

The screenshot is literally posted in the thread:

https://www.namepros.com/threads/so...er-or-suspension.1107245/page-20#post-7156909

And if the screenshot isn't good enough for you, then:

His own Joseph Peterson, Epik’s Director of Operations said and I quote:

"In particular, he interprets every massacre as a “false flag” – from 9/11 to the synagogue shooting to this New Zealand attack. "

https://dsad.com/domain-shanes-daily-list-of-domains-at-auction-for-monday-march-18th-2019/

The attack is literally on video.

 

[Internet.Domains]

And some others. It's amazing to see people not reading but that doesn't stop them from giving an opinion. Just on this one:

The screenshot is literally posted in the thread:

https://www.namepros.com/threads/so...er-or-suspension.1107245/page-20#post-7156909

And if the screenshot isn't good enough for you, then:

His own Joseph Peterson, Epik’s Director of Operations said and I quote:

"In particular, he interprets every massacre as a “false flag” – from 9/11 to the synagogue shooting to this New Zealand attack. "

https://dsad.com/domain-shanes-daily-list-of-domains-at-auction-for-monday-march-18th-2019/

The attack is literally on video.

So what if he does interpret everything as a false flag? His views are different than others. Are different views a reason to hate and condemn? What happened to respect and tolerance?

If society can't be respectable and tolerant of other views than the problem perpetuates.

Ask yourself, did the shooter have lack of respect and intolerance?

 

[JB Lions]

So what if he does interpret everything as a false flag? His views are different than others. Are different views a reason to hate and condemn? What happened to respect and tolerance?

If society can't be respectable and tolerant of other views than the problem perpetuates.

Ask yourself, did the shooter have lack of respect and intolerance?

Where did I say he couldn't have different views? I and many others were just pointing out how ridiculous they were. And you seriously just used the words respect and tolerance?

 

[Internet.Domains]

Where did I say he couldn't have different views? I and many others were just pointing out how ridiculous they were.

In that case, why are you and others condemning him?

He has seen video evidence, as others have, that raises questions. Those questions are hard to investigate with no video evidence. That's all. ...Is this a reason to condemn and exile? There has been calls for that, war horns blown, just for having a different view. I find it ironic that the same people calling for respect and tolerance are incapable of showing that when someone does not agree with their views.....The more you condemn, hate and try to exile Rob, the more you show lack of respect and lack of tolerance. Those are the same traits and motivating factors of those that cause mass violence.

 

[JB Lions]

In that case, why are you and others condemning him?

He has seen video evidence, as others have, that raises questions. Those questions are hard to investigate with no video evidence. That's all. ...Is this a reason to condemn and exile? There has been calls for that, war horns blown, just for having a different view. I find it ironic that the same people calling for respect and tolerance are incapable of showing that when someone does not agree with their views.....The more you condemn, hate and try to exile Rob, the more you show lack of respect and lack of tolerance. Those are the same traits and motivating factors of those that cause mass violence.

Are you serious? Are you really that clueless? No video evidence? What part of it's on video do you not get?

Lack of respect? I've noticed not once you've put that to Rob? I've noticed in the Escrow thread, it was mainly you answering.

Respect. Does this look respectful to you:

"For anyone interested, a copy of Brenton Tarrant's writing were saved to an IPFS file:

-url-

That file format is effectively uncensorable.

Epik is working on a new cloud utility that will make it easy for anyone to create an IPFS file with no technical skills required.

Brandable .IPFS domains can also be purchased at Epik.com."

Advertising on top of a manifest?

Is this respectful, read the quote:

"Actually, you are a troll, and indeed and an anonymous one with no transaction history and probably multiple personas on Namepros. I look forward to you being outed some day soon. All will be revealed, my friend. The God in heaven knows exactly who you are. I don't judge you but He surely will."

https://www.namepros.com/threads/fi...and-name-whoq-com.1121692/page-2#post-7119564

 

[dirk]

And some others. It's amazing to see people not reading but that doesn't stop them from giving an opinion. Just on this one:

The screenshot is literally posted in the thread:

https://www.namepros.com/threads/so...er-or-suspension.1107245/page-20#post-7156909

And if the screenshot isn't good enough for you, then:

His own Joseph Peterson, Epik’s Director of Operations said and I quote:

"In particular, he interprets every massacre as a “false flag” – from 9/11 to the synagogue shooting to this New Zealand attack. "

https://dsad.com/domain-shanes-daily-list-of-domains-at-auction-for-monday-march-18th-2019/

The attack is literally on video.

Believe me I've read it all. Hardly any facts. To be clear, I don't think it was wise for him to share that link nor do I have any doubt about the attack being real.

I don't like his wording but it was in response to someone else. There's no full story there. He also shared some links to videos supporting these oddities. They may have been edited which wouldn't surprise me. I'm more interested in what made him post this questioning of the footage and that just doesn't show.

As for what others said about him... All hearsay. From my personal experience I can only say that I never had any reason to assume he's racist, right wing or whatever he's made out to be at the moment. Maybe he is, maybe he isn't. From anything shared I can only conclude he may be those things but untill proven otherwise I give him the benfit of the doubt.

 

[Internet.Domains]

Are you serious? Are you really that clueless? No video evidence? What part of it's on video do you not get?

Lack of respect? I've noticed not once you've put that to Rob? I've noticed in the Escrow thread, it was mainly you answering.

Respect. Does this look respectful to you:

"For anyone interested, a copy of Brenton Tarrant's writing were saved to an IPFS file:

-url-

That file format is effectively uncensorable.

Epik is working on a new cloud utility that will make it easy for anyone to create an IPFS file with no technical skills required.

Brandable .IPFS domains can also be purchased at Epik.com."

Advertising on top of a manifest?

Is this respectful, read the quote:

"Actually, you are a troll, and indeed and an anonymous one with no transaction history and probably multiple personas on Namepros. I look forward to you being outed some day soon. All will be revealed, my friend. The God in heaven knows exactly who you are. I don't judge you but He surely will."

https://www.namepros.com/threads/fi...and-name-whoq-com.1121692/page-2#post-7119564

JB....Simple question. Yes or No will do. There is no need to spin this.

Are you respectful and tolerant to those that have different views (politically, religiously, philosophically) than you?

 

[Jv1999]

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2019/01/11/problem-epik-proportions

This legit could only suck for epik. Rob does not deserve this kind of smear,.. geezer, wtf. U would think that a LEGAL foundation filled with law profs would never stoop to writing a tabloid-esque piece filled with OPINIONS rather than facts.

Ppl are mad at GAB, Then decide to take it out on epik because Th ey agreed to have their domain.

 

[JB Lions]

JB....Simple question. Yes or No will do. There is no need to spin this.

Are you respectful and tolerant to those that have different views (politically, religiously, philosophically) than you?

You simply dodged my posts. People are free to have their views, I'm free to disagree with them. Not complicated. You can stop the dodge/distract/change the subject stuff.

Are they free to have those views without condemnation and calls for exile?

Read my last line again.