Tag: #AltTech

An educational juxstaposition

GAB: to two different people, neither of whom was me.

1. “If our registrar requires us to remove something again we will publish it here and let everyone know that you whined to them because someone hurt your feelings with mean words on the internet.”

2. “We just don’t “moderate” to the whining crybaby standards of your husband.”

Gab has also permitted the posting of home addresses, in direct contradiction to its Terms of Service,.
I’ve now counted and screen-capped FOUR address postings on Gab, by various Gab users, in direct violation of Texas SEC. 33.07. ONLINE HARASSMENT. The offense is a Class B misdemeanor.


TWITTER: to me, in response to three different reports of tweets which varied in their degree of abusiveness.

1. Thank you for contacting us about this issue. We’ve investigated and suspended the account you reported as it was found to be participating in abusive behavior. If these problems persist for you on Twitter, please let us know.

Thanks,
Twitter

2. Thank you for contacting us about this issue. We have reviewed the account you reported and have locked it because we found it to be in violation of the Twitter Rules. If the account owner complies with our requested actions and stated policies, the account will be unlocked. Please continue to report any future violations of the Twitter Rules to us. We appreciate your help making Twitter better for everyone.

Thank you,
Twitter

3. Thank you for reporting this issue to us. Our goal is to create a safe environment for everyone on Twitter to express themselves freely.  We reviewed your report carefully and found that there was no violation of Twitter’s Rules regarding abusive behavior.

Thank you again for reporting this issue to us.
Twitter

Now, I’m not exactly what one would call a fan of Twitter. Their moderation is inconsistent and often applied unfairly. They partially block direct access to this blog on rather dubious grounds, and its Trust & Safety Council once suspended my account for a week for posting a picture of a cartoon fish, of all things. It also forced me to delete two of my 35,800 tweets about a year ago when I had responded to an SJW attacking me. Nevertheless, there is absolutely no question that their user experience, their moderation policies, and their reporting tools, are vastly better than Gab’s.

I recommended Gab to many of you on the basis of it being an alternative to Twitter. With the benefit of hindsight, it is now apparent that doing so was a mistake. I had no idea that Gab would somehow manage to create a less professional, less viable, and even less useful alternative to Twitter. While Gab had a fair amount of potential, it simply doesn’t have a management team in place that is capable of realizing that potential.

Which is why I have canceled my Pro account and returned to Twitter for the time being.

Gab wants war

And now Andrew Torba has publicly endorsed people attempting to doxx and report hate speech by his users despite the way in which doing so would clearly violate’s Gab’s Terms of Service. At this point, given the unprofessionalism and obvious lack of self-control being demonstrated by Andrew, I think it is safe to conclude that Gab is dead. It simply hasn’t stopped moving yet.

Microchip · @Microchip
Link me @voxday’s dox when/if you have it. Don’t be shy, it’s public record somewhere and it’s time to ensure the safety of our allies.

Spacebunny Day · @Spacebunny
@a thinks this is okay – not against ToS or anything. Gab is doomed.

Microchip · @Microchip
Why wouldn’t be okay? If it’s public info, it’s public info, if you allowed your info to be posted somewhere online, not Gab’s problem, that’s your problem.

Pepe Memes · @Pepe_Memes
Die of breast cancer, you fucking cunt

Spacebunny Day · @Spacebunny
@a @e @u – brilliant work you’re doing. Truly.

Microchip · @Microchip
Don’t be bad at this, Space lady, I’m not asking for anyone to do anything illegal here, I’m asking for @voxday’s info so I can send the police to his home and have him arrested for hate crimes.

Spacebunny Day · @Spacebunny
I said against ToS, dear. Gab claims to moderate, they demonstrably don’t. Not only do they not have a chance against Google, they won’t last, period. It’s disappointing. You, however, are boring.

Andrew TorbaPRO · @a
Lol. Yes, we do. We just don’t “moderate” to the whining crybaby standards of your husband. He’s not the boss here. Period.

Todd Kincannon @ToddKincannon
I am open to persuasion, but that has not been my experience. Also, the ToS expressly disclaim a duty to moderate, while reserving a right to moderate. Don’t you agree with that? cc: @a @u @voxday

Spacebunny Day · @Spacebunny
He never claimed to be, dear. You shouldn’t have bragged about not moderating and not just to Vox.

Andrew TorbaPRO · @a
Cry more sweetie. Whine more.

Spacebunny Day · @Spacebunny
Not crying, dear. Just observing.

Justin Bailey · @Botany_Bay16309
So are you going to remove the post trying to dox Vox Day, or are you just a bald faced liar?

Andrew TorbaPRO · @a
No dox occurred. If info is public it is public. Not our problem. Public info is public domain. Deal with it.

Andrew TorbaPRO · @a
Wow if I lived in a country that had “hate speech” laws I’d be pretty worried about what has been published on my “blog.” Someone might “report” it or something.

The actual Terms of Service cited:

Considering that, unlike Gab, my blog doesn’t even violate Google’s rules concerning hate speech, I can’t say I’m terribly worried about being found at fault for violating any European hate crime statutes. And if I was, I would simply do as directed and remove them to resolve the situation.

As usual, Americans have absolutely no idea how Europeans do things.

Gab belatedly files suit

It would appear the additional discussions that delayed yesterday’s expected filing were not fruitful.

Free speech social media site Gab AI, Inc. filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against Google for violations of the Clayton Act and Sherman Act. The lawsuit stems from Google removing Gab from its Google Play Android app store on spurious grounds of “hate speech” arising from posts by users.

Google did not accuse Gab of hate speech, but used third party content as a pretext to justify its own business ends. Gab, a startup, aims to bring “folks together of all races, religions, and creeds who share in the common ideals of Western values, individual liberty and the free exchange and flow of information.”

According to Gab’s attorney, Marc Randazza, Google’s conduct is a straightforward violation of the antitrust laws “Google Play and Android have monopoly power in the app store market, and Google’s apps YouTube and Google+ compete directly against Gab. Google’s intimate partnership with Twitter, which also competes against Gab, makes Google’s control of all Android apps available through the Play Store a serious restraint of trade issue.”

Randazza noted, “regardless of Google’s pretextual justification for removing Gab, the effect is that they used their monopoly power in the app store to block an upstart competitor it in the social media app market, to the detriment of millions of consumers who value free speech.”

The monopoly issue may work for Gab. But I don’t like their chances for two reasons. First, Google’s resources. Second, the Gab team really seems to be flying blind on the moderation issue. Now, I obviously disagree with their position, which is why I have filed a petition against them. And considering that I had to do so due to their complete refusal to moderate their posts, I don’t see that they have any ability to claim they are abiding by Google’s terms of service. Which, of course, means they have handed Google a perfect excuse to stonewall them.

Oh, the irony…. This is mildly amusing.

Well, we’ve collected a whole lot of examples of defamation and defamation per se, but I don’t think Andrew is going to find them very useful to his case. The point is not that the other social networks don’t moderate effectively, the point is that Gab openly refuses to moderate at all. It is not up to Gab, or even the court, to define what Google considers to be “a sufficient level of moderation” when all Google has to do is demonstrate that Gab does not provide ANY moderation, even upon request.

UPDATE: Andrew Torba claims that Gab does moderate posts. That is likely true, to a very limited extent. The question is, is whatever level of moderation they presently provide sufficient when Gab’s management openly brags that they do not moderate for defamation or defamation per se as defined by their registrar, or by Texas law and the Texas courts, and that they will harass users who pursue legal means of redress.

Andrew TorbaPRO · @a
If our registrar requires us to remove something again we will publish it here and let everyone know that you whined to them because someone hurt your feelings with mean words on the internet.

Andrew TorbaPRO · @a
Note that these are recorded. Keep going. Please this will be fun. I am more alpha than you will ever be. Try me.

Andrew TorbaPRO · @a
Vox I’ll publish every email you ever sent us and phone calls which have been recorded, Please try me. You can destroy your personal brand all you want, but you’re not going to drag down Gab with it. Mark my words.

It seems to me that he’s doing an efficient job of dragging down Gab without any help from me. Here is a partial list of the posts being sent to Asia Registry for review by the LLoE. It demonstrates, rather conclusively, that Gab simply does not moderate to the standard set by Facebook and Twitter, and, more importantly, Google.

  • https://gab.ai/tdawg911/posts/12090691
  • https://gab.ai/FreeinTX/posts/12065490
  • https://gab.ai/FreeinTX/posts/12065748
  • https://gab.ai/FreeinTX/posts/12107799
  • https://gab.ai/FreeinTX/posts/12125780
  • https://gab.ai/FreeinTX/posts/12126457
  • https://gab.ai/FreeinTX/posts/12127469
  • https://gab.ai/FreeinTX/posts/12127738
  • https://gab.ai/FreeinTX/posts/12128833
  • https://gab.ai/FreeinTX/posts/12129102
  • https://gab.ai/FreeinTX/posts/12130342
  • https://gab.ai/FreeinTX/posts/12128833
  • https://gab.ai/FreeinTX/posts/12129450
  • https://gab.ai/FreeinTX/posts/12186103
  • https://gab.ai/Fashdaddey/posts/11862161
  • https://gab.ai/Fashdaddey/posts/11839913
  • https://gab.ai/roonyroo/posts/12180125
  • https://gab.ai/Valaranumenoriano/posts/12160268
  • https://gab.ai/Deacon_Jim/posts/12156043
  • https://gab.ai/GTKRWN/posts/12147100
  • https://gab.ai/gaystapo/posts/12112801
  • https://gab.ai/WilhelmL/posts/12090962
  • https://gab.ai/Ungern/posts/12086315
  • https://gab.ai/Pepe_Memes/posts/12077259
  • https://gab.ai/MorbiousStone/posts/12076537
  • https://gab.ai/Whiteknight007/posts/12071038
  • https://gab.ai/Pepe_Memes/posts/12067941
  • https://gab.ai/GTKRWN/posts/12067637
  • https://gab.ai/h4rdm0us/posts/12063396
  • https://gab.ai/h4rdm0us/posts/12062548
  • https://gab.ai/Pepe_Memes/posts/12061817
  • https://gab.ai/Pepe_Memes/posts/12060233
  • https://gab.ai/Pepe_Memes/posts/12046728
  • https://gab.ai/Pepe_Memes/posts/12041396
Regardless, to quote John Derbyshire’s recent column, fiat justitia ruat cælum.

Good morning, said Gab

Gab@getongab
Good morning to everyone except Google.

If you’re not sure what this means, perhaps today’s DailyMemeWars might help you understand.

Now, obviously, I don’t agree with Gab’s position on moderation. I don’t agree with it in theory and I don’t agree with it in practice. But that doesn’t mean that I think it is either right or fair for Gab to be locked out of the App Store and the Play Store. As to whether it is legal for them to be blackballed in this way, I have no idea. I simply don’t know what most of the relevant laws are, or how they apply to the situation. Unlike most of the critics of my current petition, I try to avoid opining in ignorance.

It is a daunting task to take on a tech giant with the resources that Google has at its disposal. It’s certainly a courageous move. As to whether it is a clever move or a completely crazy one, we shall have to wait and see what comes of it. But, as we know, giants can be slain.

Announcing VOXIVERSITY

To support Voxiversity, please visit the Voxiversity project at the new crowdfunding site, Freestartr, which combines the functionality of Kickstarter, Patreon, and Indiegogo, but without the SJW thought-policing. There are six levels of support, each of which comes with different rewards.

  • Subscriber
  • Supporter
  • Advocate
  • Champion
  • Brainstorm
  • Foundation

Voxiversity is a series of educational video lectures by bestselling political philosopher Vox Day.

Castalia House reaches tens of thousands of people through the medium of books. The ideas first presented in books such as SJWs Always Lie, 4th Generation Warfare Handbook, and The Irrational Atheist have penetrated even those institutions most converged by social justice, such as academia and the media.. But Castalia’s reach is limited to an audience of people who enjoy reading books.

Video offers the ability to reach millions of people in a very short period of time. But the distribution of video is entirely different than book-selling, as most people who watch videos expect to do so for free. Video production is also more expensive, and the combination of those two factors is why it is necessary to crowdfund the production of videos containing the same kind of viral information that one so often encounters in Castalia’s non-fiction books.

The videos will be 20-minutes long, and subjects that require more detailed analysis will be addressed by multi-video series. The videos will also be released as podcasts for those who prefer audio to video.

Voxiversity will change the way people think.

UPDATE: Thanks very much for the staunch support. Our objective is to exceed expectations. In the meantime, I think this was the most amusing reaction.

I suspect that your success will be proportional to your ability to restrain yourself from telling people how much more intelligent you are then them when you fail to explain something clearly. Having said that…I wish you the best of luck ? 

As promised

Utsav Sanduja@u
If only it were a phone call or two…or an e-mail or a two.

My friend, you have no idea what you’re talking about.

You just don’t.

Vox Day@voxday
He doesn’t, but he will. I will post all of our recent emails back and forth on my blog tomorrow.

My objective was not to embarass anyone, nor is the content of the emails even remotely embarrassing to anyone, but merely to demonstrate that Utsav was lying and attempting to create a false narrative about my behavior. It really was just a phone call or two and an email or four, as you will see.

9/6/2017 21:36: Andrew emails me and asks me to talk to Utsav. He provides me with the number.
9/6/2017 21:58: Utsav emails me to request a call.
9/7/2017 08:44: I email Utsav to tell him that I rang but he did not pick up.
9/7/2017 08:54: Utsav emails me to tell me to call him in 15 minutes.
9/7/2017 10:09: I call Utsav. We talk for 16 minutes and 31 seconds. It’s a good, positive call.
9/7/2017 10:47: I email Utsav to thank him for taking the time to deal with this.
9/7/2017 11:07: Utsav emails me to direct my attention to this statement by Andrew.
9/7/2017 11:49: I email Utsav to ask what the policy on prospective libel and defamation will be.
9/7/2017 13:07: Utsav emails me to tell me it’s being reviewed.
9/7/2017 20:38: I email Utsav with my suggestions for how Gab could handle defamation complaints.

And that’s it. That’s the crazy, desperate narrative at which Utsav was darkly hinting. Most of the emails were little more than sentence or two. And if you would like to know what my suggestions were, they were not particularly ambitious or draconian.

  1. Clearly state that libel and defamation are not free speech in the guidelines.
  2. Establish a Legal Review Board to which libel-related complaints sent to support can be reviewed. 
  3. If the Legal Review Board concludes that a post about which a complaint has been submitted is probable libel per current US legal standards, the account is given one strike, and the account holder is informed that his user details will be divulged to the target upon request by that user.
  4. Three strikes and the account is deleted and the account holder permanently banned. Each libelous post is counted separately, but multiple libels in a single post would only be counted once.

I felt this process would minimize legal disruptions to Gab, protect the Gab community from libel and defamation, provide any member of the community subjected to genuine libel a means of seeking legal redress without having to pay for the privilege of finding out who their attacker is, and remove any incentive for troublemakers to engage in libelous or defamatory behavior.

I’m not concerned about myself. As Supreme Dark Lord, I have the benefit of the Legal Legion of Evil, which I can assure Andrew Torba, despite his doubts, does exist. The various defamations that are presently published on Gab will be removed, one way or another. But there are others who are already coming forward who simply do not have such easy acccess the legal process that is presently required of them.

I felt that establishing a Legal Review Board would be a reasonable way of dealing with the obvious problem. Of course, I also feel that it is right to remove libelous and defamatory posts, even without waiting for a request from the target of the defamation. I do it here almost every day, usually without a request, because failing to do so renders the comments a wasteland of trolls, spammers, and people who derive some sense of spiritual satisfaction from rolling in filth.

Obviously, the management of Gab feels differently. Which is their right, but is also why the site will increasingly become a wasteland of trolls, slanderers, and people who derive some sense of spiritual satisfaction from rolling in filth. Since Gab did not take a reasonable stance at the start, their problem is only going to metastasize. I’m not surprised by any of this, in fact, I warned him in November that if he did not come up with a reasonable moderation policy, the site would eventually spin out of his control.

If people cannot get redress from Gab, they will seek it elsewhere. Andrew and Utsav really have no right to complain about how people do so when they are giving them no other choice. And yet, they are.

JeremiahEmbs · @JeremiahEmbs
So what’s the excuse for @FashDaddey calling me a child rapist?Is @a @u @support going to address this?Or are they going to pretend defamation is the same thing as free speech&make this site completely unusable for good people such as myself who will abandon this platform since it is not moderated.

 JeremiahEmbs · @JeremiahEmbs
@a @u @support What are you going to do Torba? Asia Registry is being informed you are no longer immune under section 230 of the Communications Decency Act as the site appears to be designed for defamation as there is no recourse for those abused by it.

Andrew Torba@a
If our registrar requires us to remove something again we will publish it here and let everyone know that you whined to them because someone hurt your feelings with mean words on the internet.

As I said in last night’s Darkstream, Andrew Torba is simply not ready for prime time. I have advised him for nearly a year, I think he is a talented young man, and I genuinely like him, but he has repeatedly demonstrated that he is still too emotionally fragile for any high-stress position that brings him into contact with the public. And furthermore, I would immediately fire any customer support representative who ever responded to one of my customers that way.

Gab’s Torba to release emails, recorded phone calls

Micus Expectorus@expectorant
Who the hell posts on a public forum criticizing an ally because he thought he got a phone call or two and didn’t want to pick up?

Look, we get you’re trying to be the lion for @a, but you’re coming across as a passive-aggressive weenie. You should grow up too.

Utsav SandujaPRO · @u
If only it were a phone call or two…or an e-mail or a two.

My friend, you have no idea what you’re talking about.

You just don’t.

Vox Day@voxday
He doesn’t, but he will. I will post all of our recent emails back and forth on my blog tomorrow.

I never write anything I’m not willing to expose to the public.

Vox Day@voxday
[9/7/2017 10:09:13 AM] *** Call to [number redacted] ***
[9/7/2017 10:25:59 PM] *** Call ended, duration 16:31 ***
[9/7/2017 8:01:25 PM] *** Call to [number redacted], no answer. ***
[9/7/2017 8:55:19 PM] *** Call to [number redacted], no answer. ***

Note that the first call was at @u’s request.

Andrew Torba@a
Note that these are recorded.

Keep going.

Please this will be fun.

I am more alpha than you will ever be.

Try me.

Andrew Torba@a
Vox I’ll publish every email you ever sent us and phone calls which have been recorded,

Please try me.

You can destroy your personal brand all you want, but you’re not going to drag down Gab with it.

Mark my words.

Vox Day@voxday
I am happy to grant your plea. Go for it.

Release the text of all 81 emails from 9/22/2016 to 9/7/2017 in their entirety. I suggest you redact the names and email addresses of all third parties.

You made the threat. Now deliver on it.

Legal update

First, as I pointed out in tonight’s Darkstream, I am not suing Gab. I repeat, I am not suing Gab and there is no reason to do so. That being said, Gab has already gone into lockdown mode, as evidenced by Andrew Torba’s recent “bring it on” video and Utsav’s recent post asking me not to call him.

In other words, they are not acceding to my request for the personal information of the three users responsible for the defamation, which means that we will have to force their compliance through the legal process. The Legal Legion of Evil is already aware of this and will begin the process next week.

I respect Gab’s right to run their business as they see fit. But there is no way that any responsible parent will permit such baseless and reprehensible accusations to stand uncontested, and so the Legal Legion and I will be pursuing this matter until the defamation is removed and the @dantheman10, @GTKRWN, and @Fabian_Nazism are forced to answer for their defamatory actions.

If you don’t understand why I’m doing this, these three examples might help you understand.

  • https://gab.ai/Fabian_Nazism/posts/11749651
  • https://gab.ai/GTKRWN/posts/11748825
  • https://gab.ai/dantheman10/posts/11773072

In the meantime, if you follow me on social media, you can do so on Twitter, as I will not be using Gab until the defamation is removed and policies are instituted that can be reasonably expected to prevent similar incidents in the future.

And if you’re a lawyer who is interested in joining the Legal Legion, shoot me an email. We still have 40 states that require coverage. If you think I am overreacting, I suggest you consider the recent examples set by Milo Yiannopoulos and Julian Assange.

This is compounded by my level-headed analyses of the alt-right, which has led media organization after media organization to brand me a “white nationalist”—almost always followed by a groveling apology to me and a public retraction after my lawyers get in touch.
– Milo Yiannopoulos, Dangerous

As violence broke out, Arreguin returned to Twitter to half-heartedly proclaim, “Violence and destruction is not the answer.” The following morning he put out a statement condemning the violence, while also condemning me as a white nationalist. My lawyers forced him to retract and apologize.
– Milo Yiannopoulos, Dangerous

An analyst on our air earlier today asserted that Julian Assange was a pedophile, and regrets saying it. In fact, CNN has no evidence to support that assertion… We regret the error.
– CNN

The three types of free speech

This is a concept that appears to be a particularly difficult one for the binary thinkers of the world to grasp. As I explained in the Darkstream last night, there are three types of free speech:

  • Platonic
  • Public
  • Private

As I have repeatedly explained, I support Public free speech, which is the form protected by the Constitution, reject Private free speech on the basis of private property, and observe that Platonic free speech does not, and has never, existed.

The problem that I see is that Gab is nobly attempting to set its policy on the basis of Platonic free speech, limited only by the law. However, this is setting them up for potential legal trouble, particularly since that policy does not permit them to remove libelous and defamatory speech.

Here is how Andrew Torba expressed their Neo-Platonic policy:

@Voxday, you are fortunate enough to choose who to publish and who can comment on your blog, but Gab is a completely different environment, a platform for free speech for all viewpoints. We do not agree when it comes to censorship. Gab will not be the judge of what is or is not libelous. If a competent court requires us to take down a post because it is deemed libelous, Gab will comply. Libel as we all know is not protected by the first amendment.

This means that Gab is knowingly complicit in publishing these false, malicious, and defamatory statements which I brought to their attention and requested their immediate removal.

Silverdawn · @GTKRWN
9 hours · edited
Everyone stay away from @voxday He is a faggot Talmudic half jew half Mexican Pedophile pretending to be White.

Fabius MaximusPRO · @Fabian_Nazism
8 hours
I heard @voxday is a known pedophile who’s viewed more prepubescent boys online than viewers to his own site. Sad

Silverdawn · @GTKRWN
7 hours
Why do you follow a pedophile? are you a pedophile too?

AlphaJedPRO · @AlphaJed
@voxday the libel is still up

But that’s not the real problem. The real problem is that unless the identity of the individuals is already known, it is going to be necessary to sue Gab in order to force it to disclose their identity so that they can be served for the libel case that Gab requires in order to take down a post. Which is something I tend to doubt is an aspect of their policy that has been entirely thought through. Fortunately, I have other means of identifying anonymous commenters. VFM, you know what to do.

Regardless, this is something that the Legal Legion of Evil is going to have to discuss before I make any decisions, so I’ll be getting in touch with all of you to set up a group meeting later this week. This isn’t the only matter we have to discuss, but it is the most important one at the moment. As a Gab supporter, I certainly don’t wish to harm Gab in any way; this sort of situation is precisely why I previously advised Andrew to adopt a ban-on-sight policy towards known trolls and troublemakers.

But sometimes people, particularly idealists, need to learn these things for themselves.

Andrew Torba’s statement on Gab censorship

Personally, I think there is no reason to hesitate to ban anyone from any site for any reason the site owner deems desirable. But I understand that Gab has publicly professed a commitment to free speech and therefore has to deal with the expectations that they have created for themselves.

We believe the post in question was indeed obscene. It should have been marked #NSFW and it was not, therefore it is in violation of our Community Guidelines.

This is not the first time we have enforced our guidelines. Gab has banned users for spamming, making death threats to the President, posting revenge porn, and doxing among others. We’ve been transparent and incredibly fair about this on many occasions.

We believe this effort was coordinated and planned. We knew this day would come and now we have entered a crossroads with a very binary decision: remove one post or lose our domain and thus the entire website.

Our choice was very clear to me. The post needs to come down. If it does not, we lose our domain. To my knowledge there are no pro-free speech domain registrars and that is a massive problem. Our only other option now would be to play a cat and mouse game by transferring our domain to another registrar. Others who have attempted to play this game have failed and even had their domain seized completely from under them. We will not play these games. We have little choice, for now.

The free and open internet as we know it is under attack. It is centralized and controlled by no more than a handful of companies who provide these services:

  • Hosting
  • DDoS protection
  • Payment Processing
  • Domain Registrars
  • Mobile device hardware and software distribution

Without any of these things an individual website can not possibly compete and operate at scale. If left unchecked, these centralized platforms will continue their dominance and control the means of all information, personal data, and communication on the internet.

Perhaps it would help if you understand that I don’t believe that free speech exists anymore than equality does.