You're free to let Ars' editing of the interview determine your trust level for CloudFlare. Ars used to be a Bastion of Truth, but slowly after the acquisition by Condé Nast, a bias started to appear. And then it started growing.

My take on this is the idea that any tolerance of free speech by extremists goes completely against Ars' bias. And that's why they didn't print the passage you highlight, despite Ars linking to that exact blog post.

I can see both being true; the decision to terminate based on the Stormer saying that CF and Prince supported them and Prince saying the decision was arbitrary. They pissed him off and he exercised his right to refuse service to anyone. Pissed off = arbitrary.

Quoting the quote:

> "My rationale for making this decision was simple: the people behind the Daily Stormer are assholes and I'd had enough," Prince wrote. "Let me be clear: this was an arbitrary decision."

I understand your point that being severely annoyed can lead to arbitrary decision, but nowhere it says in the interview, something like - I'd had enough because they even implied we supported them - here I would have understand. My problem is that it looks like either:

1. Ars removed this from the interview or

2. CloudFlare added this line in the PR blog post even so it was not the case

I cannot tell which one is true or both or none...

Note: Updated for formatting.

The possibility of revision is an important thing to consider. Here's a data point, though not concrete proof. The first pass by the Wayback scraped that quote: http://web.archive.org/web/*/https://blog.cloudflare.com/why...

I found out from the blog and so this has already been the reason why they withdrew they services. I have also seen it mentioned in every other article I have read on the issue, it seems like Ars are the only ones who have not included it. I think they only way to verify the claim is to go to the daily stormer site to see what was said but the site is down.