News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Website pulled on US church that wants to burn Korans [by... by mynameishere on Thursday September 09, 2010 @04:46PM (#1676885)
If I were running a hosting company, I'd be wary of permitting religious content of any sort

This makes no sense whatsoever. Obviously, you haven't thought this through, since your refusal to host (for example) an online Koran would result in death threats, protests, outrage from online teenaged suburban UMC liberal retards, etc, etc.

Re:Website pulled on US church that wants to burn Korans [by... by danilocampos on Thursday September 09, 2010 @04:59PM (#1676924)
I'd run a terrible hosting company, so let's get that out of the way completely. :)

Under Danilo's Fictional Hosting, I'm not saying I would refuse religious content outright, I'm saying I'd be much more cautious about religious content than Marjorie's Baking Blog because religion, as a result of the all too common "I'm better than the rest of you" rule, is just a troublesome topic.

Porn is a troublesome topic too -- many hosts don't permit it. Too much exposure to Dawkins leaves me with only the most feeble of arguments against giving the same treatment to religion.

Re:Website pulled on US church that wants to burn Korans [by... by joshuacc on Thursday September 09, 2010 @06:03PM (#1677112)
Personally, I'd think that Mother Teresa, Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi add up to a very strong argument against banning religious content. But as it's your (hypothetical) hosting company, you're obviously free to do as you wish. :-)
Re:Website pulled on US church that wants to burn Korans [by... by michaelhalligan on Thursday September 09, 2010 @06:36PM (#1677200)
For the most part, the reasons that hosts don't permit Porn is that pornographers are notoriously bad at paying their bills, and the amount of fraud and theft in the online porn industry is staggering. It's also why it's nearly impossible for pornographers to get merchant accounts with credit card processors.