Malicious attack on Wikipedia – what we know and what we’re doing

Re:Malicious attack on Wikipedia – what we know and what we’... by jopsen on Sunday September 08, 2019 @05:51AM (#20909530)

> no Matthew Prince selectively and benevolently enforcing CF neutrality.

Is this a slippery slope argument.

Because there is a world in difference from discontinuing a few extremists customers, to discontinuing service for something akin to Wikipedia.

I'm not sure every slight compromise of principals is a slippery slope. It seems to me that CF generally aims at being neutral.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Malicious attack on Wikipedia – what we know and what we’... by palerdot on Sunday September 08, 2019 @10:25AM (#20910726)

The argument made here is there is a chance (however minute) that the same can happen to something like Wikipedia because of some misplaced sense of morality, like say - we don't agree with wikipedia edits and editing process which we see if offending certain sections of X population. It does not matter how right their reason is. The fact that providers like cloud flare are in such position to take a moral high stance is not right ...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Malicious attack on Wikipedia – what we know and what we’... by jopsen on Tuesday September 10, 2019 @12:38AM (#20925074)

I don't disagree, but has it ever been any different?

[ Parent | on HN ]