First of, not all fire departments are government services. Sometimes they are private associations of volunteers that receive marginal if any taxpayer support. Other times, they are for-profit corporations. This is particularly true when another company needs specialized firefighting services because they are remote or handle materials and situations the local government-supported firefighters aren't equipped to handle.

> Let's say KiwiFarms was entirely hosted/located in a shed in the middle of nowhere.

A shed in the middle of nowhere, so let us suppose the nearest government supported fire department is a two hour drive away, and so KF hires a private for-profit firefighting company. With that modification to patmcc's comment, what is your response now?

Cloudflare is not a private association of volunteers. Private fire fighting services are not called fire departments commonly, are plural, and are not local frequently. My response is still the analogy is bad. We can understand the situation better without trying to imagine what fire would be like if it didn't spread.

I did not compare cloudflare to a private association of volunteers. I am suggesting they are comparable to a private for-profit firefighting company. Can you respond to this?

If KF farms hires a private for-profit firefighting company, and then political activists commit arson against KF, should the private for-profit firefighting company put out the fire? Or does your political ideology oblige firefighters to side with arsonists?

> I did not compare cloudflare to a private association of volunteers.

The point was your lecture on fire fighting services was irrelevant to the context.

> I am suggesting they are comparable to a private for-profit firefighting company. Can you respond to this? If KF farms hires a private for-profit firefighting company, and then political activists commit arson against KF, should the private for-profit firefighting company put out the fire?

I did respond. I said the analogy had negative value. Continuing to mutate the analogy is just more evidence of it.

> Or does your political ideology oblige firefighters to side with arsonists?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question

Can you explain why the comparison between a private fire department that frustrates vigilante arsonists and a private DDoS protection service that frustrates vigilante DDoSers is an analogy with "negative value"?

It's a platform of services like a government service is typically provisioned. While not a democratically elected government, they use governance all the same.

> It's a platform of services like a government service is typically provisioned.

It's a monopoly funded by taxes obligated to serve everyone?

> While not a democratically elected government, they use governance all the same.

This is meaningless.

I can see you're not interested in discussion at this time. No worries, we all have those days.

I did not say it was a government service, I said a platform functions a lot like a government service, especially when multihoming is limited due to switching costs.

> I did not say it was a government service, I said a platform functions a lot like a government service, especially when multihoming is limited due to switching costs.

You said it was like a government service is typically provisioned. And the costs of switching governments dwarf the costs of switching online services.

> I can see you're not interested in discussion at this time. No worries, we all have those days.

The same to you.