I am not asking for any of these people, specifically, to be removed from the internet. I am saying that I support cloudflare banning hosts which specifically target, harass, and doxx specific individuals or communities.

I'm not supportive of banning Joshua Moon from the internet. Do you agree that there is a difference here?

This move and people's response to it is not about lines and principles. It's pretty much a slippery slope and we all know it; some cheer it on because this time their line was crossed, and others see it for what it's signaling. The overall erosion of discourse on non-accepted ideas and topics that are on the scale of mean/offensive/hateful.

Yeah none of us here are happy about this site existing or innocent people being targeted, of course. But the next one will be slightly less extreme as kiwi farms and we'll say the same things.

Would you be okay with a website which targeted you, specifically, tracked down your home, your employer, your family? One which encouraged others to do the same, filled your inbox with hateful messages?

One which hid behind Cloudflare in order to hide their identity while simultaneously exposing yours?

This is how KF started and continued to operate.

You have a line. I have a line. What is happening here is that we're trying to define a common line which works for society, and it is going to "slip" over time as views change.

In the past, that line would have included books which even mentioned homosexual behavior. Today that is more tolerated and accepted, which is good in my opinion because gay people certainly exist.

I guess what I'm saying is that the line is going to have to slip a bit, and in more than one direction.

Should the Washington Post be banned? Or should their journalist, Taylor Lorenz be banned from Twitter for doxxing the Libs of TikTok person?

We should be consistent and non-arbitrary. There’s so many more examples.

She should be reprimanded, in my opinion. The Washington Post is not encouraging their readers to harass or doxx individuals or groups, so this is a false equivalency.

How would you feel if someone made a "Finding Nemo" forum in which they tracked down your identity, your family, and your friends and encouraged its members to harass and doxx you and your family?

Oh, and this forum hid their identity behind Cloudflare while, at the same time exposing your identity and personal details?

Would you support Cloudflare banning said forum?

> The Washington Post is not encouraging their readers to harass or doxx individuals or groups

Publishing libsoftiktok's information was definitely intended to harass them, and implicit support for doxxing.

> Would you support Cloudflare banning said forum?

No.

It's crazy how many people on this forum are disagreeing with you. Has HN's truly lost its community and the old greybeards who used to stand up for free speech?

This is nimby logic. It’s indirect. There is clear damage caused by kiwi farms. I don’t care if we can come up with a philosophically coherent rule that captures kiwi farms and not other websites, it is still good that they are banned.

But that’s an imaginary problem. You seem to think that having some standards even if they are not clearly defined necessary means anything could happen and the most silly things will. It is not the case in practice.