Write abuse@ and you stand a good chance they revert this quickly.
No chance whatsoever, they legitimately don't have a flow for unbanning people outside of knowing an employee.
Ask HN: Discord banned me with no recourse
161–170 of 300 posts
Re: Ask HN: Discord banned me with no recourse
#162Earlier quoted context omitted.
That should absolutely not apply to Discord, Google Mail, or Amazon AWS, because those are all private companies restricting the use of their private property. You may call them "public spaces" or "public services" but that is an abuse of the word "public".
I’m here to tell you in all probability, the “public” bus you ride every day is owned by a private company.
The bus is owned by a private company, but they're being contracted by the government. It's still public.
If the USG were to approve a publicly-funded centralized chat program and contracted that work out to Discord, I would support/approve subjecting them to the rules people are suggesting here. But that hasn't happened and most likely will not happen.
Re: Ask HN: Discord banned me with no recourse
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
That should absolutely not apply to Discord, Google Mail, or Amazon AWS, because those are all private companies restricting the use of their private property. You may call them "public spaces" or "public services" but that is an abuse of the word "public".
Hate to break it to you, but Facebook is the biggest public square in the world.
Sure, as long as you acknowledge you're not using any legal definition of the word "public". You're not really even using any dictionary definition of the word "public".
Re: Ask HN: Discord banned me with no recourse
#164Stop depending entirely on corporate systems for your personal communication and recreation (I say on HN...). And absolutely stop calling for the use of violence (regulations by government) in these situations. Just because Bob says you cannot come over to the weekly neighborhood BBQs in his backyard does not mean it is ethical for you to call up your police friend to threaten Bob and to make sure you can go. It does…
I hear you about saying no to depending on the rings of power. Not sure about the regulatory part with Bob’s backyard. What about when Bob intentionally persuades everyone to route all their packages and mail through his house, which he routinely opens, reads and studies to determine their preferences and desires and compile psychological profiles of everyone in the neighborhood which he then discloses to various uni…
I can only control my own actions. If Bob does that then I'd stop being friends with Bob and stop going to his BBQs. If other people want to keep using Bob's services thats entirely up to them. And their continued use is entirely voluntary. If they want they can stop.
It's already balanced. All anyone has to do is make a personal choice rather than invoking calls for coersion.
Re: Ask HN: Discord banned me with no recourse
#165Are you using a google voice number or something? A lot of big tech wont accept that type of number for verification.
Re: Ask HN: Discord banned me with no recourse
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
That should absolutely not apply to Discord, Google Mail, or Amazon AWS, because those are all private companies restricting the use of their private property. You may call them "public spaces" or "public services" but that is an abuse of the word "public".
Your argument was lost a hundred years ago or more. There are many regulations on businesses. On their speech, on their pricing, on the products, on hiring practices. The list is quite large. AT&T can't restrict who can use their network to make phone calls based on the political views or the content of the call. Why should Google, Facebook, or Twitter? Especially when special liability exemptions were made without w…
I mean the simple answer is that I think AT&T should be able to restrict their network based on those criteria. If the people of the US don't like that, they should vote to either build out equal infrastructure to replicate that functionality publicly, or vote to buy out AT&T's infrastructure.
Re: Ask HN: Discord banned me with no recourse
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are putting "individualism" where none was mentioned. > "fine none of us then as long as I can insulate myself from the worse effects of it". No. More like "there is no way that any central entity will be able to solve the conflicts of everyone without turning into authoritarianism and tyranny, so let's stop pretending that we can do that and create a plethora of different communities where people are closer to t…
So... based on the fear of a particular outcome, you want a situation where individuals and small groups must solve the problem for themselves or accept the consequences? The language may be uncharitable but I remain comfortable calling that cowardice and user-blaming, yes. I stand where I stand on this.
The only cowardice I see is in those thinking they can not fight by themselves and for others, and want to have a soothing voice telling them how to feel.
Re: Ask HN: Discord banned me with no recourse
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
That should absolutely not apply to Discord, Google Mail, or Amazon AWS, because those are all private companies restricting the use of their private property. You may call them "public spaces" or "public services" but that is an abuse of the word "public".
The entire premise of limited liability corporations is a creation of government; these are artificial entities, not people, they have privileges not rights. Every single right you might think a corporation has is a privilege, not a right, and can be taken away. They don't even have the right to exist at all.
I appreciate the sentiment, but I'm not sure that current SCOTUS precedent agrees with you, and that's the framework I'm working under.
Re: Ask HN: Discord banned me with no recourse
#169Earlier quoted context omitted.
The internet is not real life. It seems a lot of people who hold your opinion are in the 18-24 age range. Those people who grew up thinking the internet is the only way to communicate or “make things happen”. But I assure you these private companies do NOT have to let you use their services, and common excuses such as “Online communication is like a public square!” is not rooted in the desire for free speech, but is…
I'm 33. I think you're wrong. I suspect you're older - imagine the US without a public highway system. Imagine every highway is private. Imagine what arbitrary bans from those highways would do to impact how you live. Talk to me about how well we should communicate face to face in that situation? Idea not that appealing? That's what you're advocating for today. A complete loss of a highway system that has no public r…
> I suspect you're older
No, I'm younger than you.
> Imagine every highway is private. Imagine what arbitrary bans from those highways would do to impact how you live. Talk to me about how well we should communicate face to face in that situation
First off, this is a flawed argument because my taxes don't pay for the servers running Discord or other similar services.
Also, your response is proving my point. I said in my original comment that your entire argument is based on the desire for instant gratification through through the use of private services that can boost your voice/reach online - These are private services, and you are not entitled to them at all.
I understand you want faster results (in a time where you can go online), but it's still very possible to get results face to face - That was my response. This is a fact that doesn't lean on any quasi-moral bulwarks to manipulate the conversation.
Your example ignores the fact that you can get anywhere using public roads instead of highways - Which would take more time, but are still very functional. This reinforces my original point. Additionally, beginning your response with made up scenarios is generally a low quality way to frame an argument to your liking, but I'll give you a pass on that.
> Does that make this ok? Nope, Damn well doesn't
Says who? You aren't entitled to any private service. Mind you, you're the one using words like "shouldn't" that don't fall under any moral authority other than the owner of the platform itself.
Re: Ask HN: Discord banned me with no recourse
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not your server, not your data. Host your own mission critical services, and don’t commit too much to (especially free) third party services.
You cannot self-host identity. You cannot self-host a social graph. If people would host "abc liked my tweet" and "xyz follows me" on their own server, then everybody would claim that Billie Eilish liked all their tweets and Joe Biden is their best friend. People go on social media for the social graph. You can do that via a central authority (and live in fear that everything is taken from you) or you can do it via c…
have you not heard of the fediverse?