‘Shut the Site Down,’ Says 8chan’s Creator

What is a workable answer when it comes to behavior and speech other than a rules based society with limits? I don't see truly oppressed people talking about this problem as the concept was meant to protect, I see people who want to be allowed to do and say whatever they feel like despite how it affects innocents. They hijack the intent for nefarious purpose. It's proven over and over that bad people abuse and take over platforms and societies that are entirely open. You cannot have entirely "free" speech without this problem. Any civilized society has to have limits and rules otherwise regular, calm, peaceful people are always suffering the effects of the aggressors.

I've used the example before of a town with one place to eat. Someone comes in screaming and throwing poop at people. You cannot just "ignore" it. It ruins the place for others. So you choice is to suffer it or never go out to eat and socialize with other calm folks. Is that a proper price to pay so the screaming poop thrower doesn't feel oppressed? Is that really sensible? Sure long term you can build another diner at your own expense...but the screaming poop thrower will come there too and if you kick him out you are "censoring". You can also stay home. But you lose out on experience and peace to avoid the problem. But this seems to be the idea people who are entirely against any censorship or rules propose. "If you don't like it ignore it or move on". That doesn't work in the real world.

So literally everyone so much as reading 8chan/pol is on a watchlist, right? And what about the people posting they are about to “go kill as many brown people as they can find and they plan on being dead by the end of the day?” It’s a felony terroristic threat.

How about we just arrest everyone posting terroristic threats before they can do this kind of damage? 8Chan, or whatever public forum these discussions are occurring on.

I keep reading about blimps watching us 24/7, license plate readers tracking everywhere we drive.

Either these terrorists have the best opsec imaginable, or the FBI agents watching the site should consider a new line of work.

A guy like the El Paso shooter driving 9 hours to that city should have been stopped for a “broken tail light” long before he got to his destination.

I find it nearly incomprehensible that the attacker was entirely unknown to the FBI, that they didn’t flag the manifesto, know who posted it, and have the means to know he was, at that very moment, on a long road-trip toward the border.

I don’t personally know how long ahead of the attack the manifesto was posted, or if it was the attacker’s first post. Perhaps those details would mitigate somewhat my exasperation that this attack wasn’t foiled, but I suspect otherwise.

EDIT: According to the NYT it was posted 19 minutes before the first 911 call came in. But Newsweek says an hour and a half.

>I keep reading about blimps watching us 24/7, license plate readers tracking everywhere we drive.

It's almost as if this "surveillance state" you all imagine doesn't exist. There are checks in place and warrants needed for this. If you see something illegal online you could report it to the FBI perhaps?

It's always possible that many sites were candidates given their traits. And one in a semi random manner became it.

The ability to collect something and the ability to see it are two different things. Just because data about this guy may have been snarfed up, doesn’t mean anybody looked at it.