On the removal of Come Back Alive • Hacker News Board

Re: On the removal of Come Back Alive

#41

Post by bell-cot » Fri, Feb 25, 2022, 12:11 PM UTC

AussieWog93 wrote: post #26

"It is a violation of our policies, and so we have removed the page." What a shit fucking response. Following a policy that you arbitrarily created yourself is not a reasonable justification for anything.

Would you be satisfied if they just came out and said "Patreon is a small financial services company. Not black-ops mercenary outfit. Not a powerful nation state. If you expect us to face down powerful nation states on your behalf, we suggest that you sign up HERE to fight on the front lines in Ukraine yourself." ?

Re: On the removal of Come Back Alive

#42

Post by drran » Fri, Feb 25, 2022, 12:13 PM UTC

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #12

tgv wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's self-defense. Or is that bad too?

We all know the final outcome of this. In the face of the overwhelming force Ukraine faces it seems to me any help we provide is just going to prolong the agony.

Ukraine sees the overwhelming force for 8 years straight.

Re: On the removal of Come Back Alive

#43

Post by croes » Fri, Feb 25, 2022, 12:13 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #39

basisword wrote: post #35

Seems sensible. Private companies shouldn't be funding wars, particularly wars overseas from where they are based. The Ukrainian's need help but this should be coming from government's, not private citizens through a private foreign company. I feel like this shouldn't be controversial at all.

> The Ukrainian's need help but this should be coming from government's, not private citizens through a private foreign company. If you set yourself up as a payment gateway people will use you as a payment gateway. And what private citizens do with their money is up to them.

And what private companies allow is up to them.

Re: On the removal of Come Back Alive

#44

Post by aaa_aaa » Fri, Feb 25, 2022, 12:14 PM UTC

basisword wrote: post #35

Seems sensible. Private companies shouldn't be funding wars, particularly wars overseas from where they are based. The Ukrainian's need help but this should be coming from government's, not private citizens through a private foreign company. I feel like this shouldn't be controversial at all.

IMO exact opposite is the more sensible. Governments are terrible at representing people who put them to their position, let alone the rest who completely disagree with them.

Re: On the removal of Come Back Alive

#45

Post by rswail » Fri, Feb 25, 2022, 12:14 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #39

basisword wrote: post #35

Seems sensible. Private companies shouldn't be funding wars, particularly wars overseas from where they are based. The Ukrainian's need help but this should be coming from government's, not private citizens through a private foreign company. I feel like this shouldn't be controversial at all.

> The Ukrainian's need help but this should be coming from government's, not private citizens through a private foreign company. If you set yourself up as a payment gateway people will use you as a payment gateway. And what private citizens do with their money is up to them.

Patreon is not a "payment gateway", it's a mechanism for people to support creative activities, as the original term "patron of the arts" means.

Funding military weapons steps on some very complicated lines about what people are allowed to spend their money on. So saying "what private citizens do with their money is up to them." is only true as far as the law says.

Re: On the removal of Come Back Alive

#46

Post by syshum » Fri, Feb 25, 2022, 12:14 PM UTC

basisword wrote: post #35

Seems sensible. Private companies shouldn't be funding wars, particularly wars overseas from where they are based. The Ukrainian's need help but this should be coming from government's, not private citizens through a private foreign company. I feel like this shouldn't be controversial at all.

I think it should be controversial, and I do not think people should just proclaim "let the government handle it", that is very dangerous idea and one that is getting us in to more and more problems

The people are the government, when we loose sight of that we have problems. Clearly the governments around the world are unwilling to help

Re: On the removal of Come Back Alive

#47

Post by basisword » Fri, Feb 25, 2022, 12:14 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #39

basisword wrote: post #35

Seems sensible. Private companies shouldn't be funding wars, particularly wars overseas from where they are based. The Ukrainian's need help but this should be coming from government's, not private citizens through a private foreign company. I feel like this shouldn't be controversial at all.

> The Ukrainian's need help but this should be coming from government's, not private citizens through a private foreign company. If you set yourself up as a payment gateway people will use you as a payment gateway. And what private citizens do with their money is up to them.

> If you set yourself up as a payment gateway people will use you as a payment gateway.

They're not a payment gateway for everything and anything. They can choose what activity they don't want to facilitate and they have.

> And what private citizens do with their money is up to them.

It's not. There are numerous restrictions on what private citizens can do with their money.

Re: On the removal of Come Back Alive

#48

Post by WesolyKubeczek » Fri, Feb 25, 2022, 12:14 PM UTC

piokoch wrote: post #15

It is incredible how easy it is for Russia to spread their misinformation about their invasion on Ukraine without any bans or blockades, I have been reporting multiple times accounts that were clearly created by trolls to spread FUD and none of them "was breaking community standards". On the other hand perfectly factual posts are regularly deleted from groups that track situation on Ukraine and do this in a honest wa…

> and none of them "was breaking community standards".

That should be very saying about just what kind of a shitty community that is.

Re: On the removal of Come Back Alive

#49

Post by brabel » Fri, Feb 25, 2022, 12:14 PM UTC

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #12

tgv wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's self-defense. Or is that bad too?

We all know the final outcome of this. In the face of the overwhelming force Ukraine faces it seems to me any help we provide is just going to prolong the agony.

That's all I can think of... I just don't see an outcome where Ukraine receives so much support from the West that it will manage to beat Russia and make it go home without accomplishing any of its goals.... people seem to think that's a possible outcome. I wonder why when Kiev seems to already be surrounded and the USA government (who was right about warning about an imminent invasion!) has already said (correct me if I am wrong) that Kiev is likely to fall within days.

Short of actual military action from the West, which is extremely unlikely as that would give grounds to retaliation by Russia, escalating the war outside Ukrainian borders, Russia seems only days away from removing the Ukrainian government...

The rational thing to do right now is to start planning for the aftermath: how to get Russia out of Ukraine as soon as possible once they've taken control of the country. IMO there's only one way: to dialogue with Putin and finally accept some kind of terms for their removal from Ukraine. This is not what anyone wanted, but now that we've let Putin get to Kiev, what exactly are the options?

Anyone who thinks sending money and weapons to Ukraine will help solve the problem (including, to my horror, the UK government) seems to completely ignore the reality of the situation and is hoping for a delusional outcome, and worse, opening the possibility for things to go wrong and foreign soldiers being killed while trying to reach Ukrainian troops - which may without a doubt trigger a counter-attack by NATO and total escalation of the conflict (which should be priority number one to avoid right now!).

Re: On the removal of Come Back Alive

#50

Post by saiya-jin » Fri, Feb 25, 2022, 12:16 PM UTC

breakfastduck wrote: post #32

cebert wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m so disappointed with their stance here. Russians are slaughtered these folks and they can’t get funds to defend themselves? Sickening.

While I wouldn't have stopped this myself, I think its perfectly reasonable for a crowdfunding website to not want to host campaigns used to purchase military grade weaponry.

Patreon hosts tons of youtube channels focused only on weapons including purely military ones, how to make guns more effective (aka better at killing), how to tweak ammo to be more destructive.

That's one fucked up schizophrenic stance, especially from US company in this specific conflict. Does Trump have any influence there by any chance, given his recent statements?