Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

blog.cloudflare.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

961–970 of 1001 posts

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#961

Post by dang »

thinkfurther wrote: post #186

> Did not go well. And you're telling me this, why? > We should be careful to a) not call everything Nazi Oh I see, that's why. Well, you should be careful to c) not confuse me with anyone else.

I understand how hard it is not to be overcome by annoyance right now, but regardless of wrong other people are, would you please not post things like this subthread here? It really just makes things worse.

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15032510 and marked it off-topic.

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#962

Post by dang »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #151

> We might agree on a few points but trying to clarify that the murder wasn't a terrorist attack, that it was just "unplanned murder with a vehicle", makes me want to re-examine my opinions on the points where we agree. Are we going to call every road rage incident (1200/year in the US) a terrorist attack now? Please. I'd encourage you to evaluate your agreement with each of my points on an individual basis; each ide…

Would you please stop? This subthread has gone way over the uncivil/unsubstantive line and you've been fuelling this in other places as well.

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15032418 and marked it off-topic.

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#963

Post by dang »

thinkfurther wrote: post #142

Yeah, and you'll take it all down with your foolishness.

Flamewars like this get accounts penalized and banned on HN, regardless of how correct your underlying views may be. Plenty of other users are able to express similar views without stooping to personal attacks and other abuse. Please follow their example and don't do this again.

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15032400 and marked it off-topic.

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#964

Post by hsod »

Bartweiss wrote: post #951
hsod wrote: post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I stick to my thesis from October 2015. There is no evidence that Donald Trump is more racist than any past Republican candidate (or any other 70 year old white guy, for that matter). All this stuff about how he’s “the candidate of the KKK” and “the vanguard of a new white supremacist movement” is made up." I'm a big fan of SSC, but this thesis is not holding up very well

I'm not sure if it holds up poorly, or if it just cuts both ways. I mean, Nixon's FBI tried to blackmail civil rights leaders and drive them to suicide. Strom Thurmond was in the Senate until 2002. The Klan endorsed Reagan, regardless of what he said in reply. I agree that Trump has been frighteningly slow to condemn white supremacy, and that it holds more sway now than it did a decade ago. But on any time window lon…

Fifteen years is a long time. IMO the piece holds up very poorly once you acknowledge that Trump has been consequentially more racist than GOP candidates from the last fifteen years.

(I'm referring to "racism in consequence", I think speculating about his subjective inner state is pointless)

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#965

Post by [deleted] »

Bartweiss wrote: post #951
hsod wrote: post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I stick to my thesis from October 2015. There is no evidence that Donald Trump is more racist than any past Republican candidate (or any other 70 year old white guy, for that matter). All this stuff about how he’s “the candidate of the KKK” and “the vanguard of a new white supremacist movement” is made up." I'm a big fan of SSC, but this thesis is not holding up very well

I'm not sure if it holds up poorly, or if it just cuts both ways. I mean, Nixon's FBI tried to blackmail civil rights leaders and drive them to suicide. Strom Thurmond was in the Senate until 2002. The Klan endorsed Reagan, regardless of what he said in reply. I agree that Trump has been frighteningly slow to condemn white supremacy, and that it holds more sway now than it did a decade ago. But on any time window lon…

[deleted]

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#966

Post by rootlocus »

EJTH wrote: post #953
rootlocus wrote: post #888

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I didn't realize that HN was full of 16 year old communists. Was the irony on purpose?

Why would you even reply? This is so out of context, and its a petty attempt at being snarky. I think its funny that /pol/ is better at engaging soberly in a political debate than a forum such as Y-combinator. At least add something more, an argument or you know just an actual REPLY.

Out of context? You're accusing someone of shaming a group of people an then proceed to shame him for being a 16 yr old communist. That's just blatant hypocrisy.

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#967

Post by [deleted] »

EJTH wrote: post #953
rootlocus wrote: post #888

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I didn't realize that HN was full of 16 year old communists. Was the irony on purpose?

Why would you even reply? This is so out of context, and its a petty attempt at being snarky. I think its funny that /pol/ is better at engaging soberly in a political debate than a forum such as Y-combinator. At least add something more, an argument or you know just an actual REPLY.

[deleted]

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#968

Post by c3534l »

ceejayoz wrote: post #191
c3534l wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

› if Google doesn't like a website, it can derank it If Google actually does that, they're asking for an anti-trust suit.

No, they're not. Kinderstart v. Google for one of many examples.

That case had to do with whether page rank itself is anticompetitive. Their page wasn't arbitrary "deranked", the company just didn't like the algorithm. As the judge noted, Kinderstart failed to even identify the market Google was competing with them in. I was responding to the assertions that Google removes pages from their search results without reason or method.

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#969

Post by c3534l »

gbarc888 wrote: post #281
c3534l wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think I should have a sign on my business door that says "no blacks allowed," too? Also the cake incident also involved the owners posting the names and phone numbers of the gay couple on facebook and asked people to harass them.

> Also the cake incident also involved the owners posting the names and phone numbers of the gay couple on facebook and asked people to harass them. Wait a minute... where did you see that? This is the first time I have heard this part of the story. I thought the owners simply said "no", and then got sued for several hundred thousand dollars.

> Aaron Klein had posted a copy of Laurel's complaint on his Facebook page. The complaint included Rachel and Laurel's home address and phone number. Rachel and Laurel received hundreds of angry and threatening messages in response to Klein's post, including death threats. Klein later testified he was unaware that the women's personal information was on the complaint when he posted it. The BOLI decision found his denial was not credible.

http://www.wweek.com/portland/article-25119-bittersweet-cake...

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#970

Post by dragonwriter »

exabrial wrote: post #71

Also on sort of related note, this is why I disparage the "cake baking" and "wedding flowers" lawsuits... While I don't care what two adults do in the bedroom, I do care that a private business could be forced to render services. What if Mike Pence becomes president and uses the precedent set by these lawsuits to justify the passage of his version of Christianity into law? I think these issues are better left unturne…

> What if Mike Pence becomes president and uses the precedent set by these lawsuits to justify the passage of his version of Christianity into law?

Wait, how exactly would the precedent set by lawsuits under state laws forbidding certain private discrimination in public accommodations enable federal establishment of religion?

Post reply on HN