“except under rare circumstances” I disagreed with that part, at least in regards to the two specific parts I mentioned.
I was trying to catch what I thought would be something the other side would jump on before they did, to give you a chance to clarify. Sorry if that came off poorly.
I also now know specifically what post the OP is talking about, and I was posting under a misapprehension. I thought it was a closed thread, not a single post in a thread that is still active.
I want to point out the link in coremelt’s post in the original thread is still clickable on my phone for some strange reason. I won’t link to it here, but I reported it.
Well, my “rare” comment you responded to included a list of items that was beyond the scope of the couple of things you mentioned. I want to make sure this is clear to everyone- we only allow off board ventures in rare circumstances- generally only charitable fundraising (not commercial), and they must have mod pre-approval, which is not automatic.
As my mother would say, “Why borrow trouble?”. If another poster on this board (I prefer not to think of them as sides) needed clarification or was puzzled by my post, I would have been happy to explain.
There isn’t really a relationship between ignorance and activism, anyway. Everyone can make a very long list of activists who are mired in ignorance - anti-vaxxers, the black helicopter crowd, RF energy from smart electricity meters is causing soul cancer, etc.
Alternatively, one can be very well informed and open to all sorts of new ideas, but just sits on the couch (or this message board) all day and really doesn’t do anything constructive with that advanced understanding of the world. We can probably make a substantial list of those people, too.
So the implication that fighting ignorance requires political or social action, that’s not really the case. Though I totally understand many people’s preference, or even imperative, to spread what knowledge they have and their own beliefs.
Heh, that’s the one thing that would get their attention. The kind of hosting companies you’re talking about are used to hosting things people want off the internet, that’s their purpose in life. If you couldn’t get him knocked off with a DDoS, your letter writing campaign is going to end up in file 13.
I’m serious. If their checks don’t bounce, the content isn’t illegal, and they don’t negatively affect the hosting company’s other customers or otherwise cause an abuse issue; they’re aren’t going anywhere. It’s not the hosting company’s job to censor their customer’s content.
I’ve seen customers complain about other customer’s content, and say they were going to leave us if we didn’t terminate the customer who hosted content they didn’t like. The complaining customer was told “So sorry, to see you go. No, we will not prorate your contract.” In this case, you’re not even a customer or a potential one, so I’d be surprised if you even got a response.
Hateful stuff on the internet? Astonishing. There is a simple solution though. Don’t go there and read it. And don’t publicize it by spreading its name around.
You’ll never get rid of this crap. It’s the price we pay for a free and open society.
I agree with the Policy and even tho the OP seems sincere, the jerkwad he’s complaining about I think really *wants *that sort of attention.
Simply ignoring him and giving him less free publicity would be better.