Hacker News Reader

If you actually read their article, it seems they are saying that 8chan WASNT defensible to them and was a mistake for them to do so.

View on HN

then why don’t they publicly invite back 8chan and the daily stormer, possibly for a discount/free? similarly, are they lobbying to get FOSTA revised so they can bring back Switter?

their opinion is that it is (almost always?) ethically wrong for them to withhold security products. for the two websites i mentioned, nobody is stopping them from providing services. for a third, they could lobby to fix fosta and/or not transit switter traffic in the us.

Cloudflare claimed they were going to fight FOSTA but I've seen absolutely nothing done about it.

I did read the article. I read it twice. Once prior to commenting, once with someone I showed it to. I think you're misinterpreting my comment.

I stated this: "but I don't see how KF is defensible whilst 8chan et al aren't"

This meant: I don't understand how they can invoke the removal of 8chan and a neo-Nazi site, yet retain KF.

But if they "invoked" the removal of 8chan to say that they shouldn't have done it, I don't understand the relevance. Since you simply changed defended to "invoked," it seems that you're also aware that they aren't defending removing "8chan et al."

I think I misunderstood the statement.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com