GoDaddy pulls the plug on Neo-Nazi site

[HumbleDuck]

Good, support it ℅1000.
Actually I'm going to order some domains right now to support them.

[Garnier Fructis]

So if the Nazis take over and declare that Nazis are the ultimate protected class, what happens then? It sounds like your idea for a system is basically to put a gun on the table that represents power, and then pray that a malicious force never ends up being the one holding the gun.

I didn't think it needed to be said that what classes are protected is part of the position. This is silly, lol.

[Saft]

the scary thing is, i used to use nazism as a far outlier to demonstrate that not every viewpoint should be "tolerated"....and yet here we are debating if nazism should be tolerated.

I would much more prefer the debate on how it should be approached because countering them as bluntly and aggressively as possible as knee-jerk while giving antifa and blm riots a clear pass does exactly the opposite and makes stupid conservatives that found the alt-right more justified in their minds.

I'm not saying we should be treating them all the same but when all three to different degrees cause property damage and hurt people the response to all should be in the same vein but in whatever degree is deemed appropriate. Most people here advocating cracking down on it hard aren't very persuasive because the consequences haven't been considered.

[Moralgy]

the best part of this is, the website is pretending they got hacked by anonymous lol

Lol I saw that, so fucking fake it isn't even funny. That was a level of pathetic that is hilarious. Stick to your guns, assholes, don't bitch out when you are getting punished.

[Venant]

I didn't think it needed to be said that what classes are protected is part of the position. This is silly, lol.

As long as a system of special privileges for protected classes exists, great power will be in the hands of those who get to determine who the protected classes are. If you were to design a system, wouldn't it be more logical to create a system that prevents persecution of any point of view? If somebody has an indefensible ideology, then its better for those pushing that ideology to be debated openly and debunked. But putting too much power into institutions that can simply suppress opposition leads to a power struggle with a much higher likelihood that an indefensible ideology can seize power.

[Garnier Fructis]

As long as a system of special privileges for protected classes exists, great power will be in the hands of those who get to determine who the protected classes are. If you were to design a system, wouldn't it be more logical to create a system that prevents persecution of any point of view? If somebody has an indefensible ideology, then its better for those pushing that ideology to be debated openly and debunked. But putting too much power into institutions that can simply suppress opposition leads to a power struggle with a much higher likelihood that an indefensible ideology can seize power.

This is like historical fanfiction.

[Daethz]

When are they going to pull the plug on black supremacist BLM sites?

The left keeps doing more outrageous, increasingly fascist and racist things.

I consider myself alt-right, and Im against racism, everyone is born equal, the genetic differences between humans are minimal, "white privilege" is just another word for social stigma, and programs like affirmative action are actually racist, nobody should get special benefits based on the color of their skin, I think MLK would agree.

I see when the white supremacists where chanting "White lives matter" there where liberal counter protesters chanting "Black lives matter", it's a clear example of the incredible rise of racism going on right now, sadly inspired by the left.
EVERYONES lives matter, people tried to end BLM's racism when it started but they where called racist for doing so, and so now white people are feeling like they need to defend themselves from racism directed at them.
It's getting messier and messier.

Just a FYI, VA protests was mostly Actual Neo nazis, KKK members, not "alt-right" like several news agencies keeps putting the blame on. KKK/Neonazis have been around a long time, Alt-Right is new, people like me, atheist conservative who hates the neo-conservative and the neo-nazi/kkk fools. Republican party is essentially several parties smashed into one forced to work together to overcome the democrats.

[Planetdune]

This was a hosting service, not really an internet provider. They have every right to decide what they will and won't host on their servers. Now, if actual ISPs were blocking access to sites I'd have an issue with it.

Not sure how it is across the pond but over here ISP's are already blocking sites.. torrent sites, underage porn sites and so on...

[chazus]

Not sure how it is across the pond but over here ISP's are already blocking sites.. torrent sites, underage porn sites and so on...

ISP's can block illegal content, such as listed above. The stuffon Daily Stormer is a very grey area, but very much violated GoDaddy's private rules (which is unrelated to legality)

[Easo]

IIRC, GoDaddy is crap, but at least they have made a good decision.

[McFuu]

Didn't realize Ajit Pai and the death of net neutrality had so many supporters.

[Yuyn]

Didn't realize Ajit Pai and the death of net neutrality had so many supporters.

Net neutrality is about the lines and carriers, not hosting providers. For the obligatory car analogy, a hosting provider is a business that can have rules on conduct while on their premises, while the lines and carriers subject to net neutrality rules are like the public roads used to travel.

[Machismo]

On one hand I believe in free speech... bad ideas dont die unless brought into the light.

On the other I believe a private corporation has the right to serve who they want...

So I'm kind of torn.

Luckily, GoDaddy cancelling them is both. Freedom of speech is awesome, and you also get the free markets at work.

I fully support a loud, and thorough boycott of anything involving white supremacists and neo-Nazis.

[Toogoodman]

Okay, so first off, this "ideology" is pretty repugnant, and they're complete fucking idiots for trying to push this ideology in modern society, its cringe worthy.

Whats not okay about this is pretty simple, godaddy, as a domain name and web service hosting company has the right to deactivate a website they don't like. As a publicly traded entity, its usually in their best interest to do something like this, because its usually in the best interest in the shareholders. The issue is, where has this type of action been used against other radical groups? I know a huge controversy over the last few years has been pulling the plug on radical Islamist websites, and that being censoring. I could care less if some psychotic neo nazis have their website taken down, but it would be nice to see the same treatment going out to a large amount of other radical websites that still operate to this day. Consistency would be fantastic.

[McFuu]

Net neutrality is about the lines and carriers, not hosting providers. For the obligatory car analogy, a hosting provider is a business that can have rules on conduct while on their premises, while the lines and carriers subject to net neutrality rules are like the public roads used to travel.

This screams of hypocrisy, unless the site was hosting illegal content there really is no need for this. I'd love to see the happen to a pro-homosexuality website, I bet a lot of tunes in here would immediately change. I don't care where a bunch of white dudes get together and spew shit, the same I don't care where a bunch of black people do it, I just don't go there.

This is as simple as denying service based on beliefs. This is no different than the bake shop not making the wedding cake for the gay couple, those owners were nearly dragged through the streets by their thumbs. Yet people applaud this.
It's unreal.

[Garnier Fructis]

This is as simple as denying service based on beliefs. This is no different than the bake shop not making the wedding cake for the gay couple, those owners were nearly dragged through the streets by their thumbs. Yet people applaud this.
It's unreal.

The difference is that bakers are denying service because qualities that people have no control over. People absolutely have control over being neo nazis.

It's an incredibly simple concept: you should be judged by your choices and actions, not by things you have no control over.

[melodramocracy]

This is as simple as denying service based on beliefs. This is no different than the bake shop not making the wedding cake for the gay couple, those owners were nearly dragged through the streets by their thumbs. Yet people applaud this.
It's unreal.

Your political beliefs aren't covered under discrimination laws when it comes to businesses in most states.

[Edge-]

While it may be the right thing to do given the circumstances, is it appropriate to shoo business away based on political stances? Is it in some extreme instances such as this one?

Yes. GoDaddy has no obligation to host content they find objectionable, and if they decide not to tolerate hate groups I don't see why that would be remotely inappropriate.

Should private companies remain neutral on cases like these?

That's up to each company, they have no obligation to be neutral if they decide that doing so is not in the interest of the owners morals or in the companies finances.

Especially considering how much power/control GoDaddy has over an enormous number of websites. Doesn't that open a precedent to censorship, or is this form of policing required in cases that warrant it?

This is not censorship. If hate groups can't find web hosting content through existing channels, they can create their own web hosting platforms. Web hosting sites have no responsibility or obligation to host content that they find objectionable.

[McFuu]

The difference is that bakers are denying service because qualities that people have no control over. People absolutely have control over being neo nazis.

It's an incredibly simple concept: you should be judged by your choices and actions, not by things you have no control over.

There is no difference. Beliefs, choices, it's all apart of the same person. Pretending there is a difference is a poor attempt at justifying discrimination against people you don't like.

Fine, do that! The company would lose all other customers and would be left with only a bunch of extremist sites.

Turning the tables on this is not a good argument.
If I am ever in a situation where my ideology is so evil that companies stop hosting my website and employers stop giving me jobs, I will not whine about it on the internet. I will wonder where I fucked up this hard.

PS. Your first analogy was dumb, the second isn't much better.

No one knew go-daddy hosted these sites until they said they did.

Like I said before, you can do whatever you feel like to justify persecution of people you don't like.

And don't worry, by the time you realized you fucked up, it's too late and no one will help you because everyone is just growing up and learning forcibly banish what they don't like, as opposed to just ignoring it and not give it any power.

[A dot Ham]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.9f1985eee51b

While it may be the right thing to do given the circumstances, is it appropriate to shoo business away based on political stances? Is it in some extreme instances such as this one?

Should private companies remain neutral on cases like these? Especially considering how much power/control GoDaddy has over an enormous number of websites. Doesn't that open a precedent to censorship, or is this form of policing required in cases that warrant it?

Didn't do anything about it before. Political climate is right where it becomes more profitable and free advertising to pull the plug than it is to stay in bed.

Yay for a conveniently timed moral compass. Go GoDaddy?