Post: #26

(05-03-2018 10:38 PM)Ice Man Wrote:  When people say this is a "violation of the First Amendment" can they please articulate exactly what laws are being broken by GoDaddy in order for them to be prosecuted or face a civil suit?

Step 1: Hire legal team.

Step 2: Petition Supreme Court

Step 3: See what happens.

If GoDaddy gets away with this, it is because they are only shutting down websites that are so limited in number and so fringe, that ordinary companies and individuals do not see it as a threat to them. If people began to view it as a threat, you'd see a hosting company come on the market with a business model based on complete freedom to use their hosting services for any legal purpose.

If that doesn't happen, maybe it's because almost no one has empathy for some the most extreme views out there.

That being said, I'm a GoDaddy customer and when my domains come up for renewal in August, I'm planning on transferring them to a different registrar.

Post: #27

@Roosh: Might be time to start seriously thinking about dumping the forum contents and planning for a migration if you're hosting with them

Not sure how/how often/where you backup the forum data but it might be handy to keep 1 or 2 mirrors with offshore servers in the (at this point, pretty likely) event that you do become a target

Too much important information here and on your blogs to let fade into the abyss

Were all these people not required to read 1984 in school?

Post: #28

(05-03-2018 10:33 PM)YoungBlade Wrote:  All I know is my right to celebrate my religious holiday of "Annual Steal A 24-Pack From Walmart Day" better not be infringed or I'm allying with the Polynesian ethnostate in the race war.

We'd love to have you.

"Steal a 24-pack" day is the night before Kill Haole Day. So keep your schedule open.

Aloha!

Post: #29

Any plans to generate Tor links for ROK, the forum and RV.com in case they swipe the domains?

Post: #30

Quote:That being said, I'm a GoDaddy customer and when my domains come up for renewal in August, I'm planning on transferring them to a different registrar.

Ditto. Any free-speech-respecting registrar suggestions?

Post: #31

Suits Wrote:I don't see anything in there limiting the right of property owners to determine what their property is used for.

You're asserting that the words you've posted on this Forum ultimately belong to the corporation that hosts RVF (and totally, definitely not to you).

Are you really okay with this?

Post: #32

(05-03-2018 11:18 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Suits Wrote:I don't see anything in there limiting the right of property owners to determine what their property is used for.

You're asserting that the words you've posted on this Forum ultimately belong to the corporation that hosts RVF (and totally, definitely not to you).

Are you really okay with this?

Think this through again and consider the possibility that you are make a logical connection that doesn't exist.

Post: #33

Suits Wrote:Think this through again and consider the possibility that you are make a logical connection that doesn't exist.

Suits, this is what you said.

"If a hosting company agrees to host a website, the data is physically existing somewhere in their property. And nearly infinite is definitely finite, even if the cost of memory storage has gone done.

"I don't see anything in the First Amendment limiting the right of property owners to determine what their property is used for."

It's a really simple connection.

Every word you've written on this Forum DOES NOT exist in a property that you personally own. Rather, every word you've written on this Forum exists in a property owned by a Corporation (the one which hosts this Forum and stores all of its data).

Therefore, you're asserting that every word you've written on RVF does NOT ultimately belong to you, but rather to the corporation that hosts RVF. Are you okay with this?

Post: #34

For fucks sake.

Why does it matter if he's OK with it? You want him to whine like a bitch? What?

Meanwhile, is it beyond the bounds of the Federal government of the US to create a provision for the service of domain hosting, even if only as a last resort?

All American customers welcome under the protection of the 1A, the only restriction being against criminally culpable speech (threats, blackmail, extortion, etc)?

Seems like the USFedGov can summon a new multimillion dollar agency into being 8 days a week when it's inclined to do so. And let's not hear any bullshit about "optics" since the only ones that are going to complain are psychotic TDS sufferers anyway.

Post: #35

(05-03-2018 11:26 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Suits Wrote:Think this through again and consider the possibility that you are make a logical connection that doesn't exist.

Suits, this is what you said.

"If a hosting company agrees to host a website, the data is physically existing somewhere in their property. And nearly infinite is definitely finite, even if the cost of memory storage has gone done.

"I don't see anything in the First Amendment limiting the right of property owners to determine what their property is used for."

It's a really simple connection.

Every word you've written on this Forum DOES NOT exist in a property that you personally own. Rather, every word you've written on this Forum exists in a property owned by a Corporation (the one which hosts this Forum and stores all of its data).

Therefore, you're asserting that every word you've written on RVF does NOT ultimately belong to you, but rather to the corporation that hosts RVF. Are you okay with this?

If I give a neighborhood kid $20 to host my dog at their place over the weekend while I'm away on business, does the dog become his?

Post: #36

Leonard Neubache Wrote:Why does it matter if he's OK with it? You want him to whine like a bitch? What?

Because an intelligent person in this thread said that "the resistance to this form of censorship must be Cultural".

However, the Cultural belief that Suits possesses, (which is to interpret American laws such that corporations are given carte blanche to impinge upon the rights of citizens unless they get caught and reprimanded by the government), IS NOT a form of Cultural Resistance. It's a form of Cultural Non-Resistance, or more appropriately, Cultural Enablement.

Leonard Neubache Wrote:Meanwhile, is it beyond the bounds of the Federal government of the US to create a provision for the service of domain hosting, even if only as a last resort?

Of course not.

But these things only happen when the Culture demands them, and Suits' Cultural Beliefs hinders the process by which Culture demands such things.

So does yours.

Post: #37

Suits Wrote:If I give a neighborhood kid $20 to host my dog at their place over the weekend while I'm away on business, does the dog become his?

If you answer a direct question with a stupid and irrelevant metaphor, do you also become stupid and irrelevant - or does this only apply to the metaphor?

Personally, I think only the metaphor becomes stupid and irrelevant, because the person who made it has the ability to say, "Oh shit. That was dumb. Let's try a direct answer instead."

So, please, a direct answer.

You said that, (paraphrasing), "When a company hosts a website, all information on that website is stored on company servers. Because the hosting company owns those servers, then the hosting company owns the data on those servers. And you (direct quote here) don't see anything in there limiting the right of property owners to determine what their property is used for."

Now, because a technology company hosts RVF, then every word you've written on RVF is on one of their servers. This means that the RVF-hosting company owns every word you've posted on RVF. I'm asking, quite simply, whether you're okay with this.

Post: #38

(05-03-2018 10:54 PM)Kona Wrote:  

(05-03-2018 10:33 PM)YoungBlade Wrote:  All I know is my right to celebrate my religious holiday of "Annual Steal A 24-Pack From Walmart Day" better not be infringed or I'm allying with the Polynesian ethnostate in the race war.

We'd love to have you.

"Steal a 24-pack" day is the night before Kill Haole Day. So keep your schedule open.

Aloha!

Gas the Haole! Race war now!!

Post: #39

It will be interesting to see if the ALCU picks this up.

Quote:The ACLU's fight against Internet censorship stretches back a decade. Congress first attempted to censor the Internet in 1996, when it passed the Communications Decency Act. The law criminalized "indecent" speech online. The ACLU sued, arguing that the law abridged the First Amendment. All nine Supreme Court justices agreed and struck down the law. For the first time, in ACLU v. Reno, the Supreme Court recognized that online speech deserves full First Amendment protection.

If I remember correctly the ALCU fought for the Unite The Rights' permit to assemble in Charlottesville and won after the City had denied it

Post: #40

I read a few news articles, but saw no evidence that GoDaddy had specifically seized the altright.com domain.

According to one source, the registrar of the domain was given 48 hours to transfer the domain to a different host.

Quote:But on Thursday, domain registrar GoDaddy finally pulled the plug on AltRight.com, giving Spencer’s website 48 hours to transfer its domain to another web host or lose it.

I'm not knowledgeable enough about domain registrations to understand what would happen if the 48 hours expired without the domain name being successfully transferred to a different host. Would it then become Godaddy's domain or would it just become unregistered?

Post: #41

(05-03-2018 11:48 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  You said that, (paraphrasing), "When a company hosts a website, all information on that website is stored on company servers. Because the hosting company owns those servers, then the hosting company owns the data on those servers. And you (direct quote here) don't see anything in there limiting the right of property owners to determine what their property is used for."

Negative. You have misunderstood my statement and incorrectly paraphrased my words.

Post: #42

Suits Wrote:Negative. You have misunderstood my statement and incorrectly paraphrased my words.

And you're NOT offering a re- wording of your words, so that this misunderstanding stops...because?

Post: #43

(05-04-2018 12:05 AM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Suits Wrote:Negative. You have misunderstood my statement and incorrectly paraphrased my words.

And you're NOT offering a re- wording of your words, so that this misunderstanding stops...because?

Because my statement is still easily accessible on page one of this thread in simple, easy to understand English.

If English is a language you struggle with, feel free to PM me and I'll help you better comprehend the statements that you currently don't understand.

But there's no need to further derail this thread.

Post: #44

It is really not hard to setup a home server Roosh. I and many others from the forum can help. I am thinking ti setup my own email server for my family, fuck gmail and all others.

Post: #45

The problem isn't hosting, it's domain registration. They seized the domain name, not the site itself.

Hosting is everywhere. You can get hosting that doesn't give a shit about what's on your site (within legal limits).

However, since domain names are increasingly centralized you're going to have to move to one of the non-converged TLDs. I guess .name is one of them.

Post: #46

(05-03-2018 11:56 PM)Suits Wrote:  I read a few news articles, but saw no evidence that GoDaddy had specifically seized the altright.com domain.

According to one source, the registrar of the domain was given 48 hours to transfer the domain to a different host.

Quote:But on Thursday, domain registrar GoDaddy finally pulled the plug on AltRight.com, giving Spencer’s website 48 hours to transfer its domain to another web host or lose it.

I'm not knowledgeable enough about domain registrations to understand what would happen if the 48 hours expired without the domain name being successfully transferred to a different host. Would it then become Godaddy's domain or would it just become unregistered?

Considering it is GoDaddy, and they have a bad reputation with domain name transfers, I don't know. Generally speaking, they should release the name back to the general registrar and then, within a certain period of time, anyone could buy it from a private registrar that is licensed to deal in .coms. That being said, GoDaddy can buy it themselves, and they have done this many, many times before. They could then simply choose not to offer it for auction.

I don't know that the individual action of one private registrar counts as a violation of the 1st Amendment, as the consumer (theoretically) has the right to take their business (publication) to any other private registrar. Now if the government were to de facto or de jure compel US based registrars not to allow certain kinds of speech (websites) to be registered, that would be a violation of the 1st Amendment.

This thread is all over the place, and a few people were asking basic questions at the start, so I will give a shot to answering some. If you know about domain names and hosting, the below may be of no interest to you.

We are generally talking about two separate issues when we speak of most clearnet websites, forums, and the like. Those are domain name registration and hosting. The domain name (whatever.com, for example) is just a human way of expressing a registered static IP address (123.144.145.99, for example). RVF has an "actual" machine web address at some random IP. You could plug that number in up in the address bar, and it would bring you here. PROTIP: In some cases, when a domain name is seized or redirected, knowing the IP address of the site, itself will still get you to the original site, although this does not work in all cases. Hosting is where the data that comprises a site is stored/based. A site may have its domain name and hosting through the same company and in the same country or it may not. In many cases, the owner of a site will choose to register with one domain name provider, and host with another company (or self host, using a server in their basement, which we know some politicians have a habit of doing).

This layer cake operation opens up many vulnerabilities to the site owner. On the hosting level, you really only have to worry about the three big baddies; the government, the hosting company, and hackers. The government can and does seize data from hosts. This might include, for example, a list of all the geo-IPs that logged in to RVF and all member's PM's. The government can also pull or wipe the data. The company hosting can, often and depending on the TOS's, do the same. Finally, hackers can always attempt to access the hosting data for any number of nefarious reasons. And, hackers are often politically motivated, so this is a real concern for everyone with an opinion on anything.

On the domain level, you also have to worry about these three. Hackers won't really be a problem, as a hacked domain name (that is, for example, redirected) can be set right by the registration company. The company, on the other hand, can be a nightmare. They can, in many cases, effectively seize and redirect your name. They can also cancel your registration and put your domain name back up for sale, potentially giving it to someone else. Or they can cancel it and buy it themselves, allowing them to auction it off for any amount they want. Most registration companies claim they don't do this, but a simple search of GoDaddy's "shady" reputation in this area would indicate otherwise. Finally, you have the government. What can they do? A lot, depending on your TLD. The TLD is the .com or .org or .ru. Some of these are GTLDs (generic) like .com and .org. Some are ccTLDs. These are supposed to represent a specific country, like .ca for Canada. Theoretically all ccTLDs are under the jurisdiction of their "home" country. In practice, many ccTLDs for small countries are handled by private registrars or registrars from larger countries. That complicates the issue. Long story short, the government that oversees the TLD can seize it, shut it down, and/or redirect it. Good luck getting it back. And the US Government controls .com, .net, .org, etc.

The standard operating procedure for "undesirable" but legal clearnet sites is to have a primary domain at something like a .com. This is followed by a secondary domain at a safer TLD, like .ba or something. The hosting is handled by a "friendly" or "hands off" host, almost always in a foreign jurisdiction, and frequently with a zero knowledge policy (this means they don't look at or care what you are publishing, as long as it isn't broadly illegal like child pornography). I have heard good things about Icy Evolution, but there are many others. Offsite data backup is a must, as it might be neccessary to move hosts multiple times.

Many had enough with the clearnet system (or they were actually doing something illegal or dangerous) and they moved to the darknet. Those systems, and their brothers, run entirely differently. TOR, Freenet, I2P. There are others. I will leave it to the curious to investigate on their own, but I wouldn't go poking around on those networks if I didn't understand what I was doing.

TL;DR - GoDaddy can punt or keep the domain, depending. Probably not a 1st Amendment violation. Owning a website is fraught with legal and jurisdictional difficulties. Check out the darknet, if you dare.

Post: #47

Just a day ago I was laughing at projects in cryptocurrencies like Skycoin that were trying to provide free decentralized internet network and make it private and censorship free but something like this is going to eventually become an actual value people will be forced to pay into.

“Net neutrality and consumer data privacy emerged as two key issues in tech in 2017. If you’re concerned about paying ridiculous fees to ISPs for unreliable coverage, having your data sold, or government monitoring and censorship - Skycoin provides hope. These are the core issues Skycoin is attempting to solve.”

https://www.skycoin.net

For further reading on how it works:

https://www.reddit.com/r/SkycoinProject/...ne_thread/

Full disclosure: I don't own any skycoin. I'm not trying to shill, just showing you some of the options that might be out there soon.

Post: #48

(05-03-2018 10:54 PM)Kona Wrote:  

(05-03-2018 10:33 PM)YoungBlade Wrote:  All I know is my right to celebrate my religious holiday of "Annual Steal A 24-Pack From Walmart Day" better not be infringed or I'm allying with the Polynesian ethnostate in the race war.

We'd love to have you.

"Steal a 24-pack" day is the night before Kill Haole Day. So keep your schedule open.

Aloha!

What are the exact dates? Im not going to go to Walmart for "Steal a 24 pack day" as my beer stealing career peaked when my highschool buddies and I stole a whole beer truck from a frat house party (true story).

But I do want to know when "Kill Whitey Day" is. Im planning on speaking only Spanish that day and break out a wife beater

Post: #49

(05-03-2018 10:29 PM)Suits Wrote:  The 1st amendment was written into law to prevent the government from restricting speech.

Here's the actual text:

Quote:Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

I don't see anything in there limiting the right of property owners to determine what their property is used for.

This doesn't mean much.

Just like any of the amendments, the 1st amendment has thousands of pages of judicial interpretation and precedence. 200+ years worth. ALL of that applies to the question. That's how constitutional law works.

I believe that in practice, if a company that controls the means of expression (writing or posting) refuses to provide their services to someone *because they disagree with the content being expressed* then they are damned close to a lawsuit. If you're the only printer in town and you refuse to print somebody's book on the catholic faith because you are a protestant, you can and will be sued and probably lose. You are actively surpassing their right to be heard. Your property rights are secondary in this case.

Godaddy is hard to sue because, it has a ton of competition. Google and Facebook on the other hand are heading for a Federal lawsuit at lightning speed. I will personally laugh and cavort in front of their headquarters if they get broken up. I hate the arrogant fucks.

But I digress.

Post: #50

I assume Roosh has contingency plans for this.

This is a very important outlet for many men and it’s important that it continues somehow if indeed we are next or certainly in someone’s list.