RE: Parler

["Keith Medcalf" <kmedcalf () dessus com>]

That all only matters if you (the oppressor) believes that your victim
(the oppressed) has the means to "bring peace to their enemy" either by
wielding devices of War and Destruction or through the Legal System.
This is the case with all "habitual criminals" such as AWS, Twitter,
Facebook, Google, Law Enforcement, and the Government.

Given that the number of "victims" capable of obtaining "redress" for
the improper actions of the above mentioned "habitual criminals" is very
low, there is little risk of the "habitual criminal" suffering any
consequence for their actions, thus they consider themselves impervious
and may act as they please whenever they please with zero consequence.

You will note that the aforementioned "habitual criminals" *never* act
against those capable of defending themselves or bringing them peace.

This is simply the way of the world.  It has always been thus and will
always be thus.

--
Be decisive.  Make a decision, right or wrong.  The road of life is
paved with flat squirrels who could not make a decision.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: NANOG <nanog-bounces+kmedcalf=dessus.com () nanog org> On Behalf Of
> Wayne Bouchard
> Sent: Sunday, 10 January, 2021 06:55
> To: sronan () ronan-online com
> Cc: nanog () nanog org
> Subject: Re: Parler
>
> Ah, yes... re-enter the experiences of Compuserve. For that, I give
> you Telecom '96 and section 230 which, they think, makes them exempt
> from such things. Regardless, there are a whole lot of little
> triggering pebbles that risk being trodden upon here. From monopolist
> behaviour to basic discrimination (just because you're a private
> company, you do not have the right to descriminate in who you are
> willing to do business with. Wasn't that the whole point of the
> wedding thing?), there are many things to be careful of here, even
> though it will probably be a hard sell. Still, damned irresponsible to
> risk touch that precedent, IMO. It means a whole lot of flak comes
> around to the rest of us.
>
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2021 at 08:42:56AM -0500, sronan () ronan-online com
wrote:
> > While Amazon is absolutely within their rights to suspend anyone they
> want for violation of their TOS, it does create an interesting problem.
> Amazon is now in the content moderation business, which could
potentially
> open them up to liability if they fail to suspend any other customer
who
> hosts objectionable content.
> > When I actively hosted USENET servers, I was repeatedly warned by in-
> house and external counsel, not to moderate which groups I hosted based
> on content, less I become responsible for moderating all groups,
> shouldn???t that same principal apply to platforms like AWS and
Twitter?
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > > On Jan 10, 2021, at 3:24 AM, William Herrin <bill () herrin us> wrote:
> > >
> > > ???Anybody looking for a new customer opportunity? It seems Parler
is
> in
> > > search of a new service provider. Vendors need only provide all the
> > > proprietary AWS APIs that Parler depends upon to function.
> > >
> > > https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/01/09/amazon-parler-
> suspension/
> > > Regards,
> > > Bill HErrin
>
> ---
> Wayne Bouchard
> web () typo org
> Network Dude
> http://www.typo.org/~web/