Antipodean fruit grower statement

[nothingcomestonothing]

The antipodean fruit growers site is down. A statement from the owner reads in part:

What I fear more than losing my site, being sued, or dealing with police is living in a world where [redacted by me as would be against MN talk guidelines] while normal people are not allowed to even discuss it.

The mob has already planned subsequent targets. Should we stay down, they will then attack 'gender critical' communities - especially those ran by and for women. No place can exist online which criticizes [redacted], and nothing would excite them more than this power and domination struggle being inflicted on a female space instead.

Posted for info.

I don't have sufficient information about the site, and I'm not prepared to go and get it, in order to understand the difference and why they pursued her.

When I first heard about KF I thought it was harmless. I don't generally sign up to sites like MN and have belonged to very few over the years (I remember the days alt.binaries.feminism or whatever it was called before the internet as we know it exists, but the point is although I spend a lot of time looking I rarely engage as I have with MN). But I do see being online as a 'real' activity if that makes sense - one with real ethical, political and tangible effects. To this end, I looked over KF and decided that it was not a site that I could ethically (and as a woman and a feminist) condone in any way. I'm not prepared to say 'well look, I'll overlook the misogyny because x is a good outcome for me'. I'm also not prepared to turn a blind eye and be 'blissfully ignorant'. I cannot justify that to myself ethically.

I do know that quite a few dangerous individuals want the site shut down because they know too much about them.

Probably!

is it? I thought the debate was whether KF should be able to exist or not?

There is a bigger picture though - the one that I outlined in an earlier post about free speech and the ideas about this that frame the situation with KF.

oh dear. It's not meant to. I don't see them in quite the same light as you do.

They appear to have quite strict criteria on who they target. That's what I meant.

I know you didn't mean it as such - but it did sound a bit that way (and bear in mind that I grew up in an era where a man's 'motivation' for violence against women was considered by the populace as important).

I'm not sure that they do have strict criteria - they didn't for Julie or Near (Dave).

Mumsnet didn’t like my shruggie, they cut his arms off! (ツ)

Fine. My point is, though, that Cloudfare would be perfectly in its rights to do so as are all the servers that refuse to host the site. Ditto any site. This is part of free speech in a capitalist society

KF has it’s own servers. Cloudflare isn’t a host, it’s a doorman

without the doorman, the hackers win.

Cloudflare hasn’t chosen to withdraw service because it doesn’t want to work with KF, it’s been forced to temporarily suspend the site for safety reasons, due to criminal attacks.

Null’s plan (I think?) is to hire many doormen from multiple places, so no single security service is
overstretched the way Cloudflare has been.

I'm not sure that they do have strict criteria - they didn't for Julie or Near (Dave).

I don’t know who Dave is but the way the site works seems to have changed quite a lot over the years (according to Null’s stream, posted up thread).

This place constantly changes rules too (sometimes they completely forget to tell us!)

I'm not sure that they do have strict criteria - they didn't for Julie or Near (Dave).

I agree it's particularly strict, but it's not totally capricious either - you need to (a) have enough of an Internet or other profile to be have enough people think you're worth laughing at, or (b) be doing something really rather heinous. If not quite there on (a) it can be pushed over the bar by intersecting in some way with other characters.

Byuu/Near seems to have got their attention when he started doing the furry thing - links to some dodgy buggers in that community they were already following, including a convicted paedophile. They do find furries a deep source of content. I think that was what got him to actually be worthy of a thread, and he wouldn't have been otherwise.

'Null' is thus lucky that he has the cash and knowledge to do this. I understand that he has to because so many sites will not host KF (or support it or whatever else happens in tech speak).

My point is that no hosting site or security site is obliged to host or support him and that this is part of free speech in a capitalist society.

I agree it's particularly strict, but it's not totally capricious either - you need to (a) have enough of an Internet or other profile to be have enough people think you're worth laughing at,

Well, that's alright then ...

Seeing the words alt.binaries.feminism in the context of the current debate made me smile, ie how it could be misrepresented as feminism depending on binaries associated with the alt-right.

I hope that Near is still alive. If Near faked Near's own death then GOOD ON NEAR. I hope that Near got the help Near needed and is living a happy life

I hope they are alive...but no, not GOOD ON NEAR if they've faked their own suicide

That's a dreadful thing to do, these online accounts do have some influence on young people and the idea that some young person may attempt suicide because they think Near did is awful

Byuu/Near seems to have got their attention when he started doing the furry thing - links to some dodgy buggers in that community they were already following, including a convicted paedophile.

And? Will they target all Catholics because of the many, many cases of paedophilia in the RC Church?

That's a dreadful thing to do, these online accounts do have some influence on young people and the idea that some young person may attempt suicide because they think Near did is awful

But there's more to this picture isn't there? Near was very, very mentally unwell. If they faked their own death (and that's an IF) then look at the bigger picture and what drive them to that - including that they wanted to get the fuck away from the bullying on KF. Do you think they were acting with a sound mind? I don't.

Cloudflare hasn’t chosen to withdraw service because it doesn’t want to work with KF, it’s been forced to temporarily suspend the site for safety reasons, due to criminal attacks.

Unless you've seen something I haven't, I don't think it was that. Actually, found a post from Null confirming it.

It was the actual Internet data links to the main server being overloaded.

The surrounding data networks had to bar traffic to protect themselves. Effectively they were under attack too. Big "no through access to this address" signs went up on all surrounding routes.

The Cloudflare protection protects the "high level" server functionality - it stops the server computer from being overloaded. But it was being overloaded at the more fundamental network level - a much heavier attack, so the Cloudflare didn't help.

This was basically a "ISP" level temporary emergency block. I don't want to imagine a world where an individual can be outright refused ISP business.

Maybe YetAnotherSpartacus does, but being fundamentally liberal, this is where I'd have to choose liberalism over feminism. I don't want fundamental service providers for things like water, gas, electricity, data or health to be able to withhold service from undesirables. People wanting to make moral judgments on who they supply should not enter those roles.

Seeing the words alt.binaries.feminism in the context of the current debate made me smile, ie how it could be misrepresented as feminism depending on binaries associated with the alt-right.

:) Except that I seem to remember that everything was alt.binaries - i.e. alt.binaries.tasteless (the forerunner of 4 Chan I suspect).

Maybe YetAnotherSpartacus does, but being fundamentally liberal, this is where I'd have to choose liberalism over feminism. I don't want fundamental service providers for things like water, gas, electricity, data or health to be able to withhold service from undesirables. People wanting to make moral judgments on who they supply should not enter those roles.

Please do not put words into my mouth. I am merely saying that in a liberal society that is also capitalist free speech is part of capitalism as well as liberalism. That's not saying it should be, that's saying that it is. A publisher can choose not to publish your book. As a thread on MN last week demonstrated eBay can choose not to sell your first edition of Mein Kampf.

I also think that is slightly different from the water provider not providing you with water because they do not like you. Having said that, I do remember that in the Thatcher years people died because they could not afford heating.

I don't blame Near for killing himself or pretending to

But I'm certainly not going to be cheering him on

LnRhc3RlbGVzcw==

How odd. I wrote 'tasteless'!

But I'm certainly not going to be cheering him on

What should he have done?

Please do not put words into my mouth.

Then stop coming up with analogies that are inappropriate. I'm trying to steer your analogies back to the Kiwi Farms situation. Stop talking about "publishing" when we ARE dealing with something more fundamental - supply of a service.

Then stop coming up with analogies that are inappropriate. I'm trying to steer your analogies back to the Kiwi Farms situation. Stop talking about "publishing" when we ARE dealing with something more fundamental - supply of a service.

I'm not. sure exactly how you think you are entitled to tell me what to come up with or to steer me anywhere... or to tell me to 'stop' anything that really is the sort of behaviour and language I expect of a man!

Stop talking about "publishing" when we ARE dealing with something more fundamental - supply of a service.

I guess in the publishing analogy, this is the postal service refusing to deliver a publisher's books, or the phone company refusing to deliver incoming calls.

I see it more as about a publisher - but in any case, the common denominator is not heating or electricity but 'speech' which is what is happening on the KF website.

If people could say what they wanted to here, and post the photos they think need publicising, they would have no need of kiwi farms. The way they go about things wouldn't have to be accepted. We could all be doing it, with a lot more discernment. And humanity.

That's a crucial point, I think.

MN is strictly moderated, it's a large, mainstream site made up of probably fairly average users. Yet its considered beyond the pale because we talk about feminism using words and ideas that some people think are unconscionable.

The issue of how the internet has become the marketplace of ideas, and how access to it is granted, restricted, and boosted/amplified, and how essentially criminal gangs can decide to target a site and bring it down, are all things that concern all of us.

It's a pretty huge subject and MN and KF are just two tiny parts of it.