Why Epik welcomed Gab.com
By Rob Monster, November 3, 2018
Domain Investing, Domain Law, Domain Name Asset Management
The domain Gab.com has landed at Epik.
This post will summarize why Epik welcomed Gab.com. It will also address why I believe the operators of the site have the right to be online.
De-Platforming is Digital Censorship. Blacklisting is Digital Shunning.
For those not familiar with the case, Gab.com’s ability to operate was abruptly terminated by Godaddy, among other vendors, who deemed Gab to have violated their terms of service. This de-platforming of Gab generated much discussion in the mainstream technology press. It also prompted a lively discussion in the professional domain name community, including at the popular discussion board NamePros.
As the news broke, and as some elements in the mainstream media rendered their judgement, I embarked on my own search for truth. Along the way, I did have an opportunity to meet with the Founder of Gab, Andrew Torba, an entrepreneur who was willing to swim against the tide for what he believes is right, namely empowering netizens to discuss openly about matters of mutual interest with limited risk of censorship.
Although, I did not take the decision lightly to accept this domain registration, I look forward to partnering with a young, and once brash, CEO who is courageously doing something that looks useful. As I reflect on my own journey as a truth-seeking tech entrepreneur, I have no doubt that Andrew will continue to develop not only as tech entrepreneur but also as a responsible steward — one that can balance bravado with diplomacy and who tempers courage with humility.
A Word on Inalienable Rights
De-platforming a haven of free speech is not about left or right. Anyone who remembers studying civics is familiar with the concept of inalienable rights — rights that a worthy government can only protect but would have no moral authority to take away. The idea of Natural Law and Inalienable Rights dates back to Ancient Greece, if not before. Tolerance for competing views — including those protected by Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Press — is not an American concept even though the Founding Fathers of the United States built a prosperous nation around the concept.
We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. – Thomas Jefferson
These days there are many kinds of online content that some people find objectionable. When it comes to publishing content, online or offline, there is an interplay between free will and personal responsibility. Specific to Gab, the decision to not only tolerate but to welcome competing views, does come with a responsibility to take action when free will is exhibited without personal responsibility. This was famously illustrated in the opinion rendered by Supreme Court in Watt vs. United States (1969) where threats of violence was deemed unlawful.
In the case of Gab.com, there is a duty to monitor and lightly curate, keeping content within the bounds of the law. The duty is perhaps best explained by Uncle Ben of Spiderman fame: "Remember, with great power comes great responsibility."
A Word on Decentralization of Ownership
One of the unique features of Gab is their democratic approach to capitalization. For an online media portal with exponential growth, there are variety of potential acquirers and investors that would have a keen interest in providing growth capital, even for a business model that is presently loss-making as is the case with Gab. Rather than go down Sand Hill Road, they have opted to follow in the footsteps of Blockchain by designing a distributed ownership model. And while Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs) lost some of their heady momentum, the premise of shared ownership for shared outcomes remains compelling.
In the domain name world, we often talk about domain ownership. The reality is that we are mostly leasing domains from registries, who in turn is often regulated by a regulator ICANN. Recently I have been a vocal advocate for Forever domain registrations whereby a domain is free of ongoing expense. At the moment, this is possible through Epik though there is still more work to do to make this a risk-free industry norm. The danger of not proactively embracing digital sovereignty, in all its forms, is that the digital world will inevitably find a way to achieve it, with or without domain names.
Let Freedom Ring
To the casual observer, the case of Gab.com seems like it is something new. It is not. It is history repeating itself. While there are consequences to actions, there is also the proverbial risk of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. My hope, for all of our sakes, is that Gab.com treads wisely, using its liberty for the betterment of most, and the enlightenment of all.
‘Those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it. – George Santayana
(1863-1952)
Sincerely,
Robert W. Monster
Founder and CEO
Epik.com
https://epik.com/blog/why-epik-welcomed-gab-com.html
#GAB #DePlatform #Censorship #Blacklisting #Minds
https://epik.com/blog/why-epik-welcomed-gab-com.html
By Rob Monster, November 3, 2018
Domain Investing, Domain Law, Domain Name Asset Management
The domain Gab.com has landed at Epik.
This post will summarize why Epik welcomed Gab.com. It will also address why I believe the operators of the site have the right to be online.
De-Platforming is Digital Censorship. Blacklisting is Digital Shunning.
For those not familiar with the case, Gab.com’s ability to operate was abruptly terminated by Godaddy, among other vendors, who deemed Gab to have violated their terms of service. This de-platforming of Gab generated much discussion in the mainstream technology press. It also prompted a lively discussion in the professional domain name community, including at the popular discussion board NamePros.
As the news broke, and as some elements in the mainstream media rendered their judgement, I embarked on my own search for truth. Along the way, I did have an opportunity to meet with the Founder of Gab, Andrew Torba, an entrepreneur who was willing to swim against the tide for what he believes is right, namely empowering netizens to discuss openly about matters of mutual interest with limited risk of censorship.
Although, I did not take the decision lightly to accept this domain registration, I look forward to partnering with a young, and once brash, CEO who is courageously doing something that looks useful. As I reflect on my own journey as a truth-seeking tech entrepreneur, I have no doubt that Andrew will continue to develop not only as tech entrepreneur but also as a responsible steward — one that can balance bravado with diplomacy and who tempers courage with humility.
A Word on Inalienable Rights
De-platforming a haven of free speech is not about left or right. Anyone who remembers studying civics is familiar with the concept of inalienable rights — rights that a worthy government can only protect but would have no moral authority to take away. The idea of Natural Law and Inalienable Rights dates back to Ancient Greece, if not before. Tolerance for competing views — including those protected by Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Press — is not an American concept even though the Founding Fathers of the United States built a prosperous nation around the concept.
We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. – Thomas Jefferson
These days there are many kinds of online content that some people find objectionable. When it comes to publishing content, online or offline, there is an interplay between free will and personal responsibility. Specific to Gab, the decision to not only tolerate but to welcome competing views, does come with a responsibility to take action when free will is exhibited without personal responsibility. This was famously illustrated in the opinion rendered by Supreme Court in Watt vs. United States (1969) where threats of violence was deemed unlawful.
In the case of Gab.com, there is a duty to monitor and lightly curate, keeping content within the bounds of the law. The duty is perhaps best explained by Uncle Ben of Spiderman fame: "Remember, with great power comes great responsibility."
A Word on Decentralization of Ownership
One of the unique features of Gab is their democratic approach to capitalization. For an online media portal with exponential growth, there are variety of potential acquirers and investors that would have a keen interest in providing growth capital, even for a business model that is presently loss-making as is the case with Gab. Rather than go down Sand Hill Road, they have opted to follow in the footsteps of Blockchain by designing a distributed ownership model. And while Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs) lost some of their heady momentum, the premise of shared ownership for shared outcomes remains compelling.
In the domain name world, we often talk about domain ownership. The reality is that we are mostly leasing domains from registries, who in turn is often regulated by a regulator ICANN. Recently I have been a vocal advocate for Forever domain registrations whereby a domain is free of ongoing expense. At the moment, this is possible through Epik though there is still more work to do to make this a risk-free industry norm. The danger of not proactively embracing digital sovereignty, in all its forms, is that the digital world will inevitably find a way to achieve it, with or without domain names.
Let Freedom Ring
To the casual observer, the case of Gab.com seems like it is something new. It is not. It is history repeating itself. While there are consequences to actions, there is also the proverbial risk of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. My hope, for all of our sakes, is that Gab.com treads wisely, using its liberty for the betterment of most, and the enlightenment of all.
‘Those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it. – George Santayana
(1863-1952)
Sincerely,
Robert W. Monster
Founder and CEO
Epik.com
https://epik.com/blog/why-epik-welcomed-gab-com.html
#GAB #DePlatform #Censorship #Blacklisting #Minds
https://epik.com/blog/why-epik-welcomed-gab-com.html
It's an interesting thing. Hate speech is interesting in that if you believe your content not to be hate speech and someone creates hate speech about you, then they're in the wrong...not you....right?
ReplyDeleteI'm on Minds....if you want to see a cesspool of hatred and white supremacy, spend about 10 mins there looking at posts. You'll also see many of the folks who have moved off of Twitter and Facebook, etc due to being banned.
Lauchlin MacGregor I'm on Minds and I'm not a White Supremacist or have a cesspool of hatred in my character. If you spend 10 minutes on any platform, you'll see content you don't like. You can find the content you describe on Google+ too. Social media platforms are a service like mobile cell phone services....anyone can use them. There's no political test when an account is created.
ReplyDeleteThe thing with Minds is only your subscribers show up in your newsfeed. If you've been on Minds for 10 minutes, you haven't built your newsfeed...it would have very little content and mostly filled with boosted posts. I've been on Minds for nearly four weeks now. I've used the Block function five times. I block the worst and ignore the rest. I concentrate and subscribe to channels that interest me. My effort went into Channel mining and I have found a lot of channels with content I enjoy. I also look for channels by hashtag of subjects that interest me. After four weeks of effort, my newsfeed is beginning to look like what I found on Google+.
I've found that there are strong photography and writer communities on Minds. Minds has a Blog button at the top of your channel that allows you to read other's blogs and to create and publish your own blogs. I really enjoy the blogs and the discussions that erupt on them.
The Minds user experience interface is a lot like Google+ and that is what attracted me. The fact that Minds doesn't invade your privacy, charges no fees like MeWe, doesn’t censor or put you in jail has given the site a buffet of minds where people speak and post their truth. There's no artificial ‘politically correct’ bubble on Minds created by people who can't stand to let others' exercise their free speech right. People post their truth. You can look at it or ignore it. None of this impacts the excellent user experience interface on Minds if you bother to learn how to navigate.
Join the 400 strong group for Google+ refugees on Minds for information and tips. https://www.minds.com/groups/profile/896384555164274688
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/VStNNmS8FhdiY3HKJ2J9lw-BuV4djJBaTFshK5FlatsGUfcTrgRuzEt_k2-bjbQilzuH-0WtC146kus=s0
Kathie Gifford I realize that there are folks who aren't. The problem is that the boost annoyance along with the lacking block feature, it's difficult to get away from it unless you pay for premium, especially if you're like me and appreciate political discourse.
ReplyDeleteI have no issue with people expressing their viewpoint, but all I see in the non-avoidable boost area are anti-semitic or white Supremacists. If they fix this particular issue, I'm pretty sure that my ability to curate may negate the problem I have.
For now, I downvote the crap like that which shows up on my feed....which seems to attract more of it.?? Not sure.
Here's a post from Minds. Check out my Google+ page to see what's on Minds because I've shared a lot of content from Minds on my Google+ page. Here's one...hahahaha...it was great!
ReplyDeleteminds.com - www.minds.com/newsfeed/904206244892667904
#funny #LOL #humor #horses
That comment actually might get flagged...sorry....it's just my demonstration. I'll check out the settings and see if something is amiss.
ReplyDeleteLauchlin MacGregor I understand your point. Of course there is content like that...it's on Google+ too. You can ignore it and/or block it.
ReplyDeleteCheck out my Google+ page and see all the positive content I have shared from Minds. You need to work on building your Minds Newsfeed by finding and subscribing to channels that interest you. I have 369 subscribers now by subscribing to their channels (some I have not subscribed to) and my newsfeed is full of their posts...not the random posts that fill a newsfeed of someone new to Minds. You can't judge Minds by what you see in the Newsfeed if you haven't customized it and built it through subscriptions.
plus.google.com - Kathie “Kat” Gifford
Kathie Gifford yes, but boosted content still shows up. I can certainly ignore it, but my point is that if I don't want to see it on my feed, then it shouldn't be there....boosted or not. Again...my issue is lack of proper tools for curation.
ReplyDeleteI have seen ZERO of these things on MeWe and Plusora. I know they are there, but it is easy to remove.
The boosted content I see is primarily hate speech, conspiracy theories, and other questionable type of content. Without the ability to not see this, I cannot recommend Minds to any casual user. It just sends the wrong message.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, there are the same type of posts on G+ as well, but it's not shoved down our throats due to either not having an annoying boost feature, or at least being able to turn it off (trending, hot posts) without having to pay. And there's a more rigorous curation of content here to remove hate speech, which isn't necessarily always a bad thing.
There are plenty of ways to express one's self without resorting to the type of things I see on Minds, and the nature of bias and bigotry seen there. Minds unfortunately becomes a haven for this type of content and it makes it difficult to avoid it, and eventually to simply see it as a place where this type of content propagates, and is allowed to propagate freely under the guise of free speech.
wara zashi It's a free world. I support any choice you make that makes you happy. I'm happy on Minds. I've learned how to navigate around content I don't like. If I subscribe to the upgraded Minds version, I won't see any boosted content. The crypto I earn everyday just for interacting on Minds, is enough to pay for the upgrade subscription but I have not upgraded yet.
ReplyDeleteAs I said before, I think the Minds user interface is superior to any other platform I have tested (MeWe and Pluspora)...it's the most like Google+. No rejection of a gif or image because it exceeds size limits half way through loading. I can share posts to Twitter and Facebook with a click of a button. No mandatory fees. No invasion of privacy. No storage limits. No overlords. No timeouts. No arrogant thought or speech police. We curate each other. It's free speech and we don't hesitate to tell someone respectfully when their post is unacceptable. Not one Minds user I have been in contact with has made a personal attack against me...they expect opposing opinions because they value free speech. They don't go into a panic like they do on Google+ and call me a Nazi or White Supremacist JUST because I don't agree with them.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/6Bkgj2mZXYuFj5-VRy6jsom1WvSv5MBVFTwPyUTphFyWEXI1jC20kvnRz1GlDmDbJpIC4qmnHRykjys=s0
Kathie Gifford You sold me, now i'm going to try Minds. And i really liked your way of describing the situation.
ReplyDeletethe boosted content on Minds was too revolting to endure - paying them to shut off the flow seemed like an ask too far. Better to simply leave.
ReplyDeleteCade Johnson ha ha, now you make me wonder what's worse, having to pay to get rid of commercials or having to pay to get rid of whackos!
ReplyDeleteI think it is perfectly reasonable to pay for a social media network that does not mine my data - the network has a cost. But the provider has to draw people with whom I will actually like to socialize. If the entrance to the market is full of stands with rotten fruit, why look in the stands farther in? Just my two cents.
ReplyDelete/sub
ReplyDeleteLet's think about it for a bit. The reason most of us here on G+ was because we didn't like "something", and that something back then happened to be Facebook, or the people in there, or the way Zuck runs it. Today that "something" also includes those a-holes on Gab and Minds. That said I think it's reasonable for Plussers to want to avoid those places as it's not much different from their motivation to avoid Facebook. Apparently blocking isn't enough because if it did we'd have no problem going back to Facebook but most of us chose to stay away.
ReplyDeleteDeplatforming is NOT censorship. You have a right to speak, nobody should be forced to lend you their ears.
ReplyDeleteKathie Gifford
ReplyDelete“The thing with Minds is only your subscribers show up in your newsfeed.”
Once you you have enough subscriber to full your newsfeed. Until then they fill it with random posts. And that's the reason why new users have so much crap in there feed.