[Found] Crossing the Rubicon

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Even if said illegal content is removed in a timely manner, this is no guarantee that the Farms will keep its Section 230 protections. Like I pointed out earlier, swift deletion of an obvious fedpost wasn't enough to stop Cloudflare from dropping the Farms.
I see where you're going with this, but Cloudflare cucking out to troons is a private business making a (faggoty) business decision.

S230 should shield Null from any fedposts that would affect him legally, especially if he's on his game and deletes them right away.
 
Think about how dirty LFJ has been playing for the last 7 years. Now magnify that at least tenfold once full-scale lawfare breaks out.
tbh i'm banking on LFJ breaking down once proceedings turn to discovery. A lot of the points will be about accusations against her, and null would be able to get testimonies from everyone affected by LFJ, potentially putting it into the public record.
 
... my concern is that someone could make a post that is in contempt of court
How when some random retard posting here isn't a party to the lawsuit?
Even if said illegal content is removed in a timely manner, this is no guarantee that the Farms will keep its Section 230 protections.
230 covers you precisely from this, you have to actively remove and police illegal content, it doesn't have a timer outside of whatever people would consider a normal time to spot and remove said illegal content, unless jannies somehow let a fedpost stay up for over a week it's of no concern.
At the very least, I hope Null talks to his lawyer about what steps he can take to minimise the risk of bad actors interfering with the Farms' legal rights whilst the case is active
This is a given, he might be a slobbering mutt but I'd like to believe, after all this time, that he isn't retarded.
Think about how dirty LFJ has been playing for the last 7 years. Now magnify that at least tenfold once full-scale lawfare breaks out.
Think of the discovery if he starts ramping it up.
 
I am so ready for 𝓣𝓸𝓽𝓪𝓵 𝓡𝓮𝓽𝓪𝓻𝓭 𝓦𝓪𝓻 kiwibros.
𝓣𝓸𝓽𝓪𝓵 𝓡𝓮𝓽𝓪𝓻𝓭 𝓦𝓪𝓻.png
 
tbh i'm banking on LFJ breaking down once proceedings turn to discovery. A lot of the points will be about accusations against her, and null would be able to get testimonies from everyone affected by LFJ, potentially putting it into the public record.
Speaking of stuff that might come up in court, the anonymous allegation of pedo-guarding by Elliot on Hacker News got redacted by moderators sometime in the last few months:

 
This may also be a good opportunity to clear KF's name. Refute all the claims that we swat people and push them to suicide, and get them in official public record.
This is a person every company and authority figure tiptoes around. He may honestly think he can get away with deleting things in light of discovery because it's not like he really suffers consequences for any of his other outrageous conduct. I mean, just look at him thinking he's a woman despite the face he stares into every morning. This isn't a person with a grasp on reality.
We got the truth, but a lie can run across the world while the truth is still getting its pants back on. Do you honestly believe that there isn't a single way the defendant can pick and choose parts of this site to make us look evil and him look like a victim? Just being prepared for that eventuality is important
One of the main things Null has going for him is that he looks and sounds like a normal individual while LFJ looks like a disgusting unhinged lunatic who does his cause no favors whatsoever by being the face of it.
Wrapping all of this together so I don't repeat myself ad-nauseum. We are going to have to live with the fact that the optics of KiwiFarms is not going to drastically improve anytime in the foreseeable future, if ever. Granted, most of us here probably don't care, and the thoughts of the dickless faggots likewise won't be changed either.

Also, the comparison of "normal" Null vs. Billy Dong-gone is a moot point for any early stage pre-trial discovery or investigation. That would all be wrapped up in legal wrangling and procedure between lawyers. The optics would only really factor in if/when it came to a jury trial where, unfortunately trannys are the Current Thing™️ that would play into Billy Dong-gone's favor. That is where a VERY GOOD lawyer in a district not favorable to troon ideology would be the most beneficial, IMO.

An interesting point about pre-trial and criminal discovery, and not knowing what Dear Leader's intentions are, so I can only speculate, is just how far into this it could go. Billy Blockhead already opened his fat fucking trap and basically admitted to torturous interference. Defamation would be harder to prove in a court of law, IMO. However, depending on the depth and direction that this could go, and you can give me all of the optimistic rainbows for this, it could open the door for actual investigation into Byuuicide™️, and not just rely on heresay from an overseas troon. I have no doubt him and his dickless hoarde is watching this board like a hawk, so anything said here is subject to scrutiny and preemptive ass-covering so I won't go completely into what I'd really like to say.


Even if said illegal content is removed in a timely manner, this is no guarantee that the Farms will keep its Section 230 protections. Like I pointed out earlier, swift deletion of an obvious fedpost wasn't enough to stop Cloudflare from dropping the Farms.
There is actually fairly recent precedent on the federal level protecting social media companies from legal consequences due to user generated ccontent. Ironically, the "imminent threat" excuse Cloudflare used to shut off service to KF, would theoretically shield them from any legal liability in the situation. Granted, they knew it wasn't true, as well as we do, so that's a moot point. Also, S230 states that providers must take reasonable steps to remove offending content, and the fact that KF is basically a one man operation with a smattering of part time moderators, I would confidently say that Null would easily be legally covered from being responsible for any truly offending fedposts.


It's times like this that I almost wish that I was on the bar in California, but alas, I'm in Farmville. Either way, I'm in for a legal fund donation should the (s)need arise.
 
Remember what happened to Vic Lasagna. Or even Rittenhouse before he fired the activist lawyers that were dressing him up like a Turkey.

Vic was undone by a literal strip mall lawyer being paid a basic pay rate. Simply because that guy was the one guy in the room not grandstanding. I know everyone here is saying to hire Randazza, or Barnes or some other high profile lawyer.

Don't.

Hire John Cletus Citizen Esq. Preferably the Senior Partner of his own firm in Charleston, who successfully sued various mining corporations on behalf of the average joe, and the US Government on behalf of the mining corporations. And won. You don't need a grand stander. Those kinds of peacocks will not be able to withstand the social media slings and arrows. Find an attorney who doesn't even know Twitter is now known as X instead.
This. The eventual case will be a social media shitshow and a procedural slog. Get yourself a guy who can pound facts so long that they're the consistency of lumpy jello, and who either has a bulletproof reputation or simply doesn't give a shit about the media circus.
 
This. The eventual case will be a social media shitshow and a procedural slog. Get yourself a guy who can pound facts so long that they're the consistency of lumpy jello, and who either has a bulletproof reputation or simply doesn't give a shit about the media circus.
And who has immaculate opsec. I cannot stress this enough.
 
It doesn't matter how hard William Minging Faux Pus See flails against the laws of nature, this will always be true. It's not an add-on, it's a fundamnetal principle:

"Heterosexual men interpret brick faced trannies sporting stinky axe wounds as damaged, and route around them."

It doesn't matter how long and hard Faux Pus-See fights Kiwifarms as a proxy war for the laws of nature, sooner or later the non-insane majority will have to stand up and say "Fuck this brick-faced pervert with an incel's untouched peen. I've stood all I can stand and I can't stands no more!"
 
I'm going to chime in with the other posters who have noted that tortious interference is a slam dunk if you're going after Dong Gone, and First Amendment claims are irrelevant
The criteria for willfully malicious tortious interference are all met:
I don't think it's exactly a slam dunk, there's still some nuance to be had, especially with regards to truth as a defense.

The criteria for willfully malicious tortious interference are all met:
A potential issue could be proving
Independent wrongful conduct by the defendant

While the following seems clear enough:
proving such intention is usually the question of fact upon which a tortious interference claim will fail or survive.

It's still necessary to actually prove the wrongful conduct. The third restatement agrees with the requirement that
A defendant is subject to liability for interference with contract if:
3. the defendant engaged in wrongful conduct as defined in Subsection (2) [and]

Conduct is wrongful for the purposes of this Section if:
2. the defendant’s conduct constituted an independent and intentional legal wrong; or
3. the defendant engaged in the conduct for the sole purpose of injuring the plaintiff.
For 3) there's the argument that it's for the troons etc. and thus not the sole purpose, so the strongest case would be with 2), with the most likely issue being false statements amounting to defamation.

The second restatement also states: (emphasis mine)
§ 772 - Advice as Proper or Improper Interference
"One who intentionally causes a third person not to perform a contract or not to enter into a prospective contractual relation with another does not interfere improperly with the other's contractual relation, by giving the third person (a) truthful information, or (b) honest advice within the scope of a request for the advice.

Given that we don't publicly know the conversations that were had, and often the justifications to the termination of the contracts, such information would likely come out when we
hopefully get to discovery. That's where things start getting really expensive and embarrassing.

While there are public statements being made regarding the site that may influence the consideration of "the nature of the actor's conduct", even if defamation is proved there, there's the question of if those statements are relevant to the interference itself, such as being used to influence the communications with the service providers, enough for the communications to be considered an independent wrong.

Even then, there might be additional difficulty proving defamation should the Kiwi Farms be considered as a public figure, since the level of proof is raised to the reckless disregard of truth instead of it merely being wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back