Opinion Deplatforming hate forums doesn't work, British boffins warn - Industry intervention alone can't deal with harassment

  • 🔧 Actively working on site again.

Depriving online hate groups of network services - otherwise known as deplatforming - doesn't work very well, according to boffins based in the United Kingdom.

In a recently released preprint paper, Anh Vu, Alice Hutchings, and Ross Anderson, from the University of Cambridge and the University of Edinburgh, examine efforts to disrupt harassment forum Kiwi Farms and find that community and industry interventions have been largely ineffective.

Their study, undertaken as lawmakers around the world are considering policies that aspire to moderate unlawful or undesirable online behavior, reveals that deplatforming has only a modest impact and those running harmful sites remain free to carry on harassing people through other services.

"Deplatforming users may reduce activity and toxicity levels of relevant actors on Twitter and Reddit, limit the spread of conspiratorial disinformation on Facebook, and minimize disinformation and extreme speech on YouTube," they write in their paper. "But deplatforming has often made hate groups and individuals even more extreme, toxic and radicalized."

As examples, they cite how Reddit's ban of r/incels in November 2017 led to the creation of two incel domains, which then grew rapidly. They also point to how users banned from Twitter and Reddit "exhibit higher levels of toxicity when migrating to Gab," among other similar situations.

The researchers focus on the deplatforming of Kiwi Farms, an online forum where users participate in efforts to harass prominent online figures. One such person was a Canadian transgender streamer known as @Keffals on Twitter and Twitch.

In early August last year, a Kiwi Farms forum member allegedly sent a malicious warning to police in London, Ontario, claiming that @Keffals had committed murder and was planning further violence, which resulted in her being "swatted - a form of attack that has proved lethal in some cases.

Following further doxxing, threats, and harassment, @Keffals organized a successful campaign to pressure Cloudflare to stop providing Kiwi Farms with reverse proxy security protection, which helped the forum defend against denial-of-service attacks.

The research paper outlines the various interventions taken by internet companies against Kiwi Farms. After Cloudflare dropped Kiwi Farms on September 3 last year, DDoS-Guard did so two days later. The following day, the Internet Archive and hCaptcha severed ties.

On September 10, the kiwifarms.is domain stopped working. Five days later, security firm DiamWall suspended service for those operating the site.

On September 18, all the domains used by the forum became inaccessible, possibly related to an alleged data breach. But then, as the researchers observe, the Kiwi Farms dark web forum was back by September 29. There were further intermittent outages on October 9 and October 22, but since then Kiwi Farms has been active, apart from brief service interruptions.

"The disruption was more effective than previous DDoS attacks on the forum, as observed from our datasets. Yet the impact, although considerable, was short-lived." the researchers state.

"While part of the activity was shifted to Telegram, half of the core members returned quickly after the forum recovered. And while most casual users were shaken off, others turned up to replace them. Cutting forum activity and users by half might be a success if the goal of the campaign is just to hurt the forum, but if the objective was to 'drop the forum,' it has failed."

Hate is difficult to shift

One reason for the durability of such sites, the authors suggest, is that activists get bored and move on, while trolls are motivated to endure and survive. They argue that deplatforming doesn't look like a long-term solution because, while casual harassment forum participants may scatter, core members become more determined and can recruit replacements through the publicity arising from censorship.

Vu, Hutchings, and Anderson argue that deplatforming by itself is insufficient and needs to be done in the context of a legal regime that can enforce compliance. Unfortunately, they note, this framework doesn't currently exist.

"We believe the harms and threats associated with online hate communities may justify action despite the right to free speech," the authors conclude. "But within the framework of the EU and the Council of Europe which is based on the European Convention on Human Rights, such action will have to be justified as proportionate, necessary and in accordance with the law."

They also contend that police work needs to be paired with social work, specifically education and psycho-social support, to deprogram hate among participants in such forums.

"There are multiple research programs and field experiments on effective ways to detox young men from misogynistic attitudes, whether in youth clubs and other small groups, at the scale of schools, or even by gamifying the identification of propaganda that promotes hate," they argue. "But most countries still lack a unifying strategy for violence reduction." ®
 
@Null: tl;dr: academy attacks KiwiFarms, cannot even collect properly the data to prove their point. In non-pozzed STEM field this alone would cause the paper to be withdrawn.

Late as usual, but after a quick search in the thread I think there's one BIG missing point nobody mentioned and that may invalidate a good chunk of their sanctimonious paper:
Namely, here:

1681911189918.png


The reset was MANDATORY, with many users losing their historical accounts and being forced to make new ones.
This clashes directly with what they say in their section D., point 1) Posting Activity:
These figures suggest that the decreasing posting volume seen in Figure 4 was mainly due to users leaving the forum, instead of surviving ones largely losing interest – they engaged back quickly after the forum recovered. Newcomers posted slightly less than casual survivors before the forum was completely down on 18 September (less than 2 posts per day), yet their average posting volume then increased quickly. This suggests that the disruption, besides removing a very large proportion of old casual users, drew in many new users who then became roughly as active as the core survivors.

FUCKING MORONS, the newcomers ARE the old users who flew out of the window in the password reset massacre and came back in through the door with a brand new account!

Shortly below, on page 10 of the article, they measure with their bogus indexes the toxicity, identity attack, and threat of posts, noting how the newcomers quickly become as toxic and aggressive as the core survivors, surely - I haven't read the paper in full - to promote the idea that KiwiFarms, the most toxic out of 12 extremist forums they've monitored (cit.) has the satanic power to fully and quickly brainwash its newly arrived users.
Yeah, too bad, the entire point is moot because their data pool is poisoned by them not taking into account the mandatory password reset.

This is ground, if not for a paper withdrawal, for AT LEAST a temporary suspension of the paper, so that it could be amended accordingly in light of the enormous blunder they've committed in collecting their data. But alas, it goes against the agenda of everyone's involved in the vetting, writing and publication of such political pamphlet...
 
Last edited:
Of course it's an idea from the Anglic menace.

Do these "people" even read the site? We're here to laugh, not hate. Or do they just pull shit out of their ass and call it fact?

Actually, scratch that. I'm definitely hateful now. I really hate the British!
They never read the site, not once, it is a never-ending ouroboros of them referencing other journos who also never actually read the site.
 
Always weird to see people describe conducting illegal cyber attacks in such a sanitized way that you'd think they were entirely legal.
It is "legal" if the government does it. Or at least nobody from the government is going to arrest the government for hacking or committing DDOS attacks or social engineering accounts out of the hands of good customers.

"Cutting forum activity and users by half"

Did all the downtime really drop activity by half? I'm unsure how they're measuring this (I assume posts per day) and I only actually started using Kiwi farms after the deplatforming campaign, so I don't have a good frame of reference to judge this. Anyone want to weigh in on this?

EDIT: Also to be clear I don't know if they're saying it cut activity by half right in the beginning, middle or end of the deplatforming campaign. The article was published today so if I were to be uncharitable I would assume they're talking about the forum as it is right now.
Many people, myself included, lost their old accounts because they used disposable email addresses that they don't have access to. I personally waited a couple of months to see if Null might be gracious enough to let the old accounts back in based on email address & password. But that just was not meant to be.

Eventually I created a new account. So when they talk about new recruits, odds are that many of those accounts are people who lost access to their old accounts and created new ones.

It would be like the time I was sent to a Christian weekend camp to correct my behavior or whatever reason my parents sent me there for. They never actually specified.

Turns out a lot of parents were thinking the same thing. You just ended up with a group of like-minded teenage boys having a great time each night in the dormitory after all the boring Jesus stuff. If anything it might have made us worse because we had found our kin from all the local area. Jesus and the soy boys running the camp had zero effect.
Hmmm... not a bad idea. Maybe we should all start Nazi deconversion camps in our various regions and our days instructing the people sent to us on what "NOT" to do.

"OK Johnny. Tell everyone here what you did and how you got caught. ... See. Foolish Nazis like you always get caught because you did X, Y Z. There is no way around it."

Maybe include a section on how to talk WokeNormal to law enforcement, judges and oppressive administrative minions to pass their smell test.

Between the education on what "NOT" to do, and what tools "NOT" to use, and the networking, we could build the worlds greatest autistic army.
 
Last edited:
Wait till they see the shit posted to Facebook and Twitter......
Can’t comment about twitter but the shit my old man (in his late 50’s working class bong boomer who, like most of his peers, never took and hand out, always took us abroad two weeks a year etc etc) gets away with posting on Facebook these fucks wouldn’t know whether to cope, seethe or dilate.

Was a fun afternoon when I explained to him how he could stop getting put in Facebook prison and what shadowbanning is.
 
  • Feels
Reactions: axfaxf
First they came for the Skinheads
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Skinhead
Then they came for the females
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a female
Then they came for the message boards
And I did not speak out
Because I did not use message boards.
Then they came for the pedo defending liberal twitch streamer
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a pedo defending liberal twitch streamer
Then they came for the farms
And there was no one left
To speak out for the farms
Guys look! We can do the "first they came for" thing too!

Aaaaaaahahahh
If you're in this little town close to a little hotel you might have heard me laugh out loud

View attachment 5067739
I HATE THE DEPROGRAMMING OF HATE!
I HATE THE DEPROGRAMMING OF HATE!
That's been going on for ages already, at least in the UK, under the "PREVENT" strategy" which was formerly started under Labour and carried over by the tories.- I got the police against me for wrongthink under it when I was like 13 or 14.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meat Target
YOU CAN'T JUST CRITICIZE PEOPLE WITH POSITIONS OF POWER!
These are the people that side with the "Anti-Fascist" movement btw, an organization built on the idea of censoring any kind of dissenting opinions.
They only call themselves "anti-fascist" because just calling themselves the straight-up Communist fucks they are wouldn't fly with anyone.
 
hortly below, on page 10 of the article, they measure with their bogus indexes the toxicity, identity attack, and threat of posts, noting how the newcomers quickly become as toxic and aggressive as the core survivors, surely - I haven't read the paper in full - to promote the idea that KiwiFarms, the most toxic out of 12 extremist forums they've monitored (cit.) has the satanic power to fully and quickly brainwash its newly arrived users.
what a bunch of BS... i have looked into this for my upcomming paper in the journal "letter to penthouse" and my findings are clear, the old fags averages a daily toxicity level of 11.3 microstoneheart with 95% never reaching peak toxicity over 2.5 decistoneheart. the newcoomers reach 34.2 nanostoneheart on average and only 7.4% reach a peak level of 11.3 microstoneheart.
 
Probably late since I haven't read all 15 pages but I’ve been an El Reg loyalist since the late 90s. Simon/BOFH was still new, it was only register.co.uk, etc. funny to see that their intentionally irreverent take to tech is starting to shift.
I remember when they used to routinely bring in Patrick Byrne to sperg out about naked short selling and glowies controlling Wikipedia. Good times.

Also fuck the British for even using retarded words like "boffin." Eat shit you Cuck Island faggots.
Yeah "wonk" is so much better.
 
Null posted the paper previously discussed here in the Telegram this morning:
C6A4BA98-4A00-4FC9-B1F5-B076BEEFC131.jpeg

Just read the paper, here are some disorganized thoughts:

•Though I’m not at all surprised this got through peer review, I am saddened.
•They took the Byuu story completely at face value, which I know isn’t unusual but it still makes them look retarded. There’s some other mistakes as well but I don’t feel like nitpicking atm.
•How can I tell whether I’m a core or casual user?
•Did they account for traffic on Tor when looking at active users? A lot of us were on Tor for months at a time during all this, which afaik can’t be tracked the same way.
•They seemed to have underestimated how many of us became increasingly radicalized against troons since this began. From their perspective, this is a huge negative. It’s not as though we became less “hateful” or “toxic”. There was a section about it but their data seems to show that their wasn’t significant increase in the metrics they used, which doesn’t line up with what I’ve been seeing. Maybe they just don’t understand what we’re saying very well.
•Also, they don’t seem to have accounted for monetary support of the forum. I would wager that the amount Null made off of site donations, stream donation, merch runs, etc significantly increased during this period. I suspect it remains higher than before the attacks because many people who stayed became more invested and more willing to make financial contributions to the site.
•Them never saying “Null” or “Josh Moon” is super weird.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
half of the core members returned quickly
There was something like 2.5k people online earlier. Did the forum really 'halve' in size since then

It seems like we're back up to where we were, I don't ever remember seeing over 3k people online ever. Except maybe for a short period when that little british (battersby something?) kid was on life support and mumsnet people came here to talk about it but I might be misremembering.
 
Back