Is it possible that Phuks will move to less restrictive hosting in future?

[–] jobes 1 points (+1|-0)

Sure, subscribers only. I like that option and I would enjoy that. The big problem is EU regulations coming through that content providers are responsible for the content they host, whether it be links, images or videos.

Having private subs prevents a majority of the community from flagging something that may get the site taken down in certain countries. Maybe having private subs would actually prevent certain countries from seeing the content and be super beneficial. I don't know. It's just wavy ground to walk upon. (I am not affiliated with phuks, just my own personal opinion)

[–] ScorpioGlitch 1 points (+1|-0)

Maybe so but at some point, and no harshness intended to our awesome admin team, admins just have to sometimes admin.

In any case, there's always ways to deal with nonsensical anti-free speech laws. Like telling them "piss off." See, the .co domain is based in... Columbia. Rules of Columbia and the host apply, not the rules of the EU. They can whine and fine you but the fines just mean that they're really just asking you to pay them so that they don't block you in their country. We're a long, long way from any point where the EU population matters.

[–] jobes 1 points (+1|-0)

We're a long, long way from any point where the EU population matters.

No, we're not. 3/4 of the admin team is not in the US. Alexa rankings don't mean a thing when they show this site as US/Canada. That's maybe 50% of users who post at most. It doesn't matter where your domain was registered. If you serve content to the EU then you are liable.

[–] ScorpioGlitch 1 points (+1|-0)

I just can't see it that way. It's a draconic way of displacing censorship. "We can't stop all the people so we'll make the website stop all the people." It's also toxic in that it tries to enforce foreign laws on citizens in other countries by proxy. They can't prosecute for people speaking in ways they don't want so they'll punish someone else. This isn't even close to right or reasonable.

If the EU doesn't want people to say mean things, they can stop it themselves and block the content at the border. It's not their job or right to stop someone from the US from saying "mean things." I totally get it that a host wouldn't want the legal responsibility so it's in the terms of use. They don't want to be responsible for all those people multiplied by all those sites they host. But then again, there's also bulletproof hosting so there's always some kind of choice. Not necessarily a great choice but a choice nonetheless.

So, if it were me, I'd tell the EU and other counties what they can do with themselves. Or rather I'd have a lawyer tell them what to do with themselves. Maybe it's not something you can do and expect to stay online but it's the right thing to do.

Now all that said, while I'm a strong proponent of free speech, I don't want the kind of nonsense here that you can see on voat. That's just pure toxic. Yes, I know it's a form of cognitive dissonance but I'm tired of toxicity. We have a happy little community and I'd like it to stay that way.

Is it possible that Phuks will move to less restrictive hosting in future?

22 comments

/s/AskPhuks