Normally I'd agree, but in this case the people on the other end of the issue rarely care about how vague the legality of something is before going forward with it, so I think it's only reasonable to extend the same logic to nitter.

▲

Levitz 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I don't see how that makes any sense whatsoever.

If one party is reckless in legal terms, then that's their right and they will bear the consequences. It's generally considered to be a bad attitude to have, which is why people generally don't have it, and I'm going to need an explanation on how wishing that onto Nitter isn't in practice wanting someone else to burn at the stake to spite a third party, especially given the enormous difference in economical, and as a result legal standing on both of those entities.

Said more explicitly, wanting some random guy who made a project to risk aspects of their livelihood to spite Elon Musk because you don't like him is psychopathic.

▲

monospacegames 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It is not my wish for nitter to shoulder any more burden than they can reasonably carry, which at this point unfortunately seems zero.

What I'm stating is that I'd normally be against a project like nitter on moral grounds had it been targeting a forum such as mineralenthusiasts.com that required you to log in to view posts, but since the counterparty in this case is a habitual bad actor extending the same goodwill to them only empowers them, and it would be best for nitter to function as much as it can unless its illegality is established in court.

I could accuse you of things as equally unpleasant as psychopathy for making me spell this out, which I had hoped would be incredibly obvious from my original comment, but I'll refrain from doing so.

▲

angoragoats an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> wanting some random guy who made a project to risk aspects of their livelihood to spite Elon Musk because you don't like him is psychopathic.

Speaking only for myself: I agree with the spirit of this statement (perhaps minus the use of the word “psychopathic”).

However, it seems like the author of Nitter wants to continue to engage in this risky activity, and is requesting resources to help. If they ever wish to stop developing Nitter/XCancel, I will absolutely respect that. But assuming they wish to continue, I consider supporting them and doing my part to frustrate a man-child, unrepentant fascist, and murderer of thousands a noble thing to do.

▲

k33n 29 minutes ago | parent [-]

> Do my part to frustrate a man-child.

Who’s the man-child here though? Elon is running multiple companies, spread his DNA and ideas everywhere, and makes a very real impact on the world every day.

And then there’s you. Who believes it’s “noble” to frustrate someone you don’t like. In reality, you’re not frustrating anyone but yourself.

So I ask again.. who’s the man child? Elon? Or you?

And who’s the fascist? The man minding his own business, and doing his thing? Or the guy who desperately wants to tell that man what to do?

▲

monospacegames 22 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Did you spill your DNA everywhere writing this too? Or just on yourself?

	▲	k33n 17 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		If you’d like to continue believing that success is immaturity, or that freedom of speech is fascism, then that is certainly your prerogative.

▲

angoragoats 15 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

> Elon is running multiple companies,

So? Nothing about that is inherently noble.

> spread his DNA and ideas everywhere

Much to my dismay. Most of his ideas have a long track record of being drastically incorrect or dangerous. And he treats his children like shit, so much that at least one of his children wants nothing to do with him. Also “spreads his DNA everywhere” is a really weird way to talk about how many children he has.

> and makes a very real impact on the world every day.

Agreed. He certainly impacted the millions of people he murdered running DOGE.

In a just world, he’d be behind bars for the rest of his pathetic life. But since we don’t live in a just world, I’m trying to do my (admittedly extremely small) part in correcting that.

> And who’s the fascist? The man minding his own business,

This is a hilariously wrong way to describe him. The fascist is the man who sieg heil’ed, twice, in front of a large audience, and then backed it up via every politically-related action he’s taken since then.