Read the CEO's blog post. The link was put up here. The fact that the assjack who pwns the sturmer said something publicly to the effect that by allowing them operate and say what they do it indicated support for their genocidal belief shitstem. Bam. Outta there! Not even admitting they used their godaddy services to stalk CNN staff was enough, but implying the service agreed with them because allowing that digital birdcageliner to operate indicated support for them was the crux of the biscuit why GD called in it's marker. Rr On 09/12/2017 03:36 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
Back onto the topic of substance at issue, even Slate gets it in this well written piece about the dangers of a regime of censorship, by whatever technical means and whatever "scoundrel" of the day (<ahem>Razer<ahem>) gets used to justify such:
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2017/08/the_one_big_prob...
Good luck folks,