i mean… we’re talking about civil torts here, not constitutional law. i think you can still count on a court to throw this out even with a pro se defense.

it’s settled law that you are absolved of responsibility if you don’t moderate.

If it’s ever successfully repealed, you’d become liable for anything posted to your forum

unless you refuse to moderate it. then you are only criminally liable in the circumstances that have been codified, which usually has a takedown grace period.

you out here doing yeomans work

it’s one reason among many.

I’m not willing to risk that it might be true

trustworthiness is always a matter of opinion.

the post is mostly verifiable information with two sentences of speculation that you seem to think is the crux of what I said, when, in fact, all I said is that routing traffic through Israel dimishes my trust in proton.

it’s not circular logic. if you don’t know, you can just not say things.

I read it when it was published and stashed it for opportunities like this.

the post is the evidence.

the claim isn’t that Israel is hacking proton. the claim is that proton routed traffic through an IDF affiliate.

I did provide evidence. you’re asking for more evidence.

I don’t trust proton. if you think you can trust proton, feel free to use them.

https://web.archive.org/web/20190318213020/https://cryptome.org/2015/11/protonmail-ddos.htm

https://encryp.ch/blog/disturbing-facts-about-protonmail/

https://web.archive.org/web/20190318213020/https://cryptome.org/2015/11/protonmail-ddos.htm

routing traffic through Israel is not fine.

stux blocked at least one of my fediverse identities and I recognize I’m not objective but if he can’t keep the instance online then like ok.

it is pretty terrifying to debootstrap over ssh. constantly checking that you’re on the correct system, and using the chrooted terminal. it’s like a high wire act. at least the first few times.

debootstrap makes this easy, and familiarity with that process introduces chroot skills.