>c
>>Christian
Suspect as fuck, but presents good evidence.
>In January of 2017, a list of Gab’s verified users and donors was datamined and released to the public17. Torba responded to this incident with a Gab post claiming that the “SJW goons” did not hack Gab as the data was apparently public and further claimed that security was Gab’s top priority18.
That's not hacking, It's not wrong to say that's not hacking, because it isn't. Gathering public data is something done and people are, for some reason, scared of. This point is bad but a lot of the rest are very telling.
>(((mastodon))) kvetching about muh 'w' White Supremacy
This is article is a distraction, it's (((D&C))), what it says may be mostly true but it's intentions are not. A lot of this post is concerning and mostly truthful. There's quite a bit to question though. This appears like a (((mastodon))) hit piece. The clues aren't obvious but it starts with the spamming of (((lolicon))) and (((porn))) in general on gab. This is a well known method kikes use to deplatform things. And they succeeded here. They also admitted and bragged about this being a course of action they were going to use / were taking on gab. They did the exact same thing with twitter when musk took over. Because twitter is jewish owned, because gab may be (I'm still open but unconvinced) jewish owned does not in any way mean it won't be taken down / attacked with methods of jewish subversion.
This all while ignoring the established fact that (((mastodon))) has instances full of (((illegal content))) that the jew dev doesn't care about. Say one single thing about jews and your (((mastodon))) instance is attacked.
The article accuses Torba of allowing threats of violence, Which real threats of violence are allowed on Gab? It accuses Torba of allowing doxing. Who is allowed to dox whom? The article complains that there are extremists on Gab, which is a direct consequence of Gab being a free speech platform. All in all, the article is the usual whining that Gab doesn't censor enough.
> The article accuses Torba of allowing threats of violence, Which real threats of violence are allowed on Gab? It accuses Torba of allowing doxing. Who is allowed to dox whom? The article complains that there are extremists on Gab, which is a direct consequence of Gab being a free speech platform. All in all, the article is the usual whining that Gab doesn't censor enough.
(post is archived)