Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2024 Poal.co

732

The Poal.co warrant canary

As of Friday, January 1, 2021, We (Poal.co) have never received:

National Security Letter, of any type, for any purpose

Personal requests from any law enforcement agency worldwide or corporate entity for backdoors in any software and/or hardware projects to which we currently are or have been active contributors, nor are we aware of other contributors to these projects having received such a request

Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court orders of any type

Subpoenas and/or search warrants accompanied by a gag order pursuant to the Electronic Communications Privacy Act

This statement will continue to be updated manually.

The Poal.co Free Speech Canary

Poal.co declares itself to be a Neutral Public Forum and claims protection under Section 230 immunity

Poal.co declares it is open to the general public for use

Poal.co commits to not removing content unless it is illegal or any form of child sexualization.

Poal.co commits to not banning users unless they post illegal content or if they compromise the site functionality (Spam, DDoS, etc.)

Poal.co delegates moderation of speech on the site to the users themselves via the Owners and Moderators of individual subs

The Owners and Moderators of individual subs may restrict speech but only at the risk of that individual sub loosing Neutral Public Forum status and the Owners and Moderators of that individual sub loosing Section 230 immunity. Poal.co itself maintains Neutral Public Forum status and maintains Section 230 immunity because anyone can create a new sub and talk about anything they want.

The Only Addendum I would like to add is that if a sub owner is determined to be an abusive mod, I may transfer that sub to another user(Abusive mod is defined by actively censoring relevant discussions or information)

@AOU Supports this message.

Poal has not received any money from any governments foreign or domestic.

The Poal.co warrant canary As of Friday, January 1, 2021, We (Poal.co) have never received: National Security Letter, of any type, for any purpose Personal requests from any law enforcement agency worldwide or corporate entity for backdoors in any software and/or hardware projects to which we currently are or have been active contributors, nor are we aware of other contributors to these projects having received such a request Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court orders of any type Subpoenas and/or search warrants accompanied by a gag order pursuant to the Electronic Communications Privacy Act This statement will continue to be updated manually. The Poal.co Free Speech Canary Poal.co declares itself to be a Neutral Public Forum and claims protection under Section 230 immunity Poal.co declares it is open to the general public for use Poal.co commits to not removing content unless it is illegal or any form of child sexualization. Poal.co commits to not banning users unless they post illegal content or if they compromise the site functionality (Spam, DDoS, etc.) Poal.co delegates moderation of speech on the site to the users themselves via the Owners and Moderators of individual subs The Owners and Moderators of individual subs may restrict speech but only at the risk of that individual sub loosing Neutral Public Forum status and the Owners and Moderators of that individual sub loosing Section 230 immunity. Poal.co itself maintains Neutral Public Forum status and maintains Section 230 immunity because anyone can create a new sub and talk about anything they want. The Only Addendum I would like to add is that if a sub owner is determined to be an abusive mod, I may transfer that sub to another user(Abusive mod is defined by actively censoring relevant discussions or information) @AOU Supports this message. Poal has not received any money from any governments foreign or domestic.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (25).
[–] • 0 pt (edited )

American case law goes back to the Compuserve and Prodigy cases. Compuserve exercised no editorial control and was determined by courts to be a service provider, not a publisher, and wasn't liable. Prodigy moderated its forums, and the courts held that moderating (rather than just pulling down illegal content) was publishing.

Congress wanted to ban porn, but didn't want the cooperating sites to be open to being sued for publishing, so they came up with Sec 230 of the Communications Decency Act. The porn ban got thrown out by courts for violating free speech, but Sec 230 remained. If you read the actual section, you will see that it was intended to shield forums that moderated out porn, but (((big tech))) drove a truck through the "otherwise objectionable" phrase.

(2)Civil liability

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be held liable on account of—

(A)any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected; or

(B)any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or others the technical means to restrict access to material described in paragraph (1).

(Note: para (B) is just about porn blockers, not websites.)