I think this is a pretty tough issue to battle for a software provider, especially when the company that writes the software doesn't host each community instance that runs it.
XF isn't like Discord, Facebook, YouTube, or Reddit, where each community is hosted on servers belonging to the company. As private entities those companies have every right to deplatform anyone they think is spreading hateful, obscene or inciting content that is against the terms and conditions for those sites, they're not the government so there's no free speech protections.
While I am personally against "hate" sites, I am more against curtailing freedom of speech. Free speech is not free if it only allows for "nice" topics.
Limitations have been applied the to the principle of freedom of speech and expression as a human right under article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights for years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech said:
Freedom of expression is recognized as a human right under article 19 of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and recognized in
international human rights law in the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Article 19 of the UDHR states that "everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference" and "everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice".
The version of Article 19 in the ICCPR later amends this by stating that the exercise of these rights carries "special duties and responsibilities" and may "therefore be subject to certain restrictions" when necessary "[f]or respect of the rights or reputation of others" or "[f]or the protection of national security or of public order (order public), or of public health or morals".
[2]
Freedom of speech and expression, therefore, may not be recognized as being absolute, and common limitations or boundaries to freedom of speech relate to
libel,
slander,
obscenity,
pornography,
sedition,
incitement,
fighting words,
classified information,
copyright violation,
trade secrets,
food labeling,
non-disclosure agreements, the
right to privacy, the
right to be forgotten,
public security, and
perjury. Justifications for such include the
harm principle, proposed by
John Stuart Mill in
On Liberty, which suggests that: "the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others."
[3]
The first amendment also has categories of speech that are given lesser or no protection
Categories of speech that are given lesser or no protection by the First Amendment include
obscenity (as determined by the
Miller test),
fraud, child pornography, speech integral to illegal conduct,
[9] speech that incites
imminent lawless action, and regulation of commercial speech such as advertising.
[10][11] Within these limited areas, other limitations on free speech balance rights to free speech and other rights, such as rights for authors over their works (
copyright), protection from imminent or potential violence against particular persons, restrictions on the use of untruths to harm others (
slander), and communications while a person is in prison. When a speech restriction is challenged in court, it is presumed invalid and the government bears the burden of convincing the court that the restriction is constitutional.
[12]
When "incel" communities that blatantly promote misogyny, racism, and rape operate on the Xenforo platform, it demeans both the platform itself and all active licensees.
I also have come across this forum or a forum like it when linked to it from reddit, I was pretty disgusted by what I read and then then disappointed to see it was running XF.
If anything it does cause a bad brand image to be associated with communities like that, which I'm sure is a big part of the decision that the previously mentioned sites choose to deplatform and ban many communities and associated users.
It reminds me of when Toyota were in the news because it turns out Isis are a big fan of
Toyota Trucks.
Business Insider said:
Ed Lewis, Toyota's Washington-based director of public policy and communications, told ABC that Toyota has "briefed Treasury on Toyota's supply chains in the Middle East and the procedures that Toyota has in place to protect supply chain integrity" and that the company has a "strict policy to not sell vehicles to potential purchasers who may use or modify them for paramilitary or terrorist activities."
Some of the Toyotas now in ISIS's possession have been rebranded with the seal of the "caliphate," or the Islamic State the group has created as it has seized control of territory in the Middle East.
The Hilux is so popular with ISIS fighters that it has now become "almost part of the ISIS brand," Mark Wallace, a former US ambassador to the United Nations who is CEO of the Counter Extremism Project, told ABC.
"In nearly every ISIS video, they show a fleet — a convoy of Toyota vehicles and that's very concerning to us," Wallace said.
ISIS's propaganda has been so effective that "Saturday Night Live" parodied the relationship between Toyota and ISIS earlier this year
Of course, it's not like the Terrorist Leaders were strolling into dealerships, AK47s slung over their shoulders and slapping down fat stacks of terrorist cash to buy them new, they were getting them used by smuggling them into the country. I drove a Toyota truck at the time it didn't change my personal view of the brand as I realised it's pretty easy for them to pick them up used and there's not much Toyota can do about it, I still drive a Toyota. However it did still create a global brand image issue for Toyota and they felt they had to be seen doing something to try and ensure their trucks weren't used for such purposes.
It also probably helped that I didn't see these trucks rolling down my local streets with 50 cals and RPGs mounted to the back. Out of site, out of mind.
With online communities it's different, it's much easier to get exposed or linked to communities using the brand you also use, such as the incel site mentioned previously, or Stormfront running on VB.
You can revoke their licence. But if they're they kind of community the warrants licence revocation to begin with, they're probably the type that could find a cracked copy pretty easily and carry on doing what they're doing. I don't know what the solution is, if it should be policed at all and if so how much, but it does somehow feel more brand damaging when it's a piece of software online and you know a hateful, obscene or violent community is thriving and growing by using it, only a few clicks away.
Reddit was getting like for quite a while before they recruited Pao to come in and clean house to make it more advertiser friendly. Some of the communities were getting out of control over there and it was having a significant affect on the brand as the site began to feature more frequently in the mainstream media, often as a result of the subreddits in question.
