Has Xenforo ever considered an acceptable use policy?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Do not put the onus of police on this small team. If you have issues with a site, and they are warranted beyond moral crusading, take it up with the police. If the police do nothing, warn people to not go there. "Acceptable use" is almost entirely subjective and its definition will change as society does.
 
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.

The first amendment also has categories of speech that are given lesser or no protection

I know there are exceptions to free speech, I have read many SCOTUS decisions concerning it. I'm referring to the general principle of free speech, not splitting hairs, in that it's not free if the only things which can be said are nice, acceptable political speech, etc. "Hate" speech is specifically allowed, so it pornography.

Historically, one of the big problems with limiting free speech is the people in power change, and they can (and have) in the past used things like this to squash political and social dissent. Curb hate group's right to speak, and some day that law can also be used against a racial minority speaking out. Had all these speech nannies been around in the 1960s, Malcolm X's speech would have been disallowed.
 
They are even here now :ROFLMAO:

If I didn't understand how this came to be, I'd be angry rather than laughing it off
 
Do we go after MS to revoke licenses when a hate group writes their diatribes using Word on a Windows PC? Or runs their site on MS Windows Server using IIS?

There are better channels out there to deal with this stuff than devs. If a group or individual is spreading legally actionable hate or encouraging violence using a web site or forum, the web host and law enforcement are better placed to do something than the software developer. The software developer is really the last person who needs to be involved since they can't really do much to actually take the site down or take legal action, only make sure they can't use that software anymore (or at least can't update it).

As for how it affects the Xenforo community, I don't see how Xenforo being used by a hate group reflects badly on them or the community any more than other software being used by said hate group.
 
Why? I don't feel blame or any other kind of discomfort when using a knife to make a dinner just because someone uses it to kill somebody.

The difference is that no kitchen knife manufacturer actively sells kitchen-knife license renewals to people known to kill people with their kitchen knives. On the other hand, XenForo currently does sell renewals, new licenses, and official add-on purchases to genuinely dangerous hate websites.

In a lot of cases sites which arguably should be taken down are deliberately hosted in countries and with companies which frankly couldn't care less and won't do anything.
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.


This is generally not the case. These websites often operate in the United States because it is one of the only places in the world that this kind of thing is not illegal. Most countries have severe limitations to free speech. And, thus, sites like Stormfront and equivalent are illegal in places like Russia, where I live, and many European nations.

Plenty of legitimate providers that would never dare host material that infringes on people's copyright (i.e. a terminated, illegal copy of XenForo) are willing to host sites like Stormfront. As an example, while I love Francisco and the guys at BuyVM, they willingly host The Daily Stormer, but they would not host a similar site that infringed on XF's copyright, that's for sure.


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. If someone does not like a site's content it's as simple as choosing not to visit it. It doesn't reflect on Xenforo, no more than it reflects on Microsoft if a hate site posts an Excel file. It reflects on that site, and its users only.

It is their freedom of speech to run such a site, but it is also your freedom of speech to say "go find someone else to help you run this thing; I'm not interested". And, again, as far as not reflecting poorly, that would be the case if XenForo truly had no control over this, but that isn't the case.


Do not put the onus of police on this small team. If you have issues with a site, and they are warranted beyond moral crusading, take it up with the police. If the police do nothing, warn people to not go there.

You're acting like it takes a lot more effort to revoke a license than it does. This doesn't require an FBI investigation to determine whether or not a Neo-nazi website violates your AUP, and, if so, pressing the big red "revoke license" button.

Again, the problem is that, in the United States, it is not illegal to be a neo-nazi, and it is not illegal to spew rhetoric that people continuously use as justification to murder others. This is not something that the police can handle without a constitutional amendment, which will never happen, judging by how attached to the paper Americans have become in recent years.

It is absolutely the moral obligation of providers to not sell to people who dog-whistle the killing of minorities and women. Personally, I will not buy another XenForo license until the agreement is changed. Until then, I'll keep using alternative software for new websites. If it wasn't for the fact that I have customers to support, I wouldn't even be renewing my current license, but I have an ethical obligation to continue providing support for new XenForo versions.
 
Last edited:
Should the staff behind xenForo be the worldwide internet authority on what is acceptable or not though?

What is acceptable to publish in one country may not be acceptable to publish in another.
What is acceptable to one person may not be acceptable to another.

How would xenForo distinguish what's acceptable and what isn't without having explicit knowledge of each country's laws?

If the likes of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc cannot control the content posted on their platforms, there is not a cat in hells chance that xenForo staff can control what is posted on their licensed software, let alone the unlicensed websites, and to carte blanch pull the plug on them would open themselves up to possible litigation.
 
If it wasn't for the fact that I have customers to support, I wouldn't even be renewing my current license, but I have an ethical obligation to continue providing support for new XenForo versions.

You suggest the XF staff should press the revoke button on their customers because of moral obligation but you won't pull the plug on your customers, sounds like a double standard.
 
If the likes of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc cannot control the content posted on their platforms, there is not a cat in hells chance that xenForo staff can control what is posted on their licensed software, let alone the unlicensed websites, and to carte blanch pull the plug on them would open themselves up to possible litigation.
I think the more pertinent comparison here is that Twitter, YouTube etc are platforms whereas XF is software.

These terms aren’t as distinct as I would have liked, but the difference is that Twitter runs the Twitter platform, whereas XenForo provides software for others to host in order to create their own platforms.

If XenForo offered a hosted solution, they would be entirely in their rights to deny that platform to people wishing to run hateful communities. As it stands, it’s up to each web host to determine whether they wish to be a platform for hosting hateful communities.
 
You suggest the XF staff should press the revoke button on their customers because of moral obligation but you won't pull the plug on your customers, sounds like a double standard.

What? I think you're misunderstanding. I do not have any customers which I personally deem dangerous in the same way that XenForo does. If I had a problematic neo-nazi/incel community existing solely because of the help of my software, I would address it — which is what I would like XenForo, as a company, to do as well.

What I was saying was that had I not already sold products to hundreds of XenForo users, I would've gone full nuclear with my monetary vote and simply stopped renewing my licenses altogether. Instead, because I have existing users, I must, unfortunately, continue paying the renewal fee in order to provide the moral obligation of not abandoning my customers when new, inevitably, incompatible versions of XenForo are released.


If XenForo offered a hosted solution, they would be entirely in their rights to deny that platform to people wishing to run hateful communities. As it stands, it’s up to each web host to determine whether they wish to be a platform for hosting hateful communities.

Again, it's also totally within XenForo's ability to add an AUP to the sales and renewal terms that state the kind of content they do not want associated with their brand. You don't have to be a hosting provider to say that you don't want to sell to nazis.


Should the staff behind xenForo be the worldwide internet authority on what is acceptable or not though?

What is acceptable to publish in one country may not be acceptable to publish in another.
What is acceptable to one person may not be acceptable to another.

How would xenForo distinguish what's acceptable and what isn't without having explicit knowledge of each country's laws?

It's not about legality, it's about morality. Being a neo-nazi and running a community whose members consist primarily of other neo-nazis that dog-whistle violence is not illegal in the United States. But, politics are not a protected class; XF is totally within their right to say that they will not sell to you if that is the kind of site you run.

You also don't need to determine what is acceptable to each individual person and each country in the world. Rather, you only need to determine which values you and your company hold and write an AUP around those. Currently, as it stands, due to lack of any sort of AUP, we're not explicitly siding against the problematic communities, like neo-nazi forums 🤷‍♂️
 
Last edited:
So does Coca Cola, one of the biggest brands in the World, then say it will not sell it's drink to any member or organisation that does not conform with what is not widely acceptable?

Just as an example
 
@webbouk Sure, why not? They're free to choose to whom they wish to sell products, so long as it doesn't violate any sort of protected class.

It might be a bit of a silly comparison, though. Unless the KKK is operating a grocery store, it's a bit hard for Coca Cola to have any real control whose hands their products end up in. This is a very different situation compared to simply revoking continued legal access to intellectual property or suspending a provided service.

If we're going to talk in hyperbolic extremes, a more fitting example is IBM willingly choosing to continue supplying its punch card services to the Nazi party during the holocaust. At any point, they could've stopped, but they didn't. Was IBM not immoral for refusing to set ethical guidelines for whom it chooses to sell to?

Personally, I find it highly immoral to sell to websites which cultivate communities based around wishing the genocide of minorities, the rape and killing of women, doxing, and so on. I wish XF had an AUP that addressed such material.
 
Again, it's also totally within XenForo's ability to add an AUP to the sales and renewal terms that state the kind of content they do not want associated with their brand. You don't have to be a hosting provider to say that you don't want to sell to nazis.
That's true. However, it has the potential to be be a bit of a legal nightmare. I'm not a lawyer, but I can imagine that applying a ToS retroactively (i.e. sites already existing) would have a chance of being contested in court if someone lost their software license as a result.

It's a really tricky situation, I don't think there's anything even resembling a black-and-white answer to whether a software vendor has the right to revoke a license if the customer uses the license for something objectionable (as opposed to illegal). Of course, in this particular instance, hate speech laws could be used as a valid defence should XF be brought to court over having revoked a license, but it could still be an extended legal battle.

In either case, I think this would require the input of a real lawyer versed in UK contract law to settle.

---
Just to be clear; I don't disagree with you that we should do everything in our power to de-platform hate speech, including getting them delisted from search engines. All I'm saying with this post is that what is morally right and what is legally right is not always the same. Short of asking users whether they plan to use the software to promote hate speech ahead of time, there's little XF could do to avoid the legal minefield this could be.
 
@DragonByte Tech For sure. I don't expect them to apply a new AUP retroactively to existing customers; I really can't imagine winning that court case ;)

But, it should be feasible to apply an AUP to new purchasers and to future license renewals.
 
Who should they not sell licenses to?

Murders
Rapists
Scam artists
Hate groups
Pedofiles
Anti Semite
Terrorists
 
@Matthew S No, not really. I don't mind if you're some radical capitalist on the total polar opposite spectrum from me politically, but I do care when you're fostering violent rhetoric; it's not just a "disagreement".

It's also ridiculous to refer to wanting less violence as a "first world problem"; there was literally a shooting in the city my family lives in committed by a member of one of these XenForo-based communities that I am referring to in which someone killed people in large part thanks to the dogwhistling that is done on these forums. This is not at all similar to "John likes the free market; ban him!".
 
You seem to be making some assumptions, however, which may be erroneous.

1. You assume that the sites in question have actually purchased a license in the first place.
2. You assume that if they had a valid license which we revoked, that they would actually stop using the software.

You also seem to be assuming that we actually know which sites you are referring to. Or we do and haven't already attempted to take as much action as we are able to.

Long story short, this conversation isn't exactly going to be very productive, nor does it seem to be going anywhere.

If you have any concerns about any particular site that appears to be licensed to run XenForo, then please Contact us with details. That said, please do not be surprised if you are merely asked to report the abuse to their host. They have much more power to shut things down than we do and, to reiterate, even if they are licensed, and even if we do revoke a license, that may not stop them from using the software.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom