Wow, there's a lot to sift through, here. I'll just address it point by point, things that stick out to me.
>>313
>Then I promptly started using it as a sort of watchdog/archival/unfucking-8chan's-shit thing. There are a lot of things I have posted about, both angrily and reservedly, but I'm mostly trying to keep the narrative straight as waves and waves of these poli-SJW faggots keep trying to rewrite the very recent past.
That's actually a good idea.
>Hotwheels never offered people protection from hotpocketry from or identification by mods, at least at the start. In fact, any board admin could see the IP of every post made on their board. This was brought up pretty early on after the "migrations"…I don't remember exactly when. Close to the new year, I think.
It was in about October or November of 2014, I believe. The scandal started because board owners could see all bans, reports, or histories across boards rather than just on their board, allowed BOs and vols to pass notes to each other on these users, and didn't hash IPs. Someone protested, and rightfully so, that they shouldn't be able to see histories across boards or discuss users with one another. Someone brought up the idea of having an unhashed IP as a risk to users who don't want their information harvested, and Hotwheels agreed.
>There are a variety of things to consider here…obviously, admins can ban people. If they're looking for "numerous offenses" leading up to a ban instead of having a quick trigger finger, then it would be helpful in all but the most obvious cases to be able to track them throughout. Also, for admins who use "ban & delete all", they might accidentally wind up deleting half of the good content in their stickies because they lay down the hammer on a catalog-spamming autist who in the past few months was a useful-and-unique-information-posting autist. Now, they would deserve it for lightly using ban-and-delete-all, but that does exist for a reason…namely, when someone is catalog spamming. If you can tell they aren't the same IP as valuable posts, you don't have to delete every single bit of identical spam in threads and as new threads individually.
That's why I'm ultimately against the idea of something like hash ephemerality. It does have its purposes. Really, the only answer I can see to this problem is reactive rather than proactive, unfortunately.
>8ch was never a place to protect anons. Hotwheels may like and want to protect anons, or he may not give a fuck about anons anymore, but that's not the point as I see it. 8chan was created (or at least advertised) to protect free speech, be neutral, and allow anyone to make their own board, so on.
The problem I have with this is protecting anons does protect free speech. If board owners are allowed to create dossiers on their users and use the board as a honeypot to populate that dossier, then that has a chilling effect on free speech on this site, does it not? I mean, illegal boards aren't allowed on here, but that doesn't mean that there aren't several boards that would be of interest to authorities.
>8ch is not a safe space
>If you are posting on a board someone owns, they can be looking at all of your posts by IP hash. Nothing new there. They can be a random asshole, a serial killer, an FBI informant, HW himself, a sociologist, whatever. Remember, anyone can create a board.
And that's irrelevant. What I want to know is not whether or not HW will "protect us," it's what he will do when it's obvious that a board owner's selling his users downriver like that? Is it going to be tolerated, and if so, what effect will it have on free speech? Can this site even call itself pro-free speech anymore if it takes the attitude that board owners can treat their boards as honeypots? There's a difference between it being possible to do something on a site and it being allowed by the administration. If I'm one of those people that you mentioned, I'd feel a lot more confident doing this sort of behavior knowing that Hotwheels will have my back, whether it's because he's actually fine with it, or because he doesn't give a rip about the community anymore.
>What response is HW honestly supposed to give? "I'm taking over the gg board, violating my own rules"? "I'm putting the gg board up for claim with an active admin, violating my own rules"?
He already crossed the Rubicon with that when he gave Acid a 12 hour ultimatum to prove he wasn't a fed, then was satisfied when Acid sent an email going "I'm not." Like it or not, he does have a history of interfering with board owners when he feels it will improve the community in some way. So, the line has been drawn, but we have no idea where it is or what it takes to cross it. That's my issue.
>How the fuck's he going to stop them?
>Preemptively know who's doing it?
>Stop doing what he's been doing all along?
>Just kick out whatever admins he doesn't like or trust or consider part of the collective?
Again, I feel you have to be reactive rather than proactive here and say whether or not a behavior like that is allowed as part of a site and act accordingly. All we've heard from him on the topic is that he doesn't want a dedicated FBI informant running a board. Really, you could say that him speaking up to begin with on the topic betrays all of those, because really, any FBI informant with an IQ over 80 wouldn't go waving his dick around about informing on people like HQ's BO did just now.
>Also, with /intl/, /pol/, /leftypol/ and the SA faggots' constant, endless initiative to stir up bullshit for their idiotic views and co-opt or influence or convert or manipulate any board split or disagreement, I'm skeptical about all of this victim bullshit. Let's be honest, if we're going to treat this shit like some sort of Harlem fronting, then /revolt/ snitched first.
This isn't about snitching, this is about the use of mod tools and position within the community to assist in that snitching. I guess if you want to, this could also extend to the unsubstantiated rumor (have to add that) that Mark took money in return for giving a dev a sticky to shill their game and agreeing to clean it of trolling. What allows for permissible BO behavior? He can't help who's a fed or not, no, that goes beyond the scope of his site. But if they use his site for certain behaviors, then that's within the scope of what he should concern himself with as an admin, in my opinion.
> - Do not give out factual personal information on goddamn 8chan, this is not a social network, and
> - Change your goddamn IP once in a while
These are both free speech issues and automatically treat the site as compromised. Probably wise if you want to discuss controversial topics, but you have to admit, they make free speech on here seem limited by the system and the admin's attitude regarding BO behaviors, don't you think?