
Squarespace has “completely and arbitrarily shut down our website” - eternalban
https://twitter.com/drsimonegold/status/1288178446569545734
======
SpicyLemonZest
I'm concerned about HN signal boosting random Twitter threads. This is on the
front page, but do we have any idea who this person is or whether they're a
reliable source?

~~~
encom
Reliable source for what? You can easily verify yourself that
www.americasfrontlinedoctors.com has been taken down. And the archive.org
captures from the live site references the twitter account in OP.

[https://web.archive.org/web/20200727231840/https://www.ameri...](https://web.archive.org/web/20200727231840/https://www.americasfrontlinedoctors.com/)

~~~
aspenmayer
Are they a reliable source for the content posted on their site, is how I read
their query.

~~~
encom
Well, I guess that's for Squarespace to decide.

~~~
aspenmayer
In this case, they have the first say which is enforceable. A legal case, if
brought and substantiated, could have a further decision, which may supersede
any prior decision.

For your sake, what do you think should happen?

~~~
encom
I think nothing should happen. The information does not violate any laws.
Maybe it's utter bollocks, maybe it's not, but I'm tired of american tech
companies trying to protect me from "harmful" opinions and information.

~~~
aspenmayer
I guess I just see those “‘harmful’ opinions and information” as the tip of
the iceberg. There’s a whole invisible economy around these sites and info.
Follow the money.

------
scalableUnicon
Do they loss access to their domain name as well if their TOS is violated?
From their website it seems like they offer first year domain registration for
free, tied to their account. It seems to fragile if the domain name goes with
the suspended account.

------
hprotagonist
because they're crazy people.

moving on...

------
jbob2000
These are the people that appeared in that strange "demon semen" video. Don't
give them any airtime.

------
throwawaysea
These platforms hold way too much power in deciding which speech is allowed
and disallowed. There have been many times where trusted public agencies
provided incorrect guidance on COVID - why should they enjoy a monopoly on
speech and trust on these topics? We need dissenting voices and speculation to
be heard, because they are part of the societal journey to ascertain the
truth.

I’m also concerned that these actions are typically not motivated by a sacred
duty to “public safety” but rather politics. Why should anyone trust
squarespace if their employees’ politics can affect your business on a whim?

~~~
nient
Hearing the opposing view, doesn't mean we should pay any attention to flat-
earthers and conspiracy theorists. We are not going to reach the truth that
way.

~~~
throwawaysea
Why not? Flat earthers haven’t had much impact as far as public opinion. And
HCQ isn’t a conspiracy theory unless you label all new data or speculation or
difference of opinion as a conspiracy theory. We have to be careful when we
use these labels. For example when the WHO said masks weren’t helpful, was
that a conspiracy theory? Were the people nevertheless pushing masks also
conspiracy theorists?

There are also many experts that support hearing the opposing view by the way.
For example, Yale’s public health Dean just came out in support of the right
to argue that HCQ could save lives ([https://www.thecollegefix.com/yales-dean-
of-public-health-de...](https://www.thecollegefix.com/yales-dean-of-public-
health-defends-right-to-argue-hydroxychloroquine-could-save-lives/)). This
statement was made because one of the public health professors at Yale
believes HCQ could save lives, and the Dean felt it is important to defend
academic freedom and free inquiry. We need that to challenge what might
otherwise be incorrect prevailing sentiments on how best to treat COVID. It
may be a dead end ultimately, but I am not for shutting down all discussion
around it.

