More on the Patreon Meltdown

Here’s a guy, Matt Christiansen, who gained an interview with some droid at Patreon.  Good questions, laughable answers, and a sense that he’ll never get another interview with them.  Heh.

He’ll leave Patreon in January.  At one point, the droid he interacts with implies that any impact to this guy’s account, dropped memberships through Patreon, that is, results from an overlap between his viewership and that of the recently de-platformed Sargon of Akkad.  He bats this down, but it points the way to the next phase to watch for in this sorry spectacle.

Wait until the lefties are impacted.

Brief explainer, for those not following this:  Patreon has de-platformed Milo, Lauren Southern, and now Sargon of Akkad.  I know nothing of the Milo and Southern bans, and am only glancingly familiar with the Sargon ban — looks like he used some language that I do not use.  This video is Christiansen’s attempt to get a straight answer out of Patreon about standards, processes, or rules.  They don’t have an answer, although they keep trying.

7+

Users who have liked this post:

  • avatar
  • avatar
  • avatar
  • avatar
  • avatar
  • avatar

41 thoughts on “More on the Patreon Meltdown”

  1. It’s telling that the Patreon drone was insistent that the conversation not be recorded. Lefty is clearly uncomfortable with how this is coming across, in spite of the denials. Patreon has stepped in it and they know it.

    The attempt to deny that it’s affecting Patreon creators that are not affiliated with Sargon is pure BS. I deleted everyone, even though most of them are musicians who have zero political content. I’m sorry about the effect it will have on them but everyone on the platform has to feel the pain for Patreon’s actions. Running Patreon out of business would be a worthy goal even though it would hurt people who aren’t political.

    10+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
  2. Here is some background info, copied out from a post three days ago in the Ratburger Happy Warriors group:

    Patreon censors the internet; they bounced a guy for something he said, on somebody else’s podcast, that appeared on Youtube (not Patreon nor the site being funded through Patreon). Jordan Peterson and Dave Rubin said that was the straw to break the camel’s back. They dropped off of Patreon and are preparing an alternate to Patreon. In the meantime this is costing them both.http://thefederalist.com/2018/12/21/jordan-peterson-dave-rubin-plan-new-site-in-response-to-illiberal-ban/

    7+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
  3.  This video is Christiansen’s attempt to get a straight answer out of Patreon about standards, processes, or rules.  They don’t have an answer, although they keep trying.

     

    That’s because their actual rules don’t matter. When it comes down to it, their rules are “We favor people we like, and we punish people we don’t like”. The nebulous “terms of service violation” is silicon valley’s equivalent to the Pentagon’s infamous Article 134 of the UCMJ  (the “catch-all” article), which basically says “… and if we can’t find anything specific to court martial you with, we’ll use a general “brings discredit upon the military” excuse”.  The TOS has become their catch-all method of deplatforming people. Liberals violate the OBVIOUS sections of various social media TOS every day and are never punished for it. Everyone knows what’s going on. You’re either with them or you’re against them, and everything else is just a technicality they can whip from thin air if they like.

    7+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
  4. At this point, why would anyone expect anything other than despicable lies out of these Silicon Valley leftists?

    They are plainly and obviously censoring people they disagree with, because they disagree with them, and then clumsily attempting to justify it after the fact.

    No one should be fooled, and no one should let them pretend this isn’t what is actually happening.

    3+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
  5. Bitcoin is not a solution to this problem, as it is not legal tender.  The exchanges that buy and sell bitcoin with legal tender are just as vulnerable to financial cutoff as anyone, with the added burden that bitcoin is an open ledger.

    2+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
  6. Phil Turmel:
    Bitcoin is not a solution to this problem, as it is not legal tender.  The exchanges that buy and sell bitcoin with legal tender are just as vulnerable to financial cutoff as anyone, with the added burden that bitcoin is an open ledger.

    My fear is that governments will start shutting cryptocurrencies down. I can already hear the excuses: they’re vehicles for “hate”, organized crime, etc.

    3+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
  7. At this point, it’s more than just a matter of shutting down those they disagree with. It’s also terror. The tyranny of the Left is so great that all these platforms are terrified of not being seen to be strong enough in their hatred of Wrongthink.  I haven’t been a Leftist since about 1975, but I remember the mindset very clearly.

    I keep hoping their own side will get fed up enough to join the #WalkAway movement, but it just seems to be getting worse.

    5+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
  8. RightAngles:
    The tyranny of the Left is so great that all these platforms are terrified of not being seen to be strong enough in their hatred of Wrongthink

    Isn’t that a good sign? Lefty’s running scared. There’s hope.

    3+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
  9. Phil Turmel:
    Bitcoin is not a solution to this problem, as it is not legal tender.  The exchanges that buy and sell bitcoin with legal tender are just as vulnerable to financial cutoff as anyone, with the added burden that bitcoin is an open ledger.

    Is this correct?  I can buy or receive bitcoin and transfer it to you without anyone being able to stop the transaction.  The feds can possibly track you down (by mapping an IP address to a transaction) if they think you’re doing something illegal, but it seems there’s not an easy way to cut off people exchanging bitcoin for dollars.

    One deplatformed youtuber I support takes bitcoin, as the individual is not in a country where paypal is convenient.

    Of course, happy to be corrected on any of this!

    0

  10. Haakon Dahl:

    Damocles:
    I can buy or receive bitcoin and transfer it to you without anyone being able to stop the transaction.

    Try it in the middle of nowhere when you’re thirsty.

    Umm I’m confused. I can give patreon-like donations anywhere, regardless of my hydration level, so I think I’m not getting your point.

    0

  11. Damocles:

    Haakon Dahl:

    Damocles:
    I can buy or receive bitcoin and transfer it to you without anyone being able to stop the transaction.

    Try it in the middle of nowhere when you’re thirsty.

    Umm I’m confused. I can give patreon-like donations anywhere, regardless of my hydration level, so I think I’m not getting your point.

    Legal tender must be accepted for any product by any party.  Nobody is required to accept bitcoin, and at any rate, most vendors simply cannot.

    0

  12. Haakon Dahl:

    Damocles:

    Haakon Dahl:

    Damocles:
    I can buy or receive bitcoin and transfer it to you without anyone being able to stop the transaction.

    Try it in the middle of nowhere when you’re thirsty.

    Umm I’m confused. I can give patreon-like donations anywhere, regardless of my hydration level, so I think I’m not getting your point.

    Legal tender must be accepted for any product by any party.  Nobody is required to accept bitcoin, and at any rate, most vendors simply cannot.

    Hmm, it seems you are arguing against a much stronger statement than what I’m making, which is that Bitcoin effective solves many problems associated with the patreon issue .

    0

  13. Damocles:
    Hmm, it seems you are arguing against a much stronger statement than what I’m making, which is that Bitcoin effective solves many problems associated with the patreon issue .

    Fair enough.  My angle is just that anything electronic is mediated by somebody.  Colonize that somebody with a control agenda, and it’s just another control mechanism.

    All hail cash.

    0

  14. Haakon Dahl:
    Legal tender must be accepted for any product by any party.

    Actually, no.

    There is, however, no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person or an organization must accept currency or coins as for payment for goods and/or services.

    0

  15. Haakon Dahl:
    Fair enough.  My angle is just that anything electronic is mediated by somebody.  Colonize that somebody with a control agenda, and it’s just another control mechanism.

    There is a difference between payment processors such as credit card companies, PayPal, and services such as Patreon, and Bitcoin or other blockchain-based cryptocurrencies.

    With the payment processors, you have a central point of control where the management which operates the service, or a government in a position to compel it, can deny service to a customer, freezing their ability to receive payments.  With Bitcoin (etc.) there is no central point of control.  You can create a new Bitcoin address any time you wish.  (It’s easy: try it!  Note that this runs entirely in your browser and doesn’t send anything over the Internet or interact with any central authority.)  Anybody who wishes can send Bitcoin to that address, which will never appear on the blockchain until somebody uses it for the first time.  Once funds are sent there, whoever has the private key for that public address can then send the funds elsewhere if they wish.

    To convert Bitcoin into fiat currency (or precious metals), you have to go through an exchange which will perform that transaction (unless you’re dealing with a vendor that accepts Bitcoin directly: they’re rare but they do exist).  Any given exchange can refuse to do business with a customer or be ordered not to do business with a customer by a government, but if there are a multitude of exchanges in various jurisdictions, it’s difficult to control them all, just as you can always find a bank who will convert one currency into another for you or buy and sell precious metals for fiat currency.

    As I’ve been saying for years, Bitcoin is not (at least at present) a store of value (it’s too volatile for that), but as a medium of exchange it is much more efficient and free of top-down coercion than any other electronic form of payment which presently exists.  I have used it to support various projects for the last six years with no problems whatsoever.

    4+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
  16. Haakon Dahl:
    Fair enough.  My angle is just that anything electronic is mediated by somebody.  Colonize that somebody with a control agenda, and it’s just another control mechanism.

    Interestingly, blockchain based currencies aren’t mediated by anybody.  Transactions go onto the chain, which is verified by  the miners.  It’s all done in the open, and anybody who desires can verify that the transactions are valid.

    I think it’s a great way to transfer money, and I anticipate some time in the future (after the hype and tulipmania has subsided) most people will have some form of e-coin that can be used for low-cost money transfer.

    You can see bitcoin calculation stats here:

    https://www.blockchain.com/explorer

    and a fun visualizer here:

    https://bitbonkers.com/

    Its astonishing to me that as I’m  typing this there are 44 million trillion hashes per second being calculated around the world.

    2+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
  17. drlorentz:

    Haakon Dahl:
    Legal tender must be accepted for any product by any party.

    Actually, no.

    There is, however, no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person or an organization must accept currency or coins as for payment for goods and/or services.

    I’ll submit that my argument stands.  The link you provide (thank you) points out only that certain restrictions may be emplaced, which would I suppose be challengeable in court — indeed these sound like the sort of restrictions which are the product of well-decided court cases or of good regulation.  The ability of a bus line to restrict payment to “not pennies and not dollar bills [or larger]” means that you must have exact change, in coin, less pennies.  Toll roads do the same thing with automated coin catchers.  Pennies are a plague, and not dollar bills rapidly deteriorate to the condition that a machine might not reliably accept them.

    The guy paying his taxes in pennies is not an activist, he is a pain in the ass.  It is not reasonable to pay thousands of dollars in pennies from any standpoint.  Likewise, the business of a bus line, even a public one is transportation, not the valuation of rare coins, or the processing of large amounts of pennies.  He’s going to get his ass beat[en] by the other passengers, which is where the idealism of libertarian values comes up against the practical values of a society with things to do.  Neat theory — see you in court.

    The potential for abuse of basing things on what might earn an ass-kicking or the values of a society “with things to do” is not negligible, yet these cannot be meaningless concerns in a representative form of government.

    The key difference between bitcoin (for example) and cash is that cash provides a literal lowest common denominator of value.  The difficulty of accepting (or providing) bitcoin is greater than that of counting out a wheelbarrow full of pennies.  As a vendor of water in the desert, I do not have to verify anything.  The coin of the realm is good.

    So let’s say that tomorrow the government decrees that bitcoin shall be accepted everywhere.  This would be a disaster.  Even assuming that on the day after tomorrow, every vendor has acquired the ability and the expertise to comply, it will still require a reconciliation no less intrusive than if we were required to sign for every purchase made with cash.  I need neither an account nor a clearinghouse to use cash.  No central control opportunity.

    The electronic transfer of funds introduces control mechanisms.  I appreciate the convenience and the expanded opportunities, but I do not wish to be required to use these mechanisms.  Fiat currency has a lot wrong with it, but it is the last vestige of anonymous transactions that we have.  Bitcoin is no obstacle to Patreon-style control.

    2+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
  18. Damocles:
    Interestingly, blockchain based currencies aren’t mediated by anybody. Transactions go onto the chain, which is verified by the miners. It’s all done in the open, and anybody who desires can verify that the transactions are valid.

    Yes, and when the verification is done, it points to a wallet.  Somebody’s credit card was used to fund that.  Perhaps you can walk up to a desk and pay cash for bitcoin — perhaps bitcoin ATMs will accept deposits.  Regardless, there will be a transaction with a date, an amount, and an identifier of the account deposited into.

    Cash carries no date of transaction, no identifier, no location — none of it.  The serial number on a bill identifies the bill, not any party in the transaction.  What anonymity may be available with bitcoin will be due to the properties of cash.

    2+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
  19. Damocles:
    Interestingly, blockchain based currencies aren’t mediated by anybody.

    More to the point, if you and the vendor purport to exchange bitcoin but then neither reports the transaction to anybody, the vendor won’t stay in business for long.  There is a “third party” in a bitcoin transaction, and no matter who it is, you now require somebody to mediate an otherwise two-party transaction — on a per-transaction basis.

    Bitcoin is not fungible — it doesn’t go into the till unremarked and simply get counted up at the end.  Not only does a record exist — the record *is* bitcoin’s existence.

    3+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar
    • avatar
  20. Haakon Dahl:
    Yes, and when the verification is done, it points to a wallet.  Somebody’s credit card was used to fund that.

    To be precise, it does not point to a wallet (which is a collection of Bitcoin public and private keys), but rather to a public Bitcoin address.  You can create these addresses at will, as many as you wish, without any intermediation of a third party or public disclosure.  It is only when an address is used that it appears on the blockchain, and users concerned with anonymity and security generate and use a new address for each transaction.  Some wallet software takes care of this automatically.

    Here is a guide to using Bitcoin anonymously (this document is full of crappy pop-ups, sorry).  By mixing or using a service like JoinMarket, you can break the chain by which one can track the flow of funds back to the origin.  It’s a bit of work, but doable if privacy is important.  Many people keep their Bitcoin with a service like Coinbase.  This is no more secure than using a bank or credit card company and, in fact, they comply with the same “Know Your Customer” regulations.  For security, the best approach is to run your own Bitcoin node (note: there is a difference between running a node and mining, and you can run a node without processing transactions for third parties).  The compute requirements for a non-mining node are minimal, and a Raspberry Pi with an external USB hard drive or SSD is more than adequate.

    2+

    Users who have liked this comment:

    • avatar
    • avatar

Leave a Reply