I may look back on this moment and think, "how could I have let this happen?"

I had wondered as much. Enough rope?

Thanks for your efforts, Jamal.

And yes, I think we should probably open up the new site, to allow anyone to sign up, though with admin approval to activate accounts. — Jamal

Will all the previously banned members get a second chance? Lol

But seriously - Sounds like a decent amount of work. Look forward to seeing how it turns out. :up:

Will all the previously banned members get a second chance? Lol — Mikie

I too was thinking of this yesterday. I wonder whether they would dare to sign up on the new platform.

They must be aware that TPF moved to new software to do it, though.

Will all the previously banned members get a second chance? Lol

But seriously — Mikie

I'd like to see the return of @Streetlight to be honest.

Seriously, I think we gave banned members a second chance when we moved in 2015, and one or two members were reincarnated.

Seriously, I think we gave banned members a second chance when we moved in 2015, and one or two members were reincarnated. — Jamal

Interesting! @Agent Smith and @karl stone may have a second chance. :smile:

I'd like to see the return of Streetlight to be honest. — Jamal

Ditto. I'd like to see TGW back as well.

Yeah, but I have a feeling he was one of those reincarnated members, who had been banned on the first site. Don't quote me on that.

I'd like to see the return of Streetlight to be honest.

Seriously, I think we gave banned members a second chance when we moved in 2015, and one or two members were reincarnated. — Jamal

Oh no kidding? Cool.

@Jamal

If Marco comes back I may have to burn the place to the ground.

If Marco comes back I may have to burn the place to the ground. — Michael

See this is why places like this, at least in the Lounge, should have a topic or something where past "legends" (or villains to some) can have their stories told unbiased from both sides of the proverbial fire.

Don't you ever go to a new place and wonder what the stories, tales, and legends of the locals are? What the people who actually made a place what it is today have to say and what they feel and as a result what the true zeitgeist of a place is beyond friendly smiles and pleasantries? The blood, sweat, and tears behind the benches and walls we pass by every day without batting an eye or giving a second thought toward really are and what they represent to those who have seen and lived times we ourselves have not?

I've been here for 5 years. I've seen the name "Porat" come up a few times, but with such intensity and quiet understanding between those who seem to know, it's... curious. Meanwhile, myself and new persons just view this as almost a mental tic or idiosyncrasy from otherwise respected posters because, it just doesn't make any sense where the rage or discontent comes from. It demands an explanation. And those who are free from fear due to being unbiased or otherwise not "in the wrong" have no reason for all darkness and secrets to become light and openly discussed.

See this is why places like this, at least in the Lounge, should have a topic or something where past "legends" (or villains to some) can have their stories told unbiased from both sides of the proverbial fire. — Outlander

See here for an unbiased account of Marco.

I've been here for 5 years. I've seen the name "Porat" come up a few times, but with such intensity and quiet understanding between those who seem to know, it's... curious. — Outlander

Before https://thephilosophyforum.com there was another forum. The owner of the old forum sold it to a man named Eric Porat. Some of us had concerns about him, and the future of the forum, so Jamal made this place and we moved over.

Some of us had concerns about him, and the future of the forum, so Jamal made this place and we moved over. — Michael

I recall hearing enough about "the old place" so as to form a relevant and accurate enough (albeit understandably underlying-ly ignorant) narrative, yes,

So someone uninformed, and forgive my ignorance, a man made less than ideal decisions and temporary (albeit unnecessary) sufferings or hardships were placed on many folk at the time. Yet a new land was formed and thus all passed or alleged and perceived hardships should no longer hold any meaning.

So, why don't we, that is to say all who were involved see this as a happy ending, per se?

Forgiveness is not an acceptance of past wrongs but rather an acknowledgement that a better future not only can but has been obtained. There will always be people who gain power who use said temporary transient position unwisely. This is expected, nay, a requirement for the free and at times tumultuous world in which we live.

I don't see how the memory of this man is not all but water under the proverbial bridge. What have you to fear in the present day and age as far as this person is concerned?

I don't see how the memory of this man is not all but water under the proverbial bridge. What have you to fear in the present day and age as far as this person is concerned? — Outlander

Are you asking about Marco?

He's an annoying fucking twat, as elucidated with exceptional eloquence here.

Suffice it to say he's the reason this forum became invitation-only.

Are you asking about Marco?

He's an annoying fucking twat, as elucidated with exceptional eloquence here. — Michael

So, he's just a guy, one out of 8 billion mind you, nothing special, save for the fact, he that did something some odd years ago nobody else seems to recall, that annoyed you and a few others.

I wasn't there, I don't know, forgive me if that comes off as callous or discounting of your ability to perceive right and wrong or goodness and virtue in men, I just know nothing of the guy beyond the few sporadic mentions of his and a few other unspeakables here, and your comment, seeing as you're a moderator, piqued my interest, is all.

I will read the topic you linked to now in full, every comment, specifically those who are staff or who otherwise seemed to have been here a while to see what type of "larger story" or "picture" one can reasonably ascertain.

I thank you personally for your response and suggest perhaps, due to my nagging curiosity, might have been responsible in leading this topic slightly off topic. This was not intentional. I apologize, and honestly thank you for indulging in my juvenile curiosity, and will direct any other further comment or inquiry of the matter to you in a private message if I feel the need to. (Which I likely won't)

While, as I'm sure you may be able to gather, your "Sleeping Beauty" thread may be above my current level of understanding (just a wee bit over my head), I look forward to engaging with you in it in the not too distant future. :smile:

He was banned — probably for low post quality — but then he created a new account, so we banned him again, but then he created a new account, so we banned him again, ...

This repeated literally hundreds of times. He just would not stop. Every day for months we were banning his new accounts and it was driving us crazy so we just gave up and turned off direct registration.

Now I’m curious. I searched for his name and there’s several. Was his name just Marco? Seems like that guy is still a member.

Was his name just Marco? — Mikie

Polo!

He was banned — probably for low post quality — but then he created a new account, so we banned him again, but then he created a new account, so we banned him again, ... — Michael

Marco expressed a lot of affection for TPF, but you repeatedly banned him and treated him as a twat. :sad:

Although this all seems good and necessary technical changes, I question the choice of the UK for the business jurisdiction.

UK is restricting free speech pretty severely and those existing and any new restrictions will automatically apply to the forum.

I strongly recommend choosing a jurisdiction where that would not be an issue, or at leasts not a super likely issue.

US would be far more preferable over the UK, and there would be plenty of free speech allies if ever the US government did want to moderate clear political expression, which seems unlikely.

However by far and away the best option is @Benkei legally administers the business in his country, presumably the Netherlands.

It's not a casual thing making a business structure, you're then liable as a business and anyone can sue you for any amount. The protections you have as a private individual do not extend to a business you happen to own. If you lose a lawsuit the business will be taken to settle the damages.

Simply because you don't make much money does not mean you can't be sued for enormous sums.

Honestly the idea of making a business to manage small donated sums seems to me extremely foolish.

However, if there's commitment to that, then 100% the only reasonable implementation is that @Benkei takes care of the administration aspects. Small errors in paperwork can lead to audits and fines and endless bureaucracy. Just filing the taxes properly will likely cost more than this 100 Euros a month.

A business needs a certain scale to function properly or then not function at all and sit on the "shelf". but any business activity creates liabilities that can result in both government and civil legal actions that are just as complicated to manage if you are making 100 pounds a month or a million pounds a month, the different being if you're making a million pounds a month you can pay someone to deal with the complications.

@Benkei can for sure avoid most if not all pitfalls from happening in the first place, and can just go represent in lawsuits that are clearly just legal harassment.

If he's not willing, then I'd strongly recommend carefully thinking through both the legal structure, jurisdiction, the business plan (if a business is really the way to go), all the alternatives.

Once a business exists and IP is owned by that business it is business IP essentially forever.

But definitely the UK is a poor choice for such a business operation. Requires just one UK national to complain to UK authorities that their feelings have been hurt and the site could be easily shutdown.

UK is restricting free speech pretty severely and those existing and any new restrictions will automatically apply to the forum. — boethius

However, if there's commitment to that, then 100% the only reasonable implementation is that Benkei takes care of the administration aspects. Small errors in paperwork can lead to audits and fines and endless bureaucracy. Just filing the taxes properly will likely cost more than this 100 Euros a month. — boethius

Oh no!!!! @Benkei stop being missing and help him, please!!!

It is a life or death risk.

Interesting! I also feel it relevant to note TPF does, apparently, have its share of enemies. Not really "enemies" of the forum itself (that would be weird) but people who have axes to grind toward one or more high-ranking staff members and would consider as you say "blowing the whistle" for things that they likely could introduce themself or otherwise would reasonably show up organically either way.

The staff generally seems left-leaning as it is, people who tend to post with assertions or implications that could be read as "offensive" are generally lopped in under "low quality posts" and don't tend to proliferate here for that reason alongside others. There are intelligent people who have a history of intelligent (acceptable) posts that do express beliefs that others may find not only disagreeable but perhaps offensive and inappropriate, but I can count them on a single hand. Point being, it seems the "UK authorities" and general TPF staff sentiment are more or less on the same page as far as what should be allowed and what shouldn't. But you never know. You never know. Good looking out! :smile:

The UK Online Safety Act 2023 applies to sites that can be accessed and joined by UK users, regardless of where the servers are actually located. TPF has a significant number of UK members, so OSA compliance is a requirement whether the company is registered in the UK or not.

As for hosting, putting the site on servers outside of the UK doesn't make us any safer under the OSA. The law targets the operator, not the server location, so our obligations remain the same whether the servers are in the UK or elsewhere.

In any case, the new site will not be hosted on UK servers. If you are concerned about these matters it might be worth pointing out that the current platform, Plush Forums, is a UK company, but our soon-to-be platform, Discourse, is an American one.

I don't think registering the company outside the UK would reduce legal obligations, and it would massively complicate things for me. Since I'll be continuing to run the forum, forming a UK company under my own control is the best way to keep TPF running and legally compliant.

I am a UK citizen. But since I'll be continuing as the forum's administrator, this is simply a fact of the situation that won't change.

And let's be realistic. I don't want to minimize our (mainly my) responsibilities—technically TPF probably does fall under the OSA—but the law is aimed at high-risk platforms where illegal or harmful content can spread quickly to large audiences, e.g., social media, video-sharing, live-streaming, and messaging apps used by children. A deliberately compliant and heavily and accountably moderated philosophy forum like TPF, with mostly text-based discussion, clear rules, policies specifically addressing the OSA's concerns, and reporting tools for all posts and even private messages, is very low risk.

Requires just one UK national to complain to UK authorities that their feelings have been hurt and the site could be easily shutdown. — boethius

That's not how it works. The OSA doesn't allow the authorities to shut down a site just because someone's feelings are hurt. It goes after sites and apps that neglect to take steps to prevent and remove illegal content. By implementing special policies, reporting mechanisms, and moderation of everything, TPF will be able to fully comply with the OSA.

Honestly the idea of making a business to manage small donated sums seems to me extremely foolish.

However, if there's commitment to that, then 100% the only reasonable implementation is that Benkei takes care of the administration aspects. Small errors in paperwork can lead to audits and fines and endless bureaucracy. Just filing the taxes properly will likely cost more than this 100 Euros a month. — boethius

Note that since the company will be a micro-entity, accounts and administration will not be costly and burdensome at all. You are vastly overstating it.

It's not a casual thing making a business structure, you're then liable as a business and anyone can sue you for any amount. The protections you have as a private individual do not extend to a business you happen to own. If you lose a lawsuit the business will be taken to settle the damages. — boethius

I don't get this. If TPF is going to be sued I'd rather it was run as a company, since otherwise I'd be personally liable. I mean, that's the whole point.

Whether it's really necessary or not is debatable though, I agree.

Note that since the company will be a micro-entity, accounts and administration will not be costly and burdensome at all. You are vastly overstating it. — Jamal

Zero overstating it.

People make absurd or predatory lawsuits all the time.

Judges make absurd rulings all the time with absurdly high amounts, and if the idea is the business runs off 100 dollars a month, even the essentially minimum amount losing any court case (of paying the other side legal fees) will be super high in the context of this budget.

That there's also the possibility of something insane happening and being sued for millions (and hundreds of thousands is "normal" business lawsuit level) should be taken into serious consideration.

I don't get this. If TPF is going to be sued I'd rather it was run as a company, since otherwise I'd be personally liable. — Jamal

That's not really how it works.

First you need to still deal with the lawsuit and if you don't then held in contempt of court and become responsible for the damages anyways.

Second, I'm not sure about UK law, but usually micro businesses are personal liability businesses, just adding a business name and various business codes to your personal identity.

To have limited liability you need a limited liability business, what ltd. means, and that requires shareholders and a board of directors and it is first of all the shareholders that are not personally liable for the debts of the business and second the board of directors but only if they satisfy certain conditions, referred to as "due care" for short.

Board members are only immune for personal liability for the debts of the business if they've acted both lawfully and in due care, meaning their decisions made both legal and business sense at the time.

Then there's how the law is actually practiced which may not make any actual sense.

That you're confident you've acted lawfully and in due care does not mean others can't argue the exact opposite and get a judge to agree, once a judge agrees then you're liable. Of course you could then appeal but that will take time and money.

People could have some real or (more likely) perceived grievance or then simply suing you to take control of the company and then get as much of your personal assets as they can.

Now, most "norma" micro-businesses wouldn't have these concerns, if they are selling knitted socks in their spare time for example, but you'll be in an area of business that is prone to lawsuits: speech people don't like.

Furthermore, you'll be amassing a new trove of data and a decent micro brand to go with your micro business, that people may see as valuable and may see that just suing you for anything will give them your business and your trove of data basically for free (and in fact you'll be paying them for the privilege).

Now, as just an individual you are only liable where you live and you have the sympathy of the court as a resident and just a "normal person" doing a hobby. So you could defend yourself.

As soon as you're doing business in the UK you're liable in the UK and anyone can sue you in the UK and "I'm not really a business, just a normal person with a hobby" judges will just laugh at.

Judges don't differentiate much between size of business, but generally have the attitude that "you want to do business, you got it. And everything that goes with it".

What changes specifically is that judges do not generally hold normal people to "ought to know" standards of highly obscure and technical legal information. You ought to know you can't randomly hit people in the face for no reason, sure, but highly technical regulations that affect your hobby and ... also only if you were a business, judges will be unlikely to say you ought to know.

However, as soon as you're doing business you ought to know everything legally relevant to running your business and anyone can go to court and hold you to account to the letter of the law, often with nonsensical arguments and no evidence, but zero sympathy from the judge that you "aren't really a business", and who maybe simply impressed by a lot technobabble and fancy clothes, and so the only solution is to hire people with even fancier clothes to impress the judge with even more technobabble.

Just one lawsuit is a major pain in the ass to deal with, is the point, and anyone in the entire world that thinks you've published something you shouldn't can bring you to court over it.

And this is true for any jurisdiction, but the UK seems to be making every more stricter speech control laws, so just seems to me inviting danger.

Now, in a jurisdiction like the US with super strong freedom of speech laws (whatever else we may criticize the US for they have been jealous of their freedom of speech and that's been reflected in the courts) then you would likely have the sympathy of the court who would just throw out any lawsuits.

Hearing a case against a philosophy forum is likely the last thing any US judge would ever consider (with the exception the case has nothing to do with philosophy). And you'd immediately get all sorts of support from all sorts of freedom of speech organizations and maybe even Elon Musk himself, would be an instant national scandal a philosophy forum is being sued for discussing philosophy.

If you have the same confidence in UK judges and courts, then ok, maybe I'm wrong.

However, jurisdiction in this case is the best protection.

As soon as there's a freedom of speech grey area then people have grounds to sue over speech, their cases can't be thrown out, and just dealing with the lawsuit is likely to be impossible for a micro-business.

Second, I'm not sure about UK law, but usually micro businesses are personal liability businesses, just adding a business name and various business codes to your personal identity. — boethius

To have limited liability you need a limited liability business, what ltd. means, and that requires shareholders and a board of directors and it is first of all the shareholders that are not personally liable for the debts of the business and second the board of directors but only if they satisfy certain conditions, referred to as "due care" for short. — boethius

No, a micro-entity is a type of limited company. I have run limited companies before. I had one on my own when I was a contract programmer. It was not difficult.

With this specific issue as with all others you bring up, your worries are entirely misplaced.

No, a micro-entity is a type of limited company. I have run limited companies before. I had one on my own when I was a contract programmer. It was not difficult. — Jamal

Well that makes it slightly better, but the key difference is that only your clients would have grounds to sue you as a contract programmer and that would be costly for them. Logical solution is to just contract someone else next time if they aren't happy with your work.

So basic sub-contracting is not an area prone to lawsuits, as it would cost the firm more to sue than they would get back. Obviously plenty of small businesses operate without issue.

As important, you're also not developing any IP as a contractor. There would be no reason for anyone to go through the trouble to take your software contracting business away from you.

As we saw with the previous philosophy forum, that motivation does exist for philosophy forums; there's IP, a sort of brand, social network etc.

No one wants your software business as it has no value apart from you doing the software work.

So, simply existing as a brand online with IP (domain, data, network, brand etc.) may make you a target of some random person who wants it. If it's your personal belonging (as it is now) there's no real effective way to do that. As a just a person you can only be sued in the district where you live and you can just show up in court and defend yourself and your hobby. However, it would be far easier to prey on your philosophy forum IP in the UK (thousands of times easier) through a series of contrived lawsuits for the purpose.

Then there's anyone who really does take issue with something said on this website and goes through the trouble of filing complaints (all sorts of channels are available to complain about businesses), and even suing you in UK court. It's super unlikely someone taking issue with your code would be passionate enough to take every legal measure available against you, but someone that takes issue with your speech or speech on your website could very well be passionate enough to do that.

And the issue is it takes just one person who wants yo'shit or then hates your guts to have all these deleterious effects.

As for liability, having limited liability is not written in stone.

If you get sued for hundreds of thousands of pounds the winning party could then argue that it was not lawful to create that kind of liability as a small business to shield yourself from the legal consequences of your reckless speech actions and therefore you should be held personally liable.

And if a business goes bankrupt there are essentially prima facie grounds to hear the case that it went bankrupt for incompetent and unlawful actions.

It's difficult to argue that you're not competent enough to run a business but you are competent enough to run a business legally as grounds for a case to be thrown out.

Why most small businesses don't get sued then is that they have nothing worth taking and have no public exposure, dealing only with people and businesses they know (such as software contracting) and can easily navigate things with common sense. However, public exposure to lawsuits, such as speech people don't like, means anyone in the world can take issue with you and bring you to court, put you through various consumer and data protection processes and other legal "remedies" to what ails them.