You all know how hard I pound the table about using services of your enemies, and how crazy it makes me.
Well, I am subscribed to KiwiFarms founder J0sh on X, and he posted this:
original: https://x.com/XJosh/status/1919476240617996716
archive: https://archive.is/xU11p
"The irate black woman trying to debank @GiveSendGo says they're trying to switch to Stripe, as Square may have already decided to ban them."
I was eating lunch, and damned near spit out a mouthfull of food after reading that.
I swear, the right deserves to get their heads bashed in as often as they do, if they keep doing stupid shit like using either Square or Stripe.
For f*** sake, Stripe just de-platformed Odysee a few months ago over content, THEY ARE A HOSTILE PLATFORM, but GSG thinks they will somehow be able to thread the needle?
As much as I appreciate the parallel economy we really need to pass laws on this while we have the chance. Banking is pretty much a utility and should be regulated to the degree that you can't cancel a customer because of "bad publicity" or whatever excuse they make up, and for payment processing you cannot discriminate between legal products and services or buyers and sellers. (I'd go farther and apply anti-cancel regs to ALL large businesses, but I think we can get people Left and Right to agree on banks at least.)
Actually, what they should do is make it illegal for companies to not accept cash and to not pay their employees in cash if employees ask to be paid in cash.
That’s not a terrible idea either, but the debanking thing is still important for any internet service. Do you really want to live your life mailing envelopes full of cash around any time you want to buy something online? Even if you’re some kind of ascetic or local only champion, most people aren’t (and nor should they need to be).
I don't really like the idea of forcing companies to have to take on clients they don't want tbh.
Yes, if absolutely no bank will accept you then you should mail in cash for online purchases and yes that means online companies should have to accept this.
On another note, absolutely no bank should ever receive government help or bailouts.
I would be willing to accept that if a bank is deemed "systemically important" then it must accept all clients no matter what. Smaller banks should be able to turn people away. This at least gives these large banks the option to self split up the company into smaller companies if they want to be able to turn people away.
That's what credit unions are for. Credit unions can discriminate who can be a member and what their financing is used for.
I agree with what you’re saying in principle, but in practice there are certain types of institutions that have so much indirect influence over modern life that I think some regulation is required. I mean, should you be able to “de-electrify” someone? “De-water” them? The utilities already have these regulations. I think this is one of those moments where pure libertarian ideals need to bow to certain realities.
AML, KYC and other laws are used interfere with that.
Well, then we obviously need to get rid of these AML and KYC laws.
There is no issue you can get left and right to agree on and there never will be again. If we had another 9/11 you would see demonstrations in favor of Al Qaeda in every major US city.
I'm not so sure GSG doesn't want an excuse to be this way. It's hard to tell. A lot of right-wing stuff is intentional gatekeeping.
Given the hypocritical statements by GiveSendGo cofounder Jacob Wells, it should be obvious that they're not genuine. They merely present themselves as the "non woke" alternative to GoFundMe, while being just another false choice, uniparty, globalist supporting, RINO group.
There is a link in that post to a Kiwi Farms thread on the Shiloh thing, and it is 183 pages long.
I'm starting to think subscribing to KF might not be such a bad idea.
It's kind of feast & famine.
When breaking news hits & there's a thread featured on the frontpage, it actually becomes difficult to get a TL; DR on the situation (even with the Highlight feature allowing skipping between top rated posts) because threads grow dozens of pages overnight with a wasteland of useless one-liners.
Then those same threads can go unupdated for months or years at a time in between drama for otherwise interesting lolcows worth documenting & keeping tabs on.
The site also isn't a monolith.
He absolutely does. The one woman who is essentially his ballwasher that started the infamous "Manhate" thread openly and blatantly breaks rules all the time, with zero consequence. In fact, women who go against her get harassed until they leave the site.
He literally does the "I pretend I do not see" when any of them are fucking around and causing trouble, and then brings down his autistic thunder when anyone responds to them in kind.
I still respect the guy for numerous reasons, but his crippling loneliness from being locked inside for years has made him incredibly weak to women.
It is really astounding how even the minorest of disagreement sends him into a frothing tantrum.
Like, from a completely neutral point of view I respect the man highly. He has been fucked hard by all the powers that be and kept resisting on a level that has broken almost any other man before him, and cost him any chance of a happy or normal life. His contributions and principles in regards to that are legendary and deserve a place in history simply because of the lengths they have gone to try and squash him.
But dealing with him as a person is just impossible. You can't speak to him, because you don't know what will set him off or what he will read out of what you said to go apeshit on. You can't even respond to him positively because he might get pissed at being pinged in a thread he himself posted in.
And everywhere he goes brings with it his legion of ballwashers who shit up any thread he posts in and agree with anything he says. Which likely contributes to the aforementioned problem, a legion of sycophants telling him how right he is on every little thing.
It was really funny when last month his Queen Bitch, you know who it is, literally paid someone on the site to leak their chatlogs to try and shame and attack them. But that didn't count as infighting, despite being the dozenth time she has tried that. He doesn't even openly acknowledge her existence almost ever that I've seen, to a point where its comically noticeable that he refuses to. Which confirms some absolute backroom shit going on between the two.
Like, that kind of stuff is funny and should be allowed. But the lack of consistent rule enforcement, seemingly entirely to the favor of his TERF lovers is palpable.
I don't think anyone would be as committed to the "cause" as it is out of pure altruism or noble goals. Regardless of it he did it to have his little room to tantrum in, he still has gone to the lengths and given us the site to mostly have the freedom to do the same. And I doubt he would have done any of that if he wasn't already a contrarian little shit who rejects anyone telling him anything.
You dismiss it as a little dumb website from the outset, so of course you won't give it the same value I do in terms of simply letting it exist as it does. You are free to that opinion, but its something that means a lot to me as the alternatives across the web fall one by one. I used to be a /b/tard after all and I still lament that place's death to this day.
I mean, he has his own thread and its packed full of his lolcow history. Its a great read about how much of an autistic manchild he has always been, and I do give him credit for allowing it to exist as it does because few others would.
To be fair, this is a problem wide enough that he himself has had to step in to control at times. The DSP forum is constantly getting their shit kicked for being more pathetic than the man himself. Fatrick alogs are absurdly obsessed with him. And half the Beauty Parlor girls are only there to preen by comparison to the lowest bar possible.
Heck the "anti-lolicon" squad that has formed up are so pathetic and constant with their nonsense that it genuinely annoys me how much they are also allowed to shit up every thread. But that entire movement only started because of his own guilty conscious about Nick Bates, I think, and people worshiping his every opinion.
I don't disagree with any of your observations, they are all accurate. I simply never cared enough about him as a person, just his work, to develop much hate for him either. His actions are often very gay, but then I also do a lot of retarded and annoying shit online when I'm not working.
But I have the benefit of my work/family not being tied to my online in anyway, and not having the power to abuse to begin with. Its why I've rejected people trying to "nominate" me (for whatever it was worth) to mod around here, because I'd absolutely ban people for similar reasons he does like them annoying me.
Or he's getting funding from them.
He gets funding from plenty of people, it literally puts a badge on your account when you give him money. He raised an easy 6 figure in crowdfunding like two years ago for a lawsuit, and that came from all corners.
The only thing that makes them different is that they are women.
The only other "group" that gets the same special treatment are the Oldfags because most predate him, but he at least acknowledges he is giving them special treatment.
Maybe it could be read using AI.
AI summary:
It's useful for digging up dirt on Reddit troons if nothing else.
I'm not going to throw shade at them, they are not folding to public pressure to shut down Shiloh's funding campaign. They have provided funding for other people, too. Kyle Rittenhouse had a campaign on there after GoFundMe killed his first attempt at crowdfunding for his defense.
They get a cut of the donations. Why would they shut down the fundraiser?
Tranny insiders at the credit card companies.
Well, I know that, but the question was regarding GiveSendGo. I was saying that even if GiveSendGo was a globohomo organization (even if they pretend they're not), they would still be incentivized to keep Shiloh Hendrix's fundraiser up, purely so they could make money via their cut of the donations. There are lots and lots of people involved in globohomo who are involved partially, or totally, by greed.
Are there alternatives to Stripe and Square?
Nope, and any alternative that tries to start up gets immediatley destroyed
Hence why I can't fault them that hard for this.
Agreed
Once they cut you off you're basically stuck with crypto and paper checks, any bank you try to use as a credit card processor will nuke your account as soon as the tranny mob detects it.
Old-school PO Box with paper checks or money orders.
On the dark web, we use Monero cryptocurrency.
Unfortunately the barrier to entry for XMR is insurmountable to normies.
There is no such thing as a right wing friendly payment platform. They're all the same thing, there is only one banking system and the orders come from the top. If you say crypto I will shoot you in the face with my internet gun. The options are A: incur damages by being banned then file suit, B: Armed revolution.
You should really exhaust option A before considering option B
Stripe and Square are both enemy forces, but when it comes to the financial industry there's not a lot of good options.
Do you have a MasterCard?
I don't, specifically because they are an enemy corporation. Visa isn't engaged in the same level of direct action against the right, but they are basically on-side with the Left. That leaves Discover and American Express. For all Credit and Bank cards.
You might think that's just a good analogy. It's not.
MasterCard owns Stripe. That is why Stripe is behaving the way it is.
Now, for online payments, I'd like to remind you that PayPal is also an explicit enemy actor.
And for online services Amazon Web Services is an enemy actor.
Gents, I don't like it, but the financial industry doesn't allow for many alternatives. We simply don't have the BitCoin Banking Infrastructure needed to do the shit we want yet. You gotta cut support where you can, but you also gotta make hard choices, and that's the point of the system being built to defend itself.
Slightly related tangent, does anyone else who's more for less regulation in industry to allow for innovation and entrepreneurs, find that bankers and financial services are excluded from this?
Like we've seen from de banking to 2008 crash what they do when they're not on a tight leash, they seem one of the few industries FULLY incapable of self regulation.
I'm in favor of de-regulating the banks.
You should see the Credit Unions struggle for air under the regulations. The Banking system is built to have regulation protect the major players from competition. The Great Recession happened not because banking wasn't under a tight leash, it was because specific banks were given funding to engage in mal-investment, they were flooded with cheap chinese money, and the government benefited from not investigating the fraud they knew was taking place. It's not that they didn't regulate the banks hard enough, it's that they were complicit in the scam. Once they realized the consequences of their fraud couldn't be maintained, they broke every law and stole every single dollar out of your wallet to keep the system afloat.
Think about it like this: did the Mafia gain power in the US because the government wasn't strict on crime? The FBI would like you to believe so, but the truth is that the Mafia rose to power because of regulation via prohibition, but also because politicians wanted to use the mob. It doesn't matter how many cops you have on a beat if they are getting bribed. And it matters even less how many cops you have on a beat when it's official policy not to interfere with the mob. And it matters to an even less degree when you realize that politicians are giving orders to both the mob, and the cops, to behave exactly as they currently are. The number of laws changes nothing. The problem is the whole racket.
That's why deregulation is a real threat. It intentionally removes the structure of the racket and allows for a power vacuum for competition to enter.
I doubt it can ever be regulated in any meaningful way. Finance is one of those industries that's completely incestuous with the government. Both politicians and bankers benefit when line go up; it's only when the music stops and line go down that they slap some token regulations to assuage the normies that the
Ponzi schemestock market/banks are totally safe now.The problem has nothing to do with "the industry", regulation vs deregulation or any other cope you can think of. The problem is the people running the industry and their blood feud with anyone who isnt part of their tribe. Nothing else matters.
Industries don't self-regulate, people do. If an industry doesn't generally self-regulate it's down to the sort of people that generally dominate that field.
Finance/Banking are more willing to take stupid, greedy risks because it’s not their money that is being gambled. They’re also addicted to “line go up”, and are especially vulnerable to it because it’s one of the few places you can cash out before the house of cards collapses with minimal legal risk.
We need a federal right to bank freely without political interdiction
What are the alternatives to stripe and square?
AlignPay, Parallel Economy are two that come to mind. Gab has GabPay, but I don't know how viable that is any more.
The only way this works is if payment processors are forced to be unbiased. Someone with means needs to sue them, using Citizens United arguments. No amount of warning anyone about anything will help, as every large enough platform to be worth using is hostile.