> He has shown over many years that he isn’t someone to be trusted with this type of accreditation. His past convictions aside, he has shown that breaking the rules is his normalcy.

Is the URL bar lying to me? Am I actually on Bootlicker News, where hackers are not to be trusted, overly-powerful and unaccountable institutions get "understand[ing] and respect", and rulebreaking is grounds for excommunication?

You don't see the problem because you are the problem.

I accept my inevitable gray punishment for negative meta discussion but it's worth stating, HN is overwhelmingly corporatist and authoritarian these days.

Somewhat orthogonal to this discussion, but I'm so glad Urbit is gaining steam every day.

The internet founded by the crazy far-right dude that believes in the Dark Enlightenment? I’ll pass.

"The Dark Enlightenment" means you think the Enlightenment was bad, it would be clearer to say that he does not think the Enlightenment was a good thing, for a general audience.

Wait till you see the body count for the organization that developed the internet.

I’m not going to support anyone that makes a profit breaking the rules, gets caught, says sorry not sorry, continues to profit off breaking the rules in the name of privacy and free internet, and then cries that they’re no longer trusted to break the rules.

> I’m not going to support anyone that makes a profit breaking the rules, gets caught, says sorry not sorry, continues to profit off breaking the rules

So no Google, Facebook, Amazon, Apple, etc?

I agree with the idea that ICANN seems to be in a reasonable way. They are based on the idea of control over companies/groups that MUST work by an agreed upon set of rules if the system is to work. Peter has proven over the years that he is comfortable breaking whatever rules he decides to. Choosing not to work with someone with that mindset seems reasonable for ICANN.

However, I do think they should come out with a clear, public statement of why those chose not to work with him.

On a tangent... I am really uncomfortable with the fact that your comment was downvoted (enough to be noticeable). I get that people may disagree with the opinion you are expressing with it, but I was under the impression that downvotes on HN are supposed to be for comments that are off topic / do not move the conversation forward / inappropriate / etc. Your comment very clearly does not fall afoul of those rules; it's an opinion to be discussed.

Im not a hacker of networks, but I had to learn how stuff words when I had a pirate bay chatroom manager go to reddit and other places and do as much slandering as he/she could. I still dont know what he /she did that against me? Im even politically kinda on their side. So it baffled and still baffles me why so much personal hate against me. I now discover that entire internet relay chat, and hacktivist cultures online, are blindly on pirate bay side, because they dont use their own judgements as independent humans (independent of the need to have a leader or a superstar to follow...). Its sad that intelligent people cannot keep a neutral ground for themselves and even judge their own friends from a neutral perpective. I have been severely harassed by a pirate bay admin and still I dont hate the pirate bay, I try to investigate what made the manager of the pirate bay today harass me with such devotion. But then I see that people who follow the pirate bay mindsets and politics aren't exactly free thinking individuals. They come from the extreme-leftist political area where violence is JUSTIFIED always if its used against ''the enemies''. And im their enemy apparently. Im not even a fuc...cen journo lady.Im a NOBODY.