You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

PeaceSeeker ago

The canary never had a set edit time period; it is only renewed when posts are made to /v/announcements.

Putt really only posts announcements to /v/Voat nowadays, and so he gets around the need to update the canary. This is very probably because little more than a week after the Canary was last updated, Voat received a DMCA takedown notice, which probably killed the Canary. It was in many ways a pointless thing to maintain from the beginning; Canaries are practically meaningless nowadays.

If by "dead" you mean Voat has received takedown requests, then it's been dead for months. True, now a government agency has also contacted Voat, which is just another nail in the coffin of the Canary. If by "dead" you mean it's overdue for an edit to clarify these points, then no, it's not dead, because it is only supposed to be editted when posts to /v/announcements are made.

PuttItOut ago

I just updated it to stop any current speculation, but it might very well be dead soon anyways. We'll see what happens.

Dismember ago

The canary may die but the multiple databanks that hold his memories will live forever.

everlastingphelps ago

tyvm -- although this might be time to put it on an official updating schedule. There are plenty of people who will remind you when it is time (as they've shown.) Maybe at least most of them will wait until the scheduled time to but you about it.

AR47 ago

Does this have to do with secretly psycho account?

I am certain that after skip tracing that girl who killed herself in Colorado after scaring the shit out of the schools there and that account name it is the same person.

Blink once for yes and 2 for no

PuttItOut ago

One head nod

AR47 ago

You are funny. Well be this the reason or not the fbi has already said they are combing the history of that person on social media.

If they are not now then soon will be.

VetGoat84 ago

It's been a pleasure.

o/

Cant_Call_It ago

...but it might very well be dead soon anyways. We'll see what happens.

As in you can't afford to keep voat up anymore or the feds are cracking down?

ForTheUltimate ago

I don;t want to have to go to TOR again, I get confused with the spam until I can't even captcha.

DANKESTGHIDORAH ago

We <3 you Putt.

PuttItOut ago

Sometimes it doesn't feel like it but thank you!

Keefin ago

I truly appreciate you, Putt. Thank you so much for providing this platform.

Wonder_Boy ago

Can someone explain what the canary is?

MinorLeakage ago

Thanks for the gesture. They will always find a new angle and nothing will ever appease them, but it's the thought that counts!

baneofretail ago

You're awesome!

Marou ago

o7

I expect countries without jurisdiction to come after us because they don't have the 1st amendment. I almost half expect some 9th circuit judge would allow it too stateside; in blatant disregard of the 1st amendment and law. Law and constitutional amendments didn't save anyone on Ruby Ridge, and we shouldn't expect them to save us - unless we can afford justice.

Can you look at getting Gab's payment processor and let us Goats throw shekels in a legal fund?

PuttItOut ago

Who did Gab use and what's the cut? 30%?

Marou ago

https://www.secondamendmentprocessing.com

I remember it being high, but dunno if it's that high.

everlastingphelps ago

30% is within the market for "high-risk" merchants. Stuff with tons of chargebacks -- particularly pron and other sex-industry stuff, but also a lot of other "card not present" (meaning you give your number but don't do a physical swipe) merchants get hit with a rate like that, at least until they have enough history to show that they don't have a ton of chargebacks.

So it probably wasn't that high (I would be surprised if gab has more than a handful of chargebacks) but it certainly could be at a processor of last resort.

(Chargebacks are also why merchants will relent and refund your card on a lot of stuff -- chargebacks cost them a ton of fees -- like up to $50 -- and also ding them with their processor. It's often better for them to eat it on a deal than deal with the rating ding.)

I suspect the real problem is that the networks -- VISA, AMEX, MC, etc -- are blocking processors from taking the transactions.

PuttItOut ago

If it's that high I'm opening a first amendment processing company!

Marou ago

Right? I don't think it was. For some reason though I think the happy merchants that run the banking industry would allow a 1st Amendment processing company, and the red tape is enormous.

PuttItOut ago

But 30%! It's like income tax level status!

Marou ago

Their testimonials say, "Cheaper than Paypal and Square" - only way to know though is to ask. If it's outright robbery it's probably a shit option - if it's not that high maybe worth considering.

PuttItOut ago

It's "high risk" for whatever reason and that usually comes with a price.

Marou ago

I'm sure we wouldn't get 2.5% rates, but 10-15%? I could live with 10-15% of whatever I gave voat going to a gun payment processor.

The risk is that they get deplatformed by Mastercard and Visa. It's why I always wanna shoot the "mah free market" people in the face; in video games of course.

PuttItOut ago

Visa and MC are the men behind the curtain.

fujin ago

Fuck dude, wtf are you doing!

PuttItOut ago

Edited it.

subscribetopewdiepie ago

They claim to have better rates then square or paypal on their site but I don't see fees published anywhere.

PuttItOut ago

That's telling but at the same time it's complicated, so somewhat understandable. Reward cards, debit, transaction amounts, etc all factor into pricing.

FurstMetternich ago

Thanks! I updated this post.

PuttItOut ago

Thank you for doing so.

FurstMetternich ago

I guess my post fulfilled a purpose.

Thank you for providing this platform!

SandHog ago

Thanks for clarifying, Putt.

Momerath ago

Thank you putt for all you do.