While we completely understand why some people were annoyed that we did not post the interview, we would like to address some claims with a detailed explanation of why this interview was not posted, we will add more answers here if we will feel its needed. these are the common claims and question that people raised about not posting the interview and what we have to say about them:
Original post was here
*** We have zero interest with going into discussion about the morals of this topic in general – just about posting / not posting the interview.
Claim: But the poll results were in favor of posting, and you ignored them.
1. It was clearly stated on the poll that it is tool to help us decide – not the verdict.
2. True that more people wanted it to be posted – but those who didn’t want it, had much better arguments that we agree with.
3. We feel the poll was a mistake, but we have no practical way to go back in time to fix this now. so we will just have to live with the results.
Claim: You are promoting Censorship / Preventing Free Speech
How about we just post the site admin details here and let anyone post anything he wants so? this will be true freedom of speech! well this not how freedom of speech works.
Freedom of speech means not censoring others when they say something, it DOES NOT mean that you have to provide anyone who wishes with a stage to say what he wants on your own private property without any terms – and especially when you have to deal with some consequences that will not be in your favo. He is 100% free to go and interview elsewhere. it also does not mean that you have no right shutting your own mouth, what we did.
1. There is also Freedom of choice – we choose not to publish this.
2. Freedom of speech is also the freedom to not saying whatever you do not want to say – and we choose not to say.
3. Not posting whatever you do not want to post is not censorship, its called editorial decision, he have strict process for that, and after a long review of this interview by many people, and getting many comments trough various channels we decided that its not wanted here.
4. The ONLY topic we will post freely about is Darknetmarkets related information – and even than, only when we decide it has practical or informational value, not general gossip or yellow information. anything else is relevant for us only we decide that its relevant.
Claim: All information should be freely accessible
It is freely accessible, just log on to their sites and you can read similar stories as much as you want, you could even do your own interview and than post it on your site, we wont condone that. however, we wont host it on our site.
Claim: This was all just Publicity Stunt
This claim is outright dumb, if we wanted more publicity than posting the poll, waiting a couple of days and than posting the interview was the right thing to do to get better publicity, it would have gotten us way more traffic than not posting the interview. we have media channels asking for a copy of this interview, which we did not provide them with. we might change our decision in the future.
Claim: It shows what makes them “tick”/ it contains valuable information that can help prevent abuse.
No its not. period. its just yellow information about his personal life and how fun they are. nothing that can help “harm reduction”.
Our Claim: This interview will be very offensive to MANY readers
Correct. Many of them contacted us asking to not post this. this is a huge consideration to us even if its just 25% of the people who voted, its more than enough loyal readers we do not want to upset. the vast majority of the others completely understands our decision, and a small minority is annoyed by it.
Our Claim: The Interview Contains at least some percent of false information
Correct. We know about at least couples of lies in there – while we cannot confirm some others, and the rest we can confirm to some degree. we don’t like posting false info. this was confirmed by some people contacting us and confirming themselves as members of his community. you can see a couple of them in the comments (although they mistaken him for another guy).
Our Claim: It Will serve mostly as advertising, no matter how bad we will make it look
Its stated clearly on the interview, we have no wish people learning trough our site about his “save haven” and how find it is. and thats even before it will attract many comments from his community and more traffic to our site from his friends, just from analyzing the traffic the poll sent us trough Google – we were shocked to see what kind of search queries such post is attracting, helping those who wish to find the stuff they are looking for, the interview will have much larger impact and will attract more unwanted traffic that will advertise unwanted activities. we want to avoid that. or at least not contribute to it.
Question: So why did you post poll to begin with?
We wanted to get some indication about how to deal with this sensitive matter, we believe now that it was a mistake, but we have no realistic way to fix it other than explaining. if you have any idea, why are open to suggestions.
Suggestion: You can publish this somewhere else
This interview is our property that we spent time and resources working on, if it will be posted anywhere it will be only when and if we decide it should, and under the terms we will find fit, we see no reason to do it at this time just for the sake of posting it.
Question: Would you publish an interview with Ross Ul or hold it back because he allegedly called for the murder of many people?
He was not charged with murder on his indictment, he did not admit murder, and he did not kill anyone, so yes, on the other hand the guy on the interview admitted doing some terrible stuff, and is proud of them. so its not exactly the same.
Claim: You post about drugs and drugs are also an offensive matter
We do not promote drugs and do not condone it – we promote safe use of Darknetmarkets and responsible drug use, if this interview could have helped reduce child abuse, we would post it without even thinking about it, but it wont (this is the main reason we conducted it, but it didn’t work).
?: This website seems much more like a blog than it does a news site
We never claimed otherwise, we just post about stuff we find interesting or useful , and apparently some people chooses to read them, we never defined our site as anything. it was external people who defined us, so call us what you will.
Hope this clears up most questions, we will add more if we see any.