No, the whole point is that an isp should not be forced to do anything, unless ordered to do so by a court.

As the title mentions, this an endless chase if you approach it like this. Vigilante mobs aren’t going to solve this, it’s going to take specialist agencies with mandates to request data civilians can’t. Crimes are being committed there (not murders, but a good way to get the scare votes, I suppose), and there are laws in place to deal with that.

As mentioned several times in this thread, shifting the responsibility for what is allowed to be said on the Internet from governments to corporate entities is a terrible precedent.

Edit: Nevermind. I see you’re also responsible for this wonderful gem:

The position is intellectually dishonest unless you’re actually pro-killing-transgender people.

There’s no point in arguing with you.

“We should allow companies that provide what is almost a necessity in the modern world the power to decide who gets to use it and who doesn’t” is a hell of a take.

While we’re at it, I don’t think thieves deserve clean water. Utilities companies should shut off the water supply to households where thieves live.

The levels of exaggeration about kiwifarms is getting a bit much, of course everyone uses emotive language but this is just getting wild.

How many websites do you think should be blocked, all the ones that are as bad or worse than kiwifarms? Because there are a lot, so you want sweeping measures to restrict the internet and you don’t see that having any problems or negative affects?