[tor-talk] Tor's reputation problem with pedo, some easy steps the community could take

[Joe Btfsplk]

On 4/29/2013 12:32 PM, Chris Patti wrote:
> Tor has a rather severe reputation problem at the moment.  Given the recent
> revelations around malware on the network, and the pervasiveness of
> pedophilia, I think we should consider a course of action to help boost the
> network's PR.
>
> For one - while nobody is interested in acting as the police and stamping
> out the pedo material, cleaning up links to pedo sites on the hidden wiki
> and the various other link dirs would be a good start.
>
> As a newcomer to Tor, as I explored the various onions out there, I felt as
> if practically everywhere I turned there were links taking me to pedo
> sites, IRC channels etc.
>
> I recognize that free speech means free speech for everyone, even those
> with views that we find objectionable, but there's nothing to stop the
> community from turning a cold shoulder to these people who see informed
> consent as being an optional or academic concept.
>
Chris, I agree in principal - about all sorts of illegal activity. But 
how could that be done w/o *someone*  overseeing all the internet & 
deciding what should / shouldn't be accessible, becoming judge & jury?  
I don't know a good solution to this old question.

Sure, pedophilia is illegal in most countries & rightly so.  But in many 
countries, accessing Youtube, Twitter, or political info sites is also 
VERY illegal.  Tor doesn't operate only in the U.S.

Even if Tor Project decided your idea is worthy, isn't that a bit like 
car mfgs enforcing speed limits?  A large % of internet users say they 
don't want censorship, but if anyone's going to shut down sites or stop 
access to them, that *violate laws* of a given country, shouldn't it be 
the government of that country?

Ironically, many gov'ts today, including the U.S., were founded by 
violating current laws or defying the gov't in power.  In the U.S., we 
celebrate that every July 4th.  Citizens all over the world applaud 
their founding fathers for ignoring existing laws or existing gov'ts in 
power, to promote freedom.  Yet, the current gov't *of any country* then 
wants to squelch dissension to the extent possible.  It's always been 
that way & always will be. That's why it's ironic.