Joshua Conner Moon - Kiwi Farms Joshua Moon Financial BS

[polonium]

I said I'd update my post but I was lazy and it's been too long to edit that one but here's how you know it's absolutely a grift.

On his lolcow fund page his refund policy says this: (highlight is mine)

Refund Policy​

No Refunds​

All contributions made are considered as donations. Please note that once the donation has been made, we do not offer refunds.

Donations​

Donations are voluntary contributions made without the expectation of receiving any goods, services, or return on investment. They are made out of goodwill to support our litigation causes and are not tied to specific products or services.

So, this page seems to suggest that these donations will go towards litigation. The title of the page is "Lolcow LLC Litigation Fund" and right there in the definition and explanation of what they mean by "donation" it acknowledges that the donations are a gesture of support towards his effort to sue Epik and The Trannies.

But as we know, when you visit the actual donation page, there's a checkbox to tick to confirm that you agree with the following:

I understand that donations do not establish an attorney-client relationship, and Matthew Hardin is not able to offer individual advice or acknowledgement to any donor. Matthew Hardin and his firm represent only Joshua Moon and Lolcow LLC. Upon receipt, all funds will become the sole property of Joshua Moon and will be held in trust for disbursement at his sole discretion, including but not limited to disbursement to support ongoing litigation or anticipated litigation in which the Hardin Law Office represents Mr. Moon or Lolcow LLC. Contributions are not tax deductible. I understand that if I have any questions about whether it is advisable for me to contribute to this fund, I am welcome to consult an independent attorney or tax professional.

Which establishes very clearly that this money is a gift to null to spend how he pleases including litigation if he wants to. When he talks about it on the forum he more often talks about it in terms of a litigation fund rather than a general slush fund, which it plainly is.

Null's also claiming that the way the fund is established offers some kind of anonymity to his users but I don't see how it does. Null claims this in his post about the Cheese Fund:

Last week, I asked the community if they would be willing to support me in the pursuit of litigation against Epik and others. Over 1,600 people voted both that they would, and that they would financially support it.

My attorney, Matthew Hardin, who has represented us with both Melinda Scott's cases and now Greer's, has agreed to set up an IOLTA account. This is a trust account that he manages. It enjoys certain legal protections due to its nature and purpose. I hid on the toilet when a man in a dress knocked on my door.

Over the last week, we've quickly set up a custom charge form for the purpose of fundraising a conservative estimate for the cost of a lawsuit up until jury trial: $75,000. Having this money upfront, specially purposed for litigation, is a very strong position for opening moves against the companies and people detailed on the fund.
https://lolcowfund.hardin.law/

This form does accept traditional card payments and should work for international cardholders as well. I will stress that I've gone through some undertaking to ensure that the form is both incredibly simple and very secure: card numbers never touch any server that I manage, instead it goes directly to the bank. Further, the fund itself enjoys certain legal protections as it is an IOLTA. Epik actually threatened on Twitter that they'd use litigation to perform discovery and 'expose' Kiwi Farms users, which an IOLTA helps protect against. Our attorney is bound by the rules of professional conduct as well as by the attorney work product doctrine and the attorney-client privilege, and will take maximum steps to ensure your privacy.

There is more detailed explanation for all of this on the website. I would encourage anyone interested to read it over. The information on the site is what is binding, this is my layman's explanation of it.


I will also mention that literally just yesterday, Stripe decided to debank my podcast. I have received no explanation for this. They closed out 1776 Hosting's old account, and all integrations that my other LLC has with other companies to monetize my work. The only given reason is "Prohibited Business". They will not give more information. This also affects my ability to charge money for merchandise runs.

So while the site has been more stable than usual, I promise you certain people are still working every day to try and destroy it. There are continuous emails being sent to all providers, they are complaining to banks to try and figure out how to stymie my ability to make money even through my side projects, and then they are defaming us on Twitter to try and snowball accusations into a genuinely untenable position. The only way forward is to be aggressive.

His lawyer is going to have to keep proper accounting of where this money came from, I can't believe for a second there's no regulatory oversight of this kind of thing otherwise it would be the easiest and quickest form of money laundering known to mankind, so the donors' identifying information is being stored for sure. Null is claiming that you're protected by three things: the rules of professional conduct, the attorney work product doctrine, and the attorney-client privilege.

The last one is an out-and-out lie. The donation form leaves absolutely no wiggle room, there is no attorney-client relationship between the donor and null's lawyer, and he knew that when he wrote the post. Also, the attorney-client privilege only applies to communications between Null and Hardin, not to records. Those are covered in the second thing he claims, the attorney work product doctrine, but that's supposed to protect work done in preparation for litigation, so that you don't have to divulge all your strategy and notes to the opposition. I think it's a stretch to say that financial records of donors to a slush fund fall under "materials prepared in anticipation of litigation". So that just leaves "the rules of professional conduct", which sounds good, but really doesn't mean anything. He won't act in an unprofessional way with your private information. Great, that doesn't mean that he won't comply with a legal request for that information though, which is what we're trying to find protection against.

So in a nutshell the fund isn't for what he says it's for and doesn't offer the anonymity he says it does, because null is a lying grifter.

 

[KampungBoy]

How do you post on a website that talks about scam dono funds and then get tricked into donating to a scam dono fund that even tells you it's a scam dono fund.

The fallout from these things doesn't appear immediately, but it always does happen making me seriously wonder if this is Null's exit strategy.

 

[atmos driver]

Using the court system for ingroup cohesion or rallying is not what the court system is for. He needs to prove that he had meaningful reputational or financial loss, and that Epik caused this, to gain anything meaningful from Epik. Haven't seen him do this. His site and reputation started falling apart years before his lawsuit threats or the Epik tweet. Epik was also already disgraced and it's hard to believe the Epik tweet lowered his already dismal reputation or caused him financial loss. I think the psychology of his legal efforts has more to do with the overall, slow destruction of his website which preceded the Epik tweets by years.

 

[atmos driver]

Even if Moon had a legal win or two, how would that stop the destruction of his website? Through an additional sentence on Wikipedia, a single news article about it by an online magazine? That would be tiny compared to the widespread and consistent media attacks on his site for years.

Seems like Moon is trying to convince his Trump-obsessed "followers" that his situation is special enough to make it's way to the supreme court, just like Trump! They are so embedded in his cult, they think his site is that important. He's provoking their histrionic personalities to act as an indefinite piggy bank is my guess.

 

[The Gays From LA]

He needs to prove that he had meaningful reputational or financial loss

He doesn't though, I've already explained to you that he plans to file defamation per se lolsuits, where you don't have to prove damages. It's a different type of defamation lolsuit from the one where you have to prove damages. Also, he's not just filing defamation lolsuits. People need to stop treating Null's different lolsuits like it's a single lolsuit. Null is talking about filing several different lolsuits that are already at different stages. Null said that the lolsuit against LFJ (in California) is going to be some other kind of tortious business interference lolsuit, unrelated to the defamation lolsuits:

There is likely a good Tortuous Interference tort with Keffals and to a greater extent Liz Fong-Jones. That's a $75,000 gamble.
https://archive.is/6vtml#selection-933.0-933.127 https://archive.is/HrPCB#selection-7275.0-7275.127

I have been thinking a lot about Null suing LFJ in California, a State with very strong anti-SLAPP protections. It's almost inevitable that LFJ will go for an anti-SLAPP motion to prevent Null from obtaining his correspondence in discovery. Null can chip away at that, but it took Manson a year of litigation, filing motion after motion to get to a point where he could perform some limited discovery, but in the end he lost and the anti-SLAPP was upheld. I know Null is not a multi-millionaire rockstar like Manson is, so I don't know how much money Null can spend on all those motions. I think he should study the Manson case closely to learn which mistakes Manson's legal team made when they filed the lolsuit. Null would do best to make his strongest, most convincing accusations against LFJ from the get-go. I am personally against RICO accusations being used on the very first motion just to alarm the judge with very little to back them, but perhaps that's what Null has to do to convince the judge in California, who is very likely to be hostile, that his lolsuit isn't about protesting LFJ's right to protest, but rather about the fact that LFJ explicitly and intentionally designed, coordinated, promoted and implemented the #DropKiwiFarms campaigns for the purpose of aiding and abetting cybercrimes against KF. As someone who followed #DropKiwiFarms closely, there is no doubt in my mind that LFJ was using the public aspect of #DKF as a cover for the cybercriminal conspiracy that he aided and abetted against KF with the help of the German hacker Kevin Karhan. There is no doubt that Kevin Karhan involvement and intent against KF was cybercriminal from the very start. Kevin Karhan joined #DKF for the explicitly stated purpose, as admitted by himself in his tweets, of committing (cyber)crimes against KF, its owners and its members.

I can think of several ways that Null can argue that #DKF wasn't a legitimate protest, but rather a protest that was used to cover up cybercrimes:

- There's the 5 year campaign (that predates #DropKiwiFarms) by LFJ himself targeting of Cloudflare - there is literally no reason to deny someone DDoS protection unless you are planning to DDoS them or to have someone DDoS them. LFJ targeted Cloudflare not just to deny KF connectivity, but to deliberately place KF and its user-base in harm's way the moment they restored connectivity.
- There's the GrayHat Academy on Github and the posting there of falsely named DROP lists that were actually used as DDoS lists
- There's the poz.hiv hack (with LFJ literally involving non-consenting third parties in his cybercrimes, attempting to export KF user data to a non-suspecting web server)
- Multiple explicit threats from Keffals, LFJ, Kevin Karhan and others in #DropKiwiFarms to personally target Null and Kiwis off-line, including death threats on social media
- Admissions by #DropKiwiFarms that they were aware of the technical specifics/"fingerprint" of the DDoS attacks against KF, which is a strong indication that #DropKiwiFarms were coordinating with the hackers who carried out those attacks, who had told them what kinds of DDoS attacks they were using against KF

Null needs to make a very strong prima facie case that #DropKiwiFarms was set-up from the get-go to be a cybercriminal conspiracy with the mere superficial appearance of a protest movement. He needs to argue that the cybercrimes that happened against KF during #DropKiwiFarms - the poz.hiv hack, the DDoS attacks - weren't just an unfortunate and unforeseen side-effect of the campaign, but the very criminal intent of the campaign.

Again, I am not a fan of RICO accusations being used as a red light to alarm the judge on the very first motion, but perhaps that's what needs to be done here. I feel that mere "business interference" isn't strong enough to counter an anti-SLAPP. LFJ can too easily respond by saying that the very purpose of protest is to enable the public to interfere with some business conduct that is unethical or in violation of some rules. Null needs to show that LFJ went above and beyond legal protest to commit outright crimes, that crimes were always the goal and that the campaign was provably designed, coordinated and executed with cybercriminal intent.

 

[atmos driver]

He doesn't though, I've already explained to you that he plans to file defamation per se lolsuits, where you don't have to prove damages. It's a different type of defamation lolsuit from the one where you have to prove damages. Also, he's not just filing defamation lolsuits. People need to stop treating Null's different lolsuits like it's a single lolsuit. Null is talking about filing several different lolsuits that are already at different stages. Null said that the lolsuit against LFJ (in California) is going to be some other kind of tortious business interference lolsuit, unrelated to the defamation lolsuits:



I have been thinking a lot about Null suing LFJ in California, a State with very strong anti-SLAPP protections. It's almost inevitable that LFJ will go for an anti-SLAPP motion to prevent Null from obtaining his correspondence in discovery. Null can chip away at that, but it took Manson a year of litigation, filing motion after motion to get to a point where he could perform some limited discovery, but in the end he lost and the anti-SLAPP was upheld. I know Null is not a multi-millionaire rockstar like Manson is, so I don't know how much money Null can spend on all those motions. I think he should study the Manson case closely to learn which mistakes Manson's legal team made when they filed the lolsuit. Null would do best to make his strongest, most convincing accusations against LFJ from the get-go. I am personally against RICO accusations being used on the very first motion just to alarm the judge with very little to back them, but perhaps that's what Null has to do to convince the judge in California, who is very likely to be hostile, that his lolsuit isn't about protesting LFJ's right to protest, but rather about the fact that LFJ explicitly and intentionally designed, coordinated, promoted and implemented the #DropKiwiFarms campaigns for the purpose of aiding and abetting cybercrimes against KF. As someone who followed #DropKiwiFarms closely, there is no doubt in my mind that LFJ was using the public aspect of #DKF as a cover for the cybercriminal conspiracy that he aided and abetted against KF with the help of the German hacker Kevin Karhan. There is no doubt that Kevin Karhan involvement and intent against KF was cybercriminal from the very start. Kevin Karhan joined #DKF for the explicitly stated purpose, as admitted by himself in his tweets, of committing (cyber)crimes against KF, its owners and its members.

I can think of several ways that Null can argue that #DKF wasn't a legitimate protest, but rather a protest that was used to cover up cybercrimes:

- There's the 5 year campaign (that predates #DropKiwiFarms) by LFJ himself targeting of Cloudflare - there is literally no reason to deny someone DDoS protection unless you are planning to DDoS them or to have someone DDoS them. LFJ targeted Cloudflare not just to deny KF connectivity, but to deliberately place KF and its user-base in harm's way the moment they restored connectivity.
- There's the GrayHat Academy on Github and the posting there of falsely named DROP lists that were actually used as DDoS lists
- There's the poz.hiv hack (with LFJ literally involving non-consenting third parties in his cybercrimes, attempting to export KF user data to a non-suspecting web server)
- Multiple explicit threats from Keffals, LFJ, Kevin Karhan and others in #DropKiwiFarms to personally target Null and Kiwis off-line, including death threats on social media
- Admissions by #DropKiwiFarms that they were aware of the technical specifics/"fingerprint" of the DDoS attacks against KF, which is a strong indication that #DropKiwiFarms were coordinating with the hackers who carried out those attacks, who had told them what kinds of DDoS attacks they were using against KF

Null needs to make a very strong prima facie case that #DropKiwiFarms was set-up from the get-go to be a cybercriminal conspiracy with the mere superficial appearance of a protest movement. He needs to argue that the cybercrimes that happened against KF during #DropKiwiFarms - the poz.hiv hack, the DDoS attacks - weren't just an unfortunate and unforeseen side-effect of the campaign, but the very criminal intent of the campaign.

Again, I am not a fan of RICO accusations being used as a red light to alarm the judge on the very first motion, but perhaps that's what needs to be done here. I feel that mere "business interference" isn't strong enough to counter an anti-SLAPP. LFJ can too easily respond by saying that the very purpose of protest is to enable the public to interfere with some business conduct that is unethical or in violation of some rules. Null needs to show that LFJ went above and beyond legal protest to commit outright crimes, that crimes were always the goal and that the campaign was provably designed, coordinated and executed with cybercriminal intent.

You seem to know about the law. Can a patently criminal organization, one that is criminal from the ground up, win a lawsuit for censorship-oriented cybercriminal activities against them? Just as a general question, not necessarily referring to Kiwi Farms.

 

[polonium]

As someone who followed #DropKiwiFarms closely, there is no doubt in my mind that LFJ was using the public aspect of #DKF as a cover for the cybercriminal conspiracy that he aided and abetted against KF with the help of the German hacker Kevin Karhan.

It's not about what you think, or believe, or what you know, it's about what you can prove. Null has been whining and griping about this shadowy cabal of trannies who know every tech CEO's personal phone number, and break into his house and make his coke go flat and pick all the pepperoni off his pizza for years now but has he provided any actual evidence?

 

[The Gays From LA]

You seem to know about the law. Can a patently criminal organization, one that is criminal from the ground up, win a lawsuit for censorship-oriented cybercriminal activities against them? Just as a general question, not necessarily referring to Kiwi Farms.

I am not a lawyer and all I know about the law is based on what I've read in the media and on legal websites/journals, not personal experience. As for your question, that depends on what you mean with "a patently criminal organization". Are they an official registered "organization", or are they just loose individuals that appear to act in concert, like an organization would? Can their structure as an organization be proven, or is it implied?

Next, are they already found to be a "patently criminal" organization? What is their track record, legally? Is there a history of lolsuits, convictions and prosecutions in which they were proven to be "patently criminal"? Or are they just rumoured be engaged in crime, but is the law simply late to catch up with what they're actually doing? Is the purpose of the lolsuit to show the court of what they did, or to remind the court of what they were already caught doing?

Next, can a criminal organization have other crimes committed against it, as in "censorship-oriented cybercriminal activities" specifically? It should go without saying that criminals routinely commit crimes against other criminals in the criminal underworld, which is why the criminal underworld is itself a problem as it tends to increase the amount of crime and law-breaking.

If an "organization" is acting in a "patently criminal" way, or is perceived to be doing so, then people who are either victims or bystanders of that organization might decide to undertake various activities against that organization, aimed at stopping them from committing more crimes. Part of that campaign might include denying that criminal organization a public presence, which isn't cybercriminal in and of itself, but might violate inalienable rights, because even criminals and perceived criminals have a right to claim their innocence in a public forum.

However, even in righteously resisting a patently criminal organization, their opponents aren't allowed to break the law themselves in doing so. If their opponents resort to breaking the law in resisting that organization, they themselves are effectively in the process of bringing about a new criminal organization of their own.

With regards to KF itself, the questions I would ask myself would be 1) was the #DropKiwiFarms campaign absolutely necessary? 2) Wasn't there another way for #DropKiwiFarms to achieve their aims, that did not involve committing cybercrimes? and 3) Were the cybercrimes committed by #DropKiwiFarms against KF proportional to what they aimed to achieve? (Whatever that was, deplatforming KF, avenging trans people, etc) My personal answer to all these questions is NO. You don't get to openly blackmail entire ISPs with DDoS attacks just because you want to target one single website that you've already hacked with the aim of causing a user data-leak - which is what the poz.hiv hack during #DropKiwiFarms was supposed to do. #DropKiwiFarms were openly blackmailing ISPs, openly tweeting out 48 hour ultimatums to them, openly threatening to show up at their offices to attack their workers going into work, openly threatening to doxx and beat up KF users, openly calling for someone to murder Null, etc. Furthermore, both Caraballo and LFJ are privileged enough to have taken KF to court themselves, or to fund someone else's lolsuit against KF, if they felt they had a case against the site. Caraballo never did, because he's a far left anarchist who believes in accosting SCOTUS and "be gay do crimes". LFJ did sue Flow Chemical in Australia, but he had to resort to such forum shopping and libel tourism to sneak his way through the legal system and get a default judgement. LFJ knew that he did not have a case against KF in the US itself where hate speech is protected and Null can personally disavow whatever individual Kiwis are posting under Section 230. #DropKiwiFarms just want to use their own brand of thuggery against what they claim are thugs. That is not the way of a lawful system.

I hope that answers your question. I know I posed even more questions in return, but I'm just trying to show you what a fair and balanced view of both sides would look like in this case. Both Kiwis and TRAs think their own cause is righteous and that rules only stand in the way of that cause.

 

[atmos driver]

I am not a lawyer and all I know about the law is based on what I've read in the media and on legal websites/journals, not personal experience. As for your question, that depends on what you mean with "a patently criminal organization". Are they an official registered "organization", or are they just loose individuals that appear to act in concert, like an organization would? Can their structure as an organization be proven, or is it implied?

Next, are they already found to be a "patently criminal" organization? What is their track record, legally? Is there a history of lolsuits, convictions and prosecutions in which they were proven to be "patently criminal"? Or are they just rumoured be engaged in crime, but is the law simply late to catch up with what they're actually doing? Is the purpose of the lolsuit to show the court of what they did, or to remind the court of what they were already caught doing?

Next, can a criminal organization have other crimes committed against it, as in "censorship-oriented cybercriminal activities" specifically? It should go without saying that criminals routinely commit crimes against other criminals in the criminal underworld, which is why the criminal underworld is itself a problem as it tends to increase the amount of crime and law-breaking.

If an "organization" is acting in a "patently criminal" way, or is perceived to be doing so, then people who are either victims or bystanders of that organization might decide to undertake various activities against that organization, aimed at stopping them from committing more crimes. Part of that campaign might include denying that criminal organization a public presence, which isn't cybercriminal in and of itself, but might violate inalienable rights, because even criminals and perceived criminals have a right to claim their innocence in a public forum.

However, even in righteously resisting a patently criminal organization, their opponents aren't allowed to break the law themselves in doing so. If their opponents resort to breaking the law in resisting that organization, they themselves are effectively in the process of bringing about a new criminal organization of their own.

With regards to KF itself, the questions I would ask myself would be 1) was the #DropKiwiFarms campaign absolutely necessary? 2) Wasn't there another way for #DropKiwiFarms to achieve their aims, that did not involve committing cybercrimes? and 3) Were the cybercrimes committed by #DropKiwiFarms against KF proportional to what they aimed to achieve? (Whatever that was, deplatforming KF, avenging trans people, etc) My personal answer to all these questions is NO. You don't get to openly blackmail entire ISPs with DDoS attacks just because you want to target one single website that you've already hacked with the aim of causing a user data-leak - which is what the poz.hiv hack during #DropKiwiFarms was supposed to do. #DropKiwiFarms were openly blackmailing ISPs, openly tweeting out 48 hour ultimatums to them, openly threatening to show up at their offices to attack their workers going into work, openly threatening to doxx and beat up KF users, openly calling for someone to murder Null, etc. Furthermore, both Caraballo and LFJ are privileged enough to have taken KF to court themselves, or to fund someone else's lolsuit against KF, if they felt they had a case against the site. Caraballo never did, because he's a far left anarchist who believes in accosting SCOTUS and "be gay do crimes". LFJ did sue Flow Chemical in Australia, but he had to resort to such forum shopping and libel tourism to sneak his way through the legal system and get a default judgement. LFJ knew that he did not have a case against KF in the US itself where hate speech is protected and Null can personally disavow whatever individual Kiwis are posting under Section 230. #DropKiwiFarms just want to use their own brand of thuggery against what they claim are thugs. That is not the way of a lawful system.

I hope that answers your question. I know I posed even more questions in return, but I'm just trying to show you what a fair and balanced view of both sides would look like in this case. Both Kiwis and TRAs think their own cause is righteous and that rules only stand in the way of that cause.

I've never seen a person get in trouble for hacking a pedophile or related website and then making a big public deal about it. Then again, they were never sued by the pedophiles to my knowledge.

I think the difference btw the pedophile sites and kiwifarms is the pedophile people are more worried about jail time. Not that kiwis aren't. I don't really see Josh showing up to any court hearing in person. Not because of vigilantism, but he probably doesn't want to be held criminally accountable for his actions. And where safe harbor laws don't apply. His website wasn't build to be a generic gossip site. It was built to be the "chris chan wiki forums". A place to stalk, harass, and wish harm upon an autistic, non-public-figure that 4chan found funny. I don't think it would be that difficult for Chris-Chan and a handful of other people to put Null and others behind bars if they had gathered evidence. But that's just my opinion and it may not be popular here.

 

[polonium]

I don't think it would be that difficult for Chris-Chan and a handful of other people to put Null and others behind bars if they had gathered evidence. But that's just my opinion and it may not be popular here.

null in the prison shower would be the only time mutt's law was justified.

 

[VAIDS Victim]

Null has been whining and griping about this shadowy cabal of trannies who know every tech CEO's personal phone number, and break into his house and make his coke go flat and pick all the pepperoni off his pizza for years now but has he provided any actual evidence?

You can't prove it because it was me.

I don't really see Josh showing up to any court hearing in person. Not because of vigilantism, but he probably doesn't want to be held criminally accountable for his actions.

I think he just doesn't want people to see how much fatter he is than Ralph.

 

[The Gays From LA]

There is no fucking way Null will ever show up in court himself. That's what he's paying Hardin for. Null always finds another male, who represents an idealized version of himself, to hide behind. This is what he has done throughout his life, and Hardin is just the latest front for Null.

 

[KampungBoy]

There is no fucking way Null will ever show up in court himself. That's what he's paying Hardin for. Null always find another male, who represents an idealized version of himself, to hide behind. This is what he has done throughout his life, and Hardin is just the latest front for Null.

He has had a long list of e-daddies you are certainly right. It's really too bad this isn't the sort of thing that would be broadcast I would kill to watch that.

 

[Crimson Fucker]

I hope the location and date gets leaked to the press.

 

[The Gays From LA]

On the topics of fair use criticism of porn uploaded to Kiwifarms as a form of "porno-laundering", Epik, banks, and morality clauses...

Here's what Null the trad-LARPer doesn't understand: a lot of banks consider porn to be so toxic and crime-adjacent that they've put morality clauses in their contracts, forcing their customers to not use their systems for any sex work related activity. Morality Clauses started out in the entertainment business and are often used in pre-nups, but they've made their way into different kinds of business contracts, including banking contracts.

Morals clause - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The Benefits And Risks Of Moral Clauses In Business Contracts – The BlackWell Firm

theblackwellfirm.com

https://law.usnews.com/law-firms/advice/articles/what-is-a-morality-clause

Has Null the trad-LARPer ever considered the possibility that the reason why Epik doesn't want any porn at all (not just CP, ANY, as stated in their ToS) is because their bank doesn't allow them to? And that other ISPs likewise don't want to do business with KF because the forum is proveably full of porn?

I was listening to this Democrat OnlyFans whore on this podcast interview with Dylan Burns and Riley Graceless NoSchlong (one of the Caraballo-associated trannie lawyers), and the point she makes here is actually very relevant to KF and Epik: "A lot of banks have morality clauses... Major banks, Bank of America has done it, Chase has done it. Credit Union seem to be a little bit so-and-so, that's a lot of advice a lot of us get, it's to start banking with them. We're not allowed on apps like PayPal, we're not allowed on Venmo."... she kinda sounds just like Null bitching about his banking situation, no?

Indeed, there was a thread on Reddit for OnlyFans whores, telling them who to bank with (deleted of course!):

https://www.reddit.com/r/onlyfansadvice/comments/11owk6a

Archived: https://archive.is/MIScP

Here's a 10 months old post from an e-whore celebrating the fact that they found a bank willing to do business with them:

Hey everyone! I know that we all have issues with morality clauses for banks so I did some legwork of actually calling some and asking directly "are your regulations sex worker friendly?" and, after many embarrassed bank tellers, I HAVE AN ANSWER.

UMPQUA BANK OF THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST DOES NOT HAVE ANY CLAUSES AGAINST LEGAL SEX WORK. THIS IS A SAFER OPTION THAN WELLS FARGO OR BANK OF AMERICA OR ANY OF THE HUGE MAINSTREAM BANKS.

Granted, there is nothing saying they can't change their rules down the line but for now, as of today I have it confirmed through them directly that there is nothing in their clauses that prevents this kind of work.

I really hope this helps someone <3 because I know I was freaking the hell out over banks closing accounts.

https://www.reddit.com/r/CreatorsAdvice/comments/136v6q6

Archived: https://archive.is/Y4y4q

LMAO, if Null is still looking for a bank in the US he should actually start reading all these sex worker threads, looks like they might have some good leads for him, LMAOOO!

If that OnlyFans whore from the video above is also a lawyer and is bitching about the banks, why doesn't Null get her on his legal team? She literally says that the banks have crippled Section 230 with their morality clauses! Isn't that argument like music to the ears of Null and Hardin, even if it's from the dirty mouth of an OnlyFans whore?

Is Null still gonna gaslight Kiwis into thinking that Epik wouldn't have blocked his domain if they kept uploading all that porn onto the Farms? Does Null insist that Epik should've risked their bank account just for the sake of Null's Righteous Quest against the LGBT, which apparently uncludes cross-posting every LGBT porn image to KF?

Null really should ask himself why he needs to archive all this porn on his forum under the guise of shocking the normies into awareness of the evils of the LGBT. Do you really need to cross-post all of Orion's trannie porn onto KF, when you already have all of his DMs where he's caught in 4k, where he openly admits to being a predator and committing CSA over and over? What does cross-posting all of Orion's trannie porn contribute to the thread, when you already have all the evidence of him telling on himself?

Spoiler: Actual examples from the Orion thread

Here is the Orion thread (replace the X with whatever top level domain they're using now, I have no idea where they are with this anymore):

https://kiwifarms.X/threads/giggly-goonclown-orion-grant-passmore.169332/

Archived: https://archive.is/hmJeN

Here's an example of a Kiwi cross-posting literally all of Orion's trannie-porn into his thread, on the 3rd page of the thread: "you can just show them his own porn videos (attached below) to prove his degeneracy"

He was dumb enough to post pornography of himself gooning/dildoing while his face was clearly visible so you can just show them his own porn videos (attached below) to prove his degeneracy instead of trying to convince anyone verbally:

https://archive.is/iNYTr#selection-6491.1-6491.236

Why would you need to "show them[? LE?] his porn to prove his degeneracy"... when you already have all his DMs of him admitting to multiple crimes?

Then another KF user shows up, who proceeds to archive all of Orion's trannie porn in a .zip file on two different other file sharing websites, one of which is a .ru Russian website:

Due to the risk of him going down the DFE route combined with the file size limitation on this site I've downloaded and re-uploaded all files from the site you provided to some third party sites:

https://archive.is/E4MIJ#selection-2071.0-2071.195

So not only do you have Orion's trannie porn being shared on KF itself, there's also a spreading effect: from there it gets copied onto two other websites as well, including a Russian one.

Another Kiwi then responds to the above post with the .zip archives, telling the guy to get the .zip files archived on KF itself. He tells the other user to contact "Null or a different jannie", who usually don't allow such large .zips to be posted on KF but who will apparently make an exception for this .zip posted onto KF, even and despite the large file-size:

Ping Josh or a different Janny. For stuff like this they make exceptions for the file size limits

https://archive.is/E4MIJ#selection-6067.0-6067.97

Clearly whomever needed to upload .zip files of pornography knew that they could ping Null or the moderators about it, and they would make an exception on the file size rules just to allow all of that trannie porn to be archived on the forum.

Does Null really insist that cross-posting a pedophile's entire back-catalogue of trannie porn onto the KF - either as individual video files to be played onto the forum itself, or as one large .zip file to be downloaded - is somehow a form of fair use criticism? No, you are just wholesale re-posting and spreading all of his porn at that point... on an ISP that very clearly stated in their ToS they don't want ANY of this.

Null, you really need to understand that an ISP is not going to risk their bank account just for the sake of your forum being filled to the brim with some pedophile's trannie porn posted in threefold. If you and your users' refuse to understand how this fact alone - a commercial business like an ISP needs to have a bank account to do business - gives Epik a very strong argument against you and your forum in court, I don't know what the hell to tell you to talk some sense into you.

 

[thefrogninja]

There is no fucking way Null will ever show up in court himself. That's what he's paying Hardin for. Null always finds another male, who represents an idealized version of himself, to hide behind. This is what he has done throughout his life, and Hardin is just the latest front for Null.

I would love to see Josh waddle his way into court with the best oversized, rented suit he could find. Hair slicked back with his natural grease.

 

[polonium]

I would love to see Josh waddle his way into court with the best oversized, rented suit he could find. Hair slicked back with his natural grease.

I like it when fatties get the only suit that fits around their gut but then it's way oversized everywhere else and they end up with jackets with giant sleeves and huge shoulders and it makes them look even more ridiculous.

 

[VAIDS Victim]

Someone posted a thread calling out null for his grifting and Kiwis are coping so hard:

https://kiwifarms.st/threads/null-isnt-going-to-win-his-dropkiwifarms-lawsuit.184379/

Spoiler: First page

https://kiwifarms.st/threads/null-isnt-going-to-win-his-dropkiwifarms-lawsuit.184379/

https://archive.ph/kcVku

 

[The Gays From LA]

It's pathetic how Kiwis just gave Null $150k, double the original goal of 75k, but literally within a day he was saying: "Geez, thanks y'all... but that's not enough! I need moar!". He won't even disclose which the firm in Australia is asking $1000 an hour to appeal Vincent's default judgement. No one is even asking why Vincent can't raise any money on his own, or create his own fundraiser to chip in with Null's.

Null is sneaky, so he doesn't verbalize the actual asking of the half a million dollars. Instead he mentions that number on MATI and leaves it dangling out there, so Kiwis will catch his drift and keep donating.

I believe Kiwis are delirious to such an extent that they'll give it to him, you watch. This has become like a feeding frenzy, where Kiwis think "Null is gunna get the troons". Mind you, this is supposed to be the most anal, nitpicky, critical group of people on the internet, who will tear everyone else to shreds over the slightest detail that seems off, but they are willing to suspend all disbelief when it comes to enabling Null.

If Null goes to court and Epik, Caraballo & LFJ block everything with either anti-SLAPP or 230 immunity (in Epik's case), don't say I didn't warn you.

 

[Nektar Geist]

https://archive.is/5uHzH

Blow to the Kwiffar wanting to donate to joshy's fund for paying off debts, not for fightin' fer freezin' peeeecheezzz. I got to ask: Why now? Shurely the bank would have picked up on this earlier?