But it's not, and so the treaties to which the US is party for those cases would...

ivan_gammel · 2025-08-18T07:28:02 1755502082

1. Preventing those citizens from doing illegal activities on UK soil

2. Using broader spectrum of law enforcement options if those citizens arrive in the UK

ffsm8 · 2025-08-18T08:55:56 1755507356

Blows my mind someone actually unironically makes this argument.

4chan is showing ads on their site, but if your idea had any grounds, the issue would be with the ad network, not 4chan.

While that'd be a pretty bad legal precedent too, it'd at least be coherent.

More realistically, 4chan will likely be banned by UK ISPs after a court ruling.

The previous mail was likely just to move the process forward to show they have no interest in following the UK law.

ivan_gammel · 2025-08-18T09:12:47 1755508367

>4chan is showing ads on their site, but if your idea had any grounds, the issue would be with the ad network, not 4chan.

It's hard to understand the logic of this statement. Why the ad network? 4chan business is to show ads to users while offering them a platform for conversations. What 3rd party service do they use is irrelevant unless that is by coincidence an UK company.

>More realistically, 4chan will likely be banned by UK ISPs after a court ruling.

This is exactly what my comment above means.