Do they define what constitutes a website?
Never assume, but I would guess they have realized the IP level blocking would be very problematic, so they are problem thinking something at the DNS level. Maybe they they are thinking a fully qualified domain name would be sufficient? Would they want to include all subdomains as well? Wildcarded? Otherwise a whack-a-mole's worth of dynamically created names might be problematic, and might even cause on excessive strain on DNS itself.
What if all the links went through a proxy, like a tor router or a VPN, or just a simply reflector. Do they intend to block only the ultimate destination, or all the intermediaries as well.
Does one flagged item on YouTube take down all of YouTube? Do some some sites get exemptions? Who gets paid to maintain the exemption list?
That’s like if a city has any criminals, then the entire population of that city should be arrested and are presumed guilty.
More like if anybody simply thinks that the city has a criminal, then that will happen.
It's the problematic use of word 'flagged', which given the lack of penalty for mistaken or malicious use, is very much weaker then 'accused' or 'suspected', and very close to 'may'.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Kryptryx.