Quora markets itself as a platform to “share and grow the world’s knowledge” where “300 million users a month” find answers to questions across every conceivable topic. The Mountain View, California-based question-and-answer platform, founded by Adam D’Angelo and Charlie Cheever in June 2009 and valued at $2 billion, hosts millions of user-generated discussions that rank prominently in Google search results.
Yet beneath this knowledge-sharing mission lies a platform riddled with arbitrary content moderation, weak appeal processes, and near-absolute Section 230 immunity that shields Quora from liability for defamatory user content. The 2016 David Silver case established Quora’s legal imperviousness to defamation claims, while the 2018 data breach affecting 100 million users exposed systemic security failures that spawned ongoing class action litigation. BBB complaints reveal patterns of unexplained account bans, collapsed answers without justification, and moderation decisions that users describe as “pure BS” and politically biased.
Email info@respectnetwork.com or Call (859) 667-1073 to Remove Negative Posts, Reviews and Content. PAY us only after RESULT.
The David Silver Case: Section 230 Immunity Perfected
In 2016, investment banker David Silver sued Quora after users posted allegedly defamatory statements about his business practices on the platform. Someone had asked “Has anyone worked with or heard of David Silver at Santa Fe Capital?” and the responses included claims that Silver cashed duplicate checks and failed to deliver promised services. Silver claimed the accounts posting these statements were fictitious and that Quora employees “could have been” the actual authors.
After Silver sent takedown notices in December 2014 and August 2015 that Quora refused to honor, he filed a pro se libel and defamation lawsuit in New Mexico federal court. The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed Section 230 immunity, ruling that Quora qualified as an interactive computer service hosting third-party content. The court noted Silver’s claims “turn entirely on Quora’s decision not to remove the allegedly defamatory statements” and rejected Silver’s argument that the Communications Decency Act doesn’t apply to websites.
The David Silver precedent demonstrates Quora’s absolute shield from liability for user-generated defamatory content, even when presented with evidence of false statements and formal removal requests. Section 230 protection extends to platforms that exercise editorial control, meaning Quora’s content moderation policies don’t diminish its immunity.
The 2018 Data Breach: 100 Million Users Compromised
On December 3, 2018, Adam D’Angelo announced that a malicious third party had gained unauthorized access to Quora’s systems, compromising data from approximately 100 million users—nearly half the platform’s entire user base at the time. Exposed information included names, email addresses, encrypted passwords, IP addresses, user IDs, account settings, imported data from linked social networks, public and non-public content, direct messages, and upvotes/downvotes.
A class action lawsuit filed on December 21, 2018, in the Northern District of California alleged privacy and negligence claims under California’s Invasion of Privacy Act, Unfair Competition Law, and Consumers Legal Remedies Act, along with Colorado and New Jersey consumer protection statutes. Named plaintiff Jeri Connor spent money purchasing identity protection services and approximately an hour daily monitoring her credit as a result of the breach.
The court greenlighted negligence claims in December 2020, finding that time and money spent on credit monitoring constituted cognizable harm. The court rejected Quora’s argument that injury allegations were merely speculative, allowing the case to proceed on claims that Quora failed to safeguard personal identity information. The data breach litigation remains ongoing, with Quora defeating attempts at forensic examination of plaintiff devices but facing continued scrutiny over systemic security failures.
Email info@respectnetwork.com or Call (859) 667-1073 to Remove Negative Posts, Reviews and Content. PAY us only after RESULT.
BBB Complaints and Moderation Chaos
Quora’s Better Business Bureau profile contains numerous complaints about unexplained account bans, arbitrarily collapsed content, and moderation decisions that users describe as biased and inconsistent. One complainant wrote: “Not long after that SINGLE post telling the idiot his racism is wrong, Quora started suggesting ‘Spaces’ to me. All being racist such as groups called ‘It’s okay to be White’…Something is really screwed up with that.”
Another user complained: “This has been the first month in 6 years I haven’t been able to generate content for Quora, and it’s solely the business itself that is preventing me from doing so. If things like this have no way to get fixed, there will be no reason for the majority of Quora users to bother writing answers there anymore.” Multiple complaints reference answers being collapsed or removed after years of accumulating upvotes and followers, with appeals resulting in generic “we’re reviewing your account” responses that produce no resolution.
The pattern emerging from BBB complaints mirrors broader user frustration documented across online forums: Quora’s moderation operates through automated systems and paid teams that make inconsistent decisions, collapse answers based on ideological bias, and provide no meaningful appeals process. Users report receiving violation notices for content that clearly doesn’t violate stated policies, with appeal buttons offering only “I understand your policy” rather than actual dispute mechanisms.
When Quora Content Qualifies for Removal
Legitimate removal from Quora requires demonstrating content violates platform policies or constitutes defamation actionable against the content creator directly. Quora’s policies prohibit harassment, spam, personal information disclosure (doxxing), hate speech, and impersonation. Content requesting removal of questions specifically about an individual can succeed if the subject makes the request, though Quora allows questions about lawsuits or media-mentioned topics.
Defamation cases against Quora itself face insurmountable Section 230 barriers established in the David Silver precedent. However, defamation claims against individual content creators remain viable when false statements about business fraud, regulatory violations, or criminal conduct can be documented. Recent enforcement trends show both SEC and FTC pursuing fraud with unprecedented aggression. In fiscal year 2024, the SEC filed 583 enforcement actions securing $8.2 billion in financial remedies, with major cases like Terraform Labs resulting in over $200 million penalties. The FTC reported consumers lost $12.5 billion to fraud in 2024, a 25% increase over 2023.
When Quora posts falsely attribute SEC enforcement actions or FTC charges to individuals facing no actual regulatory scrutiny, defamation claims against content creators become viable. The distinction lies between accurate reporting of documented fraud versus fabricated allegations unsupported by regulatory filings.
Email info@respectnetwork.com or Call (859) 667-1073 to Remove Negative Posts, Reviews and Content. PAY us only after RESULT.
Legal Pathways Beyond Platform Appeals
Quora’s internal appeal process consists of clicking an “Appeal” button on moderation notifications or using the contact form to select “I want to appeal a moderation decision.” The system reviews appeals through the same paid moderation team that made initial decisions, creating inherent conflicts of interest. Users report appeals succeeding initially only to have content removed again hours later, requiring multiple appeal cycles without achieving permanent restoration.
For defamatory content where platform appeals fail, legal options focus on the content creator rather than Quora. Cease and desist letters demanding removal can pressure individual users, though identifying anonymous account holders requires legal process. Subpoenas can compel Quora to disclose IP addresses and email metadata associated with accounts, though the platform resists such requests absent court orders.
When informal approaches fail and damages justify litigation costs, defamation lawsuits against content creators provide removal mechanisms. Court orders directing specific content removal carry enforcement power, though Quora’s cooperation depends on valid legal process served properly. The platform responds to DMCA takedown notices for copyright violations and will remove content when presented with restraining orders or injunctions from competent jurisdiction.
Working with Respect Network
Respect Network analyzes Quora posts to distinguish legitimate criticism from actionable defamation, examining whether allegations cite verifiable regulatory sources and whether business misconduct accusations have supporting documentation. When Quora posts contain demonstrably false statements about fraud, criminal charges, or regulatory enforcement that never occurred, we coordinate with defamation counsel to pursue removal through litigation targeting content creators directly.
We understand Section 230 limitations from the David Silver precedent and focus remediation efforts on identifying content authors, issuing legal demands, and pursuing defamation claims when damages justify costs. For clients facing false allegations on Quora, we provide honest assessments of removal likelihood based on content specifics and available evidence rather than making promises we can’t deliver.
Email info@respectnetwork.com or Call (859) 667-1073 to Remove Negative Posts, Reviews and Content. PAY us only after RESULT.
