I can't understand how he is still allowed to be a moderator here. It's obviously a conflict of interest. He's going around to other subs and having his position validated to him so he thinks what he's doing is ok. This subreddit is based on being completely unfiltered and democratic. And he's going around to hostile subreddits looking for ideas on how to curate. Fuck that guy. He moderates a ton of different subs. Why doesn't he leave us alone.

Some of you might not have been around for the last mod fracas. Without getting into detail, it went down much the same way. A mod tried to make overarching changes without consulting the subscribers, he and his coterie were booted unceremoniously. Scads of socks came into the sub clamoring for reinstatement. And so, those abusive mods were reinstated.

This sub is under siege from controlled opposition. This will always be the case. This sub also DOESN'T NEED MODERATION besides spam removal. But that will never happen either. Just stay vigilant and be sure to downvote/report.

Have you visited /r/uncensorship?

All posts removed by the mods here are posted there. Search for "conspiracy" to filter on our beloved sub.

Once you've done that, and have looked at the quantity, frequency, and quality of posts they remove, has your opinion changed?

That's not true. Posts have been removed and not showed up there.

As the guy who wrote the code, I'd love an example. I've never seen one not make it.

[deleted]

Participation is voluntary, and the mods felt it was important for transparency.

That's why I wrote the bot back when I was a mod.

[deleted]

Correct. There's no other way until the Reddit admins decide to allow a public mod log. The can do it, I've had several discussions with them about this, but they will not do it.

[deleted]

It's certainly better than nothing, and there currently is no other option for moderators who wish to expose their moderation activities.

[deleted]

Of course you're right. I can understand why people think were crazy in this sub, most people just can't handle the cognitive dissonance that 911 causes. I think its a natural reaction for weak people to make fun of us. If they took us seriously, they'd have to question their entire worldview. For that reason, I think its completely fine for them to have their own subreddit to make fun of us and I don't give a fuck. Go do your own thing in your own fucking place and leave me alone and were all good.

But for one of the mods here to go to another sub to ask how to "make it better"? What the fuck is that? And he also unbanned a bunch of people. Im banned from posting here and this is my sub and I consider it my community. And I've never been given an explanation as to why I can't post anymore. So one of the mods from my community went over to an openly hostile community and unbanned them, but im here fucking banned in my own community. Its such a fucking fraud.

And I've never been given an explanation as to why I can't post anymore. So one of the mods from my community went over to an openly hostile community and unbanned them, but im here fucking banned in my own community. Its such a fucking fraud.

Yep. That's been my experience. I've seen good contributors like Amos_Quitos and Max something or rather, get banned recently for shit they should not have been banned for (false allegations of "racism"), and these trolls get to post here unmolested.

It's a Psy Op, that's why. Cognitive infiltration of people deemed to be a threat to the powers that be.

well said

I do not agree with 911 truthers at all, but I will die in a shallow grave to allow them to voice their opinion. I will downvote the thread and debate those on here who believe that, but it should be allowed to be voiced

Of course you're right. I can understand why people think were crazy in this sub, most people just can't handle the cognitive dissonance that 911 causes. I think its a natural reaction for weak people to make fun of us. If they took us seriously, they'd have to question their entire worldview. For that reason, I think its completely fine for them to have their own subreddit to make fun of us and I don't give a fuck. Go do your own thing in your own fucking place and leave me alone and were all good.

Yeah. No.

You should check out the definition of narcissism, though.

Wat?

Am I correct in this?

There's practically one for every major sub, especially the so-called circlejerk subs. /r/fitnesscirclejerk , /r/Gamingcirclejerk , etc.

Do any of them make fun of individuals with open hostility or are they using a higher form of humor? I don't think /r/frugal_jerk has a ritual of going to /r/frugal to call them retards or troll their comments.

You know come to think of it /r/pcmasterrace got completely banned for much less than what /r/conspiratard has going on.

/r/againstmensrights?

/r/conspiratard kinda goes after conspiracies in general tho

There's /circlejerk but I guess it exists to mock/satirize the entirety of reddit, it's dominant trends and language anyways.

You are incorrect, there are a lot of smaller subreddits that have other smaller subreddits making fun of them.

the ONLY subreddit in ALL of reddit that was actually created to make fun of and ridicule another subreddit.

You forgot /r/ShitRedditSays (which actually ridicules all of reddit), /r/AntiSRS and /r/SRSSucks (both of which exist solely to oppose /r/ShitRedditSays), /r/AgainstMensRights, /r/SRDBroke, /r/AgainstAtheismPlus, the list goes on.

Has he offered an explanlination for his actions yet?

The topic he started in r/tard deserves no explanation. It is it's own explanation. The work of a coward who is following orders of other cowards.

Yes, this subreddit certainly isn't the abusive one...

solidwhetstone told me in PM that they did this "to understand them".

Theyre ignorant trolls. Nothing to understand. Seriously just browse some of their post histories. Ignorant as fuck

Yuck. I think we understand them pretty well.

A couple hours ago I clicked his username to see what he was up to and he was yukking it up on srd about this whole mess, getting sympathy from them about having to deal with us. Srd and conspitatard are cut from the same cloth. I don't think we should let this go. He's shown no remorse or understanding. He needs to step down.

he could leverage it for career gain or to pad his CV somehow.

Do you honestly believe that shit? "Padding" your resume/CV with information about a forum you moderated? Might be padding if you're a complete loser with nothing else and no previous work experience to put on your resume.

Seems like such a silly concept to me.

I don't know, but some people sincerely believe they are trying to help. I honestly don't see reaching out to another subreddit, even conspiratard, as bad. I mean, he didn't make them mods here, or anything overly silly. He simply asked a group critical of this subreddit what they would seriously change if given the option. Doesn't mean he was going to do everything they said, and thus far it's important to note he's done nothing. But straight up criticism, from the people who would be the harshest, does have some value in it. Take all of it seriously? Hell no. But be fair enough to realize recurring themes and take an open-minded look at them? To me that's a good thing.

But I'm obviously in the minority opinion here, and I mostly just lurk this sub. It doesn't really matter which direction this issue goes, but I would consider this whole mess a gross over-reaction by the /r/conspiracy subscribers. I mean, people aren't mad because he made any changes, they are mad because he even talked to them. It's silly and childish.

No, he has just been indoctrinated since birth and real truth is a threat to who he is. Not his fault, but certainly should not have a position of authority.

I don't think we should let this go. He's shown no remorse or understanding. He needs to step down.

upvoted for that

He said he found it humorous and doesn't intend to step down.

He should definitely step down.

Conspiratard is a hate group against us. Enough said.

I'm sure he thinks it's funny that we're all getting riled up. The thing is, a lot of people take this sub seriously. We're genuinely concerned about the state of the country/world. I understand that some theories are farfetched, but the concern is always legitimate. Fuck this guy.

Who are you asserting is 'us'?

/r/conspiracy

Their whole sub is about ridiculing and hating conspiracy theorists.

This was an extremely well-written explanation as to why his behavior was beyond inappropriate.

The only thing I don't understand is why you would support not only the CSS he unveiled, but the way in which he unveiled it. He stepped on the toes even of the other moderators with that. Quite remarkable the way he carries himself.

I supported him because I'm a graphic designer and I know how difficult and time consuming it was, and I didn't get why people were upset.

It looks bad and is hard to read. That outweighs any other factor such as, "making bad and hard-to-read layouts is difficult and time-consuming labor."

Objective example: If a thread is collapsed, it "out-dents." If you've studied UX and computer-human interfaces, that isn't a matter that can be chalked up to taste, that's incompetent.

So from a professional standpoint, I stuck up to him

I suggest you ditch the freemason/union mind-set, and instead read up on things like UX eye-tracking studies, P250 brain wave measuring, and objective, quantitative measures of good interfaces.

Even if you only read studies on fonts and reading comprehension, you can recognize an incompetent CHI design such as that which Solidwhetstone presented. The font choice alone was incompetent.

But I see Solidwhetstone is from Chicago, and I am from Seattle. So the standards of competence at UX are different.

because it sucks to put time and effort into something like that and have no one say anything good about it.

There is a big difference between a profession and a charity.

This more recent stuff is more about the spirit of the place itself, the content, the essence, and for that its harder to be forgiving.

I think it is your "union" mind-set that is preventing you from seeing his CSS transgression as a violation of the spirit of this place. I do see it as a glaring foul.

It's really like the guys from piratebay going to the MPAA to ask for advice on how to do better.

It is a lot worse than that. Some of the people who attack /r/conspiracy are criminals or in their pay. This is not a social event and an intelligent person does not seek out the approval or company of criminals.

In my mind the two issues are pretty separate

There is something obvious they have in common: Solidwhetstone has decided that he needs to change the appeal of this subreddit. He apparently wants it to appeal more to the type of person who would not likely agree with many conspiracy theories.

If it was as "sanitary" and "sane" as the rest of reddit I wouldn't like it nor would I use it.

That's right. It would become an emptied shell, populated mostly by conspiracy nay-sayers who appreciate the mass-media-like production values.

I'm not a freemason. I'm a freelancer.

I didn't imagine you'd been literally hoodwinked by the lodge. I was describing a mind-set of "professionals stick up for each other, regardless of the quality of the work." To be honest, this characterization is totally unfair to Freemasons, but possibly fair to some labor unions.

What is this?

CHI stands for Computer Human Interface. That was a little quiz. Get some issues of SIGCHI from the 70's and 80's.

It's Arial. Again. What? You prefer Verdana? I mean....ok.

Well, let's get back to this after you've studied some psychometric CHI reports.

I am from Cairo, learned in Germany. What's your point?

My point is that people who live on the West Coast of the United States have been blessed by exposure to a lot of highly-advanced psychometric research from the military-industrial complex.

I'm not in a union.

I didn't imagine you were in a union. Again, I am refering to a mind-set of sticking up for hard work done with poor form.

I simply respect the effort because I know what goes into it.

This.

Fair enough. Agreed on this point.

I am glad we could shed some light on this whole disturbing thing together.

I would say it's more like the MPAA going to piratebay to ask for advice on how it could change its practices in order to reduce the need for piracy. Pirates have helped the gaming industry understand how some practices intended to curb piracy actually curb sales and promote piracy. As a result we are now seeing workable sales models that remove the incentive to pirate. Likewise with this sub - by asking the ones who criticize us the most how we could better improve so they have less to criticize, we might learn a thing or two.

Because there was some useful advice given by a few users. Namely - the accusation of 'shill' is too often used like the Godwin's Law of /r/conspiracy. It's used to derail and discredit without requiring any kind of burden of proof and is often used indiscriminately on anyone who doesn't apply to the particular groupthink at hand. If we consider this accusation to be a personal attack and moderate it accordingly, it might cut down on a lot of derailment. The call for better evidence is difficult to actually adhere to, considering that the things we are dealing with, if true, have been subject to a systematic campaign of evidence removal and suppression. It means that even insiders are going to have a hard time providing the kind of evidence that regular society demands, without getting themselves killed.

If someone requires proof to entertain an idea they are not suited for discussions on ideas.

Dear OP,

Ive been hanging around /r/conspiracy for a little while now and I have no idea who the mods are and I certainly don't understand nor am I privy to any of the "politics" that go on here.

But your post was pretty fucking awesome! I get some good information here that I cant/don't get elsewhere and reading some of the submissions here is really enjoyable.

I completely agree with you about why people come here and the uniqueness of the genre.

/u/solidwhetstone, please step down. Please.

why?

There is no bigger antagonist to any other subreddit than /r/conspiratard is to /r/conspiracy. It exists solely to ridicule and undermine any and everything that is discussed here. Their activity spikes during big incidents, as everyone else's, but they don't foster discussion. Instead they only thrive on fishing out content and circle-jerk against it.

The fact that you fail to see that makes you unfit to moderate. I'm sorry, but you simply haven't gone through the ups and downs of this place enough to manage it. You haven't suffered through the extreme content dilution, disinformation, smurf accounts, and other harmful attempts against /r/conspiracy as many veterans here. If you had, you'd never even consider asking those who stifle discussion for advice.

It's not personal, it's just that the mod position should go to someone a bit more experienced.

Well I'm of the opinion that different mods bring different things to the subreddit- and as long as things like community guidelines changes are made as a team- then everything will be ok. I have never made a single decision about this subreddit without first getting the sign off from the mod team.

If you're asking me if I should resign because I posted a discussion thread on another subreddit- well I find that a bit confusing. Would you also want to ban a moderator of /r/libertarian for posting in /r/conservative? Are we not free to post discussions in subreddits we disagree with? Are we not free enough to do that? Legitimately curious as to your answer on that.

You're still ignorant to the relationship between the subreddits. The /r/Libertarian and /r/Conservative analogy is false. It's more like asking /r/LibertariansAreRetarded for advice on how to moderate /r/Libertarian.

It's not the act in and of itself, it's the fact that you don't even recognize that you did something terribly wrong. This place has hung on a silk thread for at least two years from all the controversy, and when a mod does something as questionable as you did, it shakes up the entire foundation, which is so fragile to begin with.

Just know that the vast majority here do not approve of you as a mod. It's up to you if you feel that it's worth persevering.

the vast majority here do not approve of you as a mod

Out of 200,000 people, only a very small % have spoken out against me. I don't think you've got the correct numbers there.

you did something terribly wrong

We will have to disagree here. I had the best of intentions, I was cordial, and made no rule changes on my own.

Because the rest of us haven't voiced up yet. Seriously, you do not understand the purpose of this subreddit and are unfit to perform your duty. You admittedly barely even go through the comments often yet have the audacity to reach out to people whose sole purpose is to discredit this sub. The fact you do not understand this is just one more reason to go. Have some dignity and admit this subreddit overwhelmingly wants you out. Show some humility please.

From what I can see there's about only 5 - 10 very vocal people who I keep seeing repeatedly in every post on it, and curiously a bunch of guys who I've never seen post here before until now...

5-10?

votes on the petition for ppl wanting him gone is 3/1

is currently 2067 - 753

You unbanned users with discussing it with other mods. That's a decision. Two of them, actually.

I have also banned users without consulting them. I file that under 'decisions we make that don't always need to get team approval.' That said, before I unban anyone else- I will be discussing with the team how far I am able to go on that front. I believe in second chances.

If you were a mod in a libertarian subreddit and went into the conservative subreddit and asked what changes should be made to the libertarian sub, people would be upset. I am not saying you step down, but I think it was a horrible decision on your part. It has made me and a lot of others question what your true intentions are as a mod of this sub.

Well look at it this way- If you had a store called 'Bob's woodworking' and somebody setup a website called 'bobswoodworkingsucks.com' might you be interested in knowing why they did that? Could there be some merit or some feud that caused that? I don't know what circumstances caused /r/conspiritard to come into existence, but I am of the belief that there can be some level of diplomacy that occurs. You might think me naive for believing so, but that's how I feel.

I wouldn't ask bobswoodworkingsucks.com how to run my store, no.

I think you are mistaking /r/conspiracy as a place for open exchange, you can see the response to you revealing /r/conspiracy for what it actually is -- an echo chamber.

The reason that /r/conspiratard exists is because there isn't open discussion and dissection of ideas here, even though most claim that they want open discussion. Part of the echo chamber illusion requires that people believe that most others agree with them, and that there is room for open discussion.

There is no room for real discussion or introspection. That is why everyone wants you to step down.

Yes, I think you are right. We all need to do a better job at being open and critical of ourselves. We can't all be right 100% of the time (I know I'm not).

Anyone that insults an entire subreddit should not be allowed to moderate that subreddit.

"/r/conspiracy members think they can do no wrong. "

http://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/1tju4s/something_nobody_seems_to_consider/ce8qrw7

How is what you quoted an insult? I'd call it being realistic.

try it like this,

"u/Rockran thinks he can do no wrong."

Using general statements is even more inappropriate than just insulting one person. For a moderator to display a derogatory opinion about an entire subreddit betrays unhealthy motivations and immaturity of thought.

That's an accurate criticism. I can be a bit up myself at times.

No, its very clearly an insult against the whole user base of /r/conspiracy.

[deleted]

Just looked through some of his recent comments and apparently he's been busy unbanning Conspiratard posters. Yet another reason for him to go.

He is probably just a lightning rod account anyway.

BipoloarBear0's South Pole?

The day I exposed the Bear Boy, SWS banned me AND "disappeared" the thread because (he claimed) I told him he was "stupid" for his failure to understand a simple play on words.

Flytape reinstated the thread and rescinded my ban - hours before he resigned as a mod.

That was the only interaction I have had with SWS, but I must say thatit left me VERY unimpressed with his professionalism, and made me suspect that he was yielding to pressure from the rogue ///news mod BipolarBear0.

If you have an agenda or are too thin skinned to handle even the mildest of criticisms in the midst of a heated debate, should you really be modding?

$0.02

I was banned by flytape as well, he was probably a lightning rod account too. Y'know just an account for the mods to do their dirty work with in order to keep up appearances that their hands are clean.

btw I informed all the other mods of my ban and they just sort of laughed it off.

Agree 100% come on ppl, it has probably always been the same dude from day 1.

Yep. We can't trust anything about the way reddit is run.

Going to them for advice is like the owner of a steak shop going to McDonalds to ask how to cook meat.

Well said.

Conspiratard is a rare example of a subreddit specifically created to ridicule another subreddit. That's a pretty dumb and low way to use your spare time. Thus, if you have to ask such a group of people for advice you're even dumber than the dumbasses making up that sub.

I don't know if it's rare. There are quite a few that are meant to anti subs to others.

Nolibertarianspam

Paultards

Etc.

i bet the tards are still masturbating furiously over the fact they got one of our mods to goto them for advice...

WTF?

As someone who came here because of #2, I agree with your well thought out assessment.

One only needs to look at my post history the last week over in that thread and see the argument style and ignorance that permeates over at conspiritard.

The use strawman, Scotsman fallacy, hyperbole to take what is obvious in your statement and make it racist/anti-semitic or an opportunity to type vulgar put downs.

A couple of my posts there were simply bait to snag these responses and like a simple fish, they bit.

I also nominate /u/fivesensesarereal as a new Mod for /r/conspiracy

From his post history, he is level headed (for the most part) and not extreme on the conspiracy spectrum

You guys fail to see that rants like the OP here are what send people away. /r/conspiritard was created because people on this thread can be immature and unreasonable, so he talks to the jaded people who left here for there to find out why.. AND... you guys get all juvenile and sling accusations and want him gone. Its people like you OP and the others that post 3 thread a day about how there are shills and enemies infiltrating your pathetic little groupspeak conversations.

You don't think it's an issue this subreddit is looked down on? It'd be benefical for society as whole to have the threads on this subreddit be about real or even remotely credible conspiracies. There are real conspiracies out there, and they are drowned out by all the unsourced blogspam and debunked pseudoscience.

It might be just an intrest to you, but this stuff is actually of importance and real world consequence. Currently it's impossible to tell if single true, fact-backed conspiracy was getting supressed on this subreddit, and even if it wasn't, no one outside this subreddit would care. I'd be dismissed based on the general post quality.

/r/conspiracy being a conspiracy to drown out true conspiracies by managing the visibility, both by having them downvoted and discrediting the communuty with circlejerking, racism and threats is more likely to be true than most content here.

Case in point:

4) In this time a lot of criticism popped up surrounding this forum.

5) Often that criticism has been proven wrong. (See: Snowden docs)

It's not up to you to decide which conspiracy is true or false for everyone else. It's impossible to label this community in any way, I dare you to try. Because this subreddit is not about a group, it's about YOU. It's about what YOU think is true for YOURSELF. There is no political agenda here at all besides speaking your mind. This is not a political movement for change, nor is it a library to fact check everything stated, because that's YOUR job.

People will always look down on fringe ideas, which is the biggest reason for this subreddit existing. This is a place where one doesn't give a fuck about perception when discussing, and claiming that people here are racist is simply false. I can't recall reading a racist post, unlike what I see every single day in /r/WTF. Being against the state of Israel is not racist, and you're free to argue against any similar claims that are made.

If you're going to make a post on such a serious topic, could you at least form coherent thoughts?

Conspiracies are an interest. It's a genre of thought.

No, conspiracies are not some hobby. "Conspiracy hypothesizing" is, however. A "genre of thought" related to conspiracies might be "curiosity" or "paranoia".

It isn't a 'hate group.'

On paper, no. Racism against Jews is extremely prevalent (look at the latest posts about a Fed appointee). As soon as someone with an Israeli or Jewish background shows up in the spotlight, it's open season on them. I've yet to see "Christian judge presiding over altar boy rape case!" or something along those lines.

This is why conspiracy has grown from around 40k when I stared using it to 204k today.

Despite <1% actually being active at any one time, and far fewer even commenting. R/conspiracy is one of the least active sites I've ever seen with over 150k subscribers.

Often that criticism has been proven wrong. (See: Snowden docs)

<1% of the time something coming true that was "predicted" isn't "often".

If anything it got worse even after many "conspiracy theories" were proven right.

"Many"

The powers that be do actually set out encourage and reinforce derision and mockery of those that question them.

Perfect example: This post and the dozens of downvotes awaiting me.

This derision and mockery is therefore political with political aims other than the quest for truth.

Or, you know, acting in a human way to those spouting unsubstantiated claims whilst they insult others for not thinking in the exact manner they do.

The point of this sub is not to accomplish a set of political aims but rather to search for truth.

So then what's your problem with solidwhetstone? Looks like his intentions line up perfectly with that statement. And if this sub really cared about the truth (it doesn't, because this subreddit is r/conspiracy and that means EVERYTHING has to be a conspiracy, or else it doesn't fit in the sub), a LOT of links on the frontpage of this sub should be taken down after a reader points out how wrong a point or video or blog post is.

People in conspiratard understand none of this and are actually among the dumbest, least interesting people on reddit.

So much for "not a 'hate group'". Way to take the high road!

Their sub only exists because of what bad asses exist in this one, who say interesting shit that I like to read.

So just making things up that are proven false after 10 seconds of Google makes someone a bad ass? Has life devolved to this?

The only ones crazy in this world are the ones that think they are sane.

So self-awareness is non-existent? Or a bad thing? Or...?

I just don't get why this solidwhetstone has everyone's panties in a bundle. Did anyone even read the threads? All that came of it was "Hey, solidwhetstone! Enforce the rules that already exist!" How is that unreasonable? Reddit isn't some right that's owned and bestowed to us. It's a private website whose content is determined by the readers. If you think the mods suck, just go to the websites that hosted the original information; they haven't gone anywhere. Want to stay here and discuss things? Sort by "new" and disable your negative karma cutoff for reading comments. There needs to be less attempts to discredit people because of Internet points and more addressing of the content of their comments.

Now for downvotes and insults from /u/thefuckingtoe and /u/LeadHelmetsBlockEMF

Perfect example: This post and the dozens of downvotes awaiting me.

You come to poke the dragon, but expect a pat on the back?

a LOT of links on the frontpage of this sub should be taken down after a reader points out how wrong a point or video or blog post is.

Then this place is simply not for you genius. Your values do not adhere to the spirit of this subreddit, so I suggest you respect the way things are done here, or go back to whatever shithole you feel comfortable in. Open-mindedness doesn't come with conditions, and your racism accusations are unfounded and slanderous.

Boy oh boy. For a "community" that say it values all opinions, you guys sure are hell bent on making sure some opinions aren't heard. Add in the ad hom attacks and it becomes clear many of you WANT an echo chamber.

There's a difference between differing opinions and trolling/mocking.

I don't know anyone that wants an echo chamber or wants to ban disagreement. That's fine if someone says "you're theory is very unlikely for X reason" but it's not fine when someone says "you're a fucking retard for proposing this theory and this whole sub is retarded."

I don't know anyone that wants an echo chamber or wants to ban disagreement.

Just look through a few of the soldwhetstone threads. You will see people calling for a ban of anyone who subscribes to a subreddit they don't like. It's right there in the comments. Easy to see.

I support banning conspiratard trolls. But I love having a discussion about theories and don't mind people challenging my evidence and theories.

The ban is to stop trolls who add no value. Trolls whose only intent is to mock and disrupt.

Someone genuinely interested in discussing conspiracy theories would not partake in the juvenile trolling at that place.

Of course I would have a process where conspiratard trolls could prove their good faith and get unbanned.

I've been downvoted and name called in /r/conspiracy several times now. I posted a link refuted that a claim. Downvote and ad homs. It has happened several times now. The truth was downvoted and I was attacked. So do these people count as trolls? Or is it just people you disagree with? It goes both ways...

The "truth" is subjective. You are doing what conspiratard accuses this sub of doing; grandiose thinking in that you're an internet warrior fighting for the TRUTH and exposing retards.

I haven't looked at your history but people are probably calling you names because they think you're a conspiratard troll hostile to conspiracy theories and this sub.

Trolls do generally get people riled up as is their intent.

Factual data is factual data. It isn't subjective. If I post "water isn't H2O" and you post factual data that it is, I don't say "well, truth is subjective". I accept that I was wrong.

I don't get the "internet warrior" stuff. Is that supposed to be some sort of attack? I find the subreddit mildly amusing. I also find some good info. I also see straight up crazy. This thread has all kinds. You should be able to laugh at some of the things posted. If you can't, I'm sorry.

But no need to start attacking me because I say I post some factual data and get downvoted/attacked. Some people in this subreddit are VERY married to their delusions. Newtown didn't exist, for example. If you think I'm going to accept "truth is subjective" regarding the existence of the actual town of Newtown, I (again) feel sorry for you.

"I didn't look at your history but..."

Interesting that you just made assumptions without any backing data. You might want to think about that...

Interesting that you just made assumptions without any backing data.

My assumption was correct. A poster concern trolling this sub and calling us "you guys" and making false claims is actually a conspiratard troll. Gee, chalk one up for a conspiracy theorist's intuition and good sense.

I correctly identified you based on your behavior.

Some people in this subreddit are VERY married to their delusions. Newtown didn't exist . . .

I think you intentionally misstate the theory. Most people who suspect a hoax don't think the town didn't exist. And some people suspect the school was not in active service, not that the town didn't exist.

Anyway, hoax theories in general and the Sandy Hook hoax in particular are valid theories so if this is your example of "delusion" than you are no truth teller as you claim.

So I can only surmise that the "factual" data you posted falls short of being "factual," but you didn't actually link to your example.

So please show us the example of how you got mocked for posting "factual" data . . . my conspiracy theory spidey senses tell me you're bullshitting and I want to go 2 for 2.

I don't get the "internet warrior" stuff. Is that supposed to be some sort of attack?

It's an observation about your motivation posting here. It's a criticism because you appear to be exhibiting the same behavior the conspiratard people (a sub you frequent) makes fun of people here for--fancying themselves as spreading the truth to the "sheeple."

"My assumption was correct. A poster concern trolling this sub and calling us "you guys" and making false claims is actually a conspiratard troll. Gee, chalk one up for a conspiracy theorist's intuition and good sense. "

I call people in EVERY subreddit "you guys". Your confirmation bias is duly noted.

"Anyway, hoax theories in general and the Sandy Hook hoax in particular are valid theories so if this is your example of "delusion" than you are no truth teller as you claim."

You claiming Sandy Hook is a valid hoax theory says it all. I'm embarrassed for you. Belittling the deaths of children. Shameful.

"It's an observation about your motivation posting here."

Again, I see your confirmation bias rules your judgement. You pick and choose from my comments to feed your need. I'm sorry your judgement is so clouded.

As I said before: This subreddit is an alamgam. Some bizarre, some funny, some interesting, some thougtful. It is up to me to sift through. YOU however, seem to feel the need to defend everything posted here. Internet Warrior indeed.

I feel no such need. I am my own man.

Often this criticism has been proven wrong.

Claims one instance of being correct = often.

Look. This forum has a problem. It's clearly got a racist/anti-Semitic/anti-government slant. The bias is out of control. Dude went to another sub for advice. What's the big deal?

He just used bad judgement. The uproar over a bad decision is exactly why we cannot have honest politicians. A stupid mistake, and people want your head. You cannot have honest people and a perfect image. The perfect image is almost always an illusion.

I say cut him a break and let him learn.

learn what? read his replies, hes not remorseful at all and has apologized to no one.

needs to go

Forget all this silly drama. Unless he tries to shove changes down your throat, who cares?

You mean like the super-crappy CSS redesign he pushed down my throat last week?

Were you being ironic on purpose? I can't tell if you're being funny or dim.

Then you are very stupid. If you read his post he offers rules as a solution to whatever phantom problem he is trying to solve.

He didn't goof at all.

EDIT: And the CSS is better than before.

So much wrong here, i.e. "The point of this sub is not to accomplish a set of political aims but rather to search for truth" and "This derision and mockery is therefore political with political aims." I find far too many people here are clearly not interested in any degree of objective truth, and are simply seeking to have their existing prejudices (in the original sense of the word) confirmed.

There's absolutely nothing political about derision and mockery for those who post completely unsourced data, or upvote news items actually taken from satirical websites.

I was, however, particularly amused by your comparing this reddit to a steak shop. It's more like a street taco stand run by a vagrant with sinus problems. McDonalds may not be perfect, but can still offer a lesson in basic food preparation hygiene.

You really need me to provide "evidence" of an example when people upvoted fake news? This was so recent, I presumed no-one could possibly have forgotten. But since it was a whole two days ago:

http://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/1tey1s/apple_admits_iphone_5s_fingerprint_database_to_be/

932 upvotes, the vast bulk of which came before it was belatedly tagged by a mod as "satire."

I love watching you guys squirm.

Ask me how to earn thousands of shillbucks every month from the luxury of your own home! I swear to god this isn't one of those scammy pyramid schemes!

Yay for spineless twerps that think they are witty!!!!!

Keep fighting the good fight!

Well I'm of the opinion that different mods bring different things to the subreddit- and as long as things like community guidelines changes are made as a team- then everything will be ok. I have never made a single decision about this subreddit without first getting the sign off from the mod team.

If you're asking me if I should resign because I posted a discussion thread on another subreddit- well I find that a bit confusing. Would you also want to ban a moderator of /r/libertarian for posting in /r/conservative? Are we not free to post discussions in subreddits we disagree with? Are we not free enough to do that? Legitimately curious as to your answer on that.

I was banned by flytape as well, he was probably a lightning rod account too. Y'know just an account for the mods to do their dirty work with in order to keep up appearances that their hands are clean.

btw I informed all the other mods of my ban and they just sort of laughed it off.

There's a difference between differing opinions and trolling/mocking.

I don't know anyone that wants an echo chamber or wants to ban disagreement. That's fine if someone says "you're theory is very unlikely for X reason" but it's not fine when someone says "you're a fucking retard for proposing this theory and this whole sub is retarded."

If someone requires proof to entertain an idea they are not suited for discussions on ideas.