u/mastigia please

I concour

I'm fine with of the 3 of you.

I disagree with this.

I can't because that will break rules (technically). Nothing personal to the user (have good convos with him/her), I can make my comments behind closed doors though, if you'd like.

Please! I thought he was a fairly thoughtful user

I'll PM you.

Please send it to modmail, or at least copy me on the PM.

Could you PM me the details of what that is as well? I have always try to be respectful to you man, even though we don't always agree on some things. Although I have noticed you reacting to me strangely at times, like we had a conversation I do not remember. Either way, I wouldn't mind knowing what I did to upset you.

You always seem really open-minded and respectful to me.

Thanks =)

Def. He/She has not been the center of any drama and is pretty active.

Don't take his nay personally. He has some emotional nuances to him that aren't always logical at first glance. Take it as a positive that he feels this way.

I think I figured it out actually, and it isn't personal. If I am right I understand where he is coming from.

good. In any case, he and I have disagreed on things and I enjoy talking with him. I disagree with his nay as well, but should be interesting.

Haha, I don't think it is possible not to incur the wrath of PLC at least once in a blue moon. But he's consistent.

Indeed.

Not even once. Js.

Who doesn't?

Just as a general FYI, mods in this sub DO NOT always agree... so I don't care if there is conflict/tension. Work it out you fucking humans

I have a large combative family. Fortunately, they all have massive senses of humor too.

Is it a personal issue with them or ethical? I feel as if this should be a transparent process, which gives the community and mastiga him/herself to respond.

You've effectively cast doubt in the mind's of whoever reads this coded/mysterious comment.

Why? Man up and say it or stfu

Why are you trying to get me to break rules?

then it sounds like you have a petty problem with someone and should be mature and move on.

I've expressed my concerns to the mods and have moved on?

yea you had to say it privately like a child afraid of getting yelled at by mommy

K.

sesame street, about right for you.

I disagree with this as well, and will link to a very recent comment where IMO /u/mastigia is far too eager to call anyone of an opposing political affiliation a shill.

Haha, thanks man. This has got to be the scariest job on reddit.

But it the pay is excellent!

Got my support dude.

And mine.

You'd be my favorite mod if you were chosen. Sometimes I feel like most of the mods here aren't mods for the right reasons, but I have full confidence that you'd be bomb.

I dunno, I kinda don't see them much, and when I see them around they aren't doing anything fucky that I have noticed. Imho when they are doing a good job I shouldn't hardly notice they are there, and I don't.

I just don't like seeing every thread that gets over 1000 upvotes being brigaded by very very narrow minded users making blind attacks going unaddressed. I'd like to see occasional stickied comments on threads that are clearly being brigaded by users with the intent to drive wedges in the organic user base

I agree, I wish there was a little bit more attention given to obvious forum manipulators. But I also think this is a "but then where do we stop?" kinda problem. And it has been answered by "if we wait long enough the shills will run out of money or energy or both, and we don't have to ban anyone incorrectly" as a solution.

Also, I have been tagging obvious shitbags for a few months. And I learned that a bunch of people I thought of as shills are actually just...different. Because the majority of the actual shills have superficially real accounts, 1-6yr history, posts in a smattering of other subs, 10k+ karma. But I never see the same ones twice. Like we will get hit with this wave this week, and I will rarely or never see those users again. They just burn the acct and switch to new ones.

It is a complicated problem and I wish I was smarter.

It's very complicated and yeah there's no solution as far as banning and removing things. I just want to see it be acknowledged and a comment stickied saying something like "notice: there is vote manipulation and lots of divisive discussion going on" or something like that. Just so it doesn't go unaddressed. Because I don't think it's really a solvable problem, the last thing I'd do is go around removing all the comments, but I just want it to be acknowledged because a lot of the actually different users can be tricked into thinking that what we see as politics is nothing more than a show with the sole purpose of distraction.

People are too emotionally attached to their own beliefs and need a reality check

Agreed

u/mastigia please

I'll second this.

https://np.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/69zopu/where_did_the_women_who_claimed_dt_sexual/dhakb2m/?context=3&st=j2hzha8q&sh=e48229e9

Last thing we need is more politics in this sub. Mastiglia needs to learn what content is acceptable at conspiracy before he takes a position of power.

This comment was very clearly a joke. Your scrutinizer continues to malfunction

Agreed.

Ok this is my one and only vote. They are on here constantly and I've never had any snafu with them. They seem legit so they have my vote u/mastigia

+1. I'd be okay with that. I enjoy every interaction with him and I feel he is pretty open minded as well, and does a good job of listening to criticism of his ideas/opinions.

/u/mastigia

We can dream

I agree too since he is fairly moderate.

And he regularly browses new and is often the top comment in a lot of threads. Because he's objective.

I too think u/mastigia is a quality poster and would make for a positive mod here.

+1

+1 I don't agree with just about every one of his theories but he is willing to debate them for as long as you wish without resorting to ad hominem or shill accusations.

u/Spider__Jerusalem and/or u/MKULTRAserialkillers

Why am I feeding you?

This guy is a joke of a hit man. U/mkuktraserialkillers

Pick one and edit the comment, please.

Is that fair, though? Who knows how many votes that comment received that were meant for the user he deleted?

thread is a shit show now, needs to be started over with the rules known from the start, not 45 minutes later

Exactly. I don't care all that much, but I'd hate for there to be an avoidable reason to contest any decision.

Plus this is like the 3rd version of this thread that's been created over the last few weeks...

I'm wondering if they actually want a new mod, or if they just want to consolidate things more deeply and give it a patina of legitimacy

I agree. This is a show.

I guarantee you the selected mod will be someone the mods already know, just like the last time.

https://np.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/5zk890/z/deys13g

I sure hope not, but thanks for turning me on to that trend, I wasn't aware of that

Thanks, I'm flattered but also lazy as shit...

I support this nomination.

I browse new quite often, mostly during the weekdays.. I'd be willing to help if anything.

Good luck to all applicants and thanks to all moderators for their good job

Just in time for the Russian shills to find a new home

And the Shareblue shills who are already all over Reddit

I say we bring back u/soveriegnman seeing as there now seems to be a more concerted effort to apply rule 10, the very rules application he resigned over

I know I'm just suggesting that y'all might check and see if he is, I always thought he was a good moderator and understood his frustration with the lack of fair rule application

So ask him

this board got 100x better after he left

no more insane rule 10 censorship

No more applying the rules fairly and consistently*

But that might go against the pro-TPTB/globalist echo chamber the mods are building.

Thats fine with me if it keeps an anti-semite off the mod team

I appreciate the thought but I have no interest in modding this sub again.

Figured you didn't but I thought it necessary to ask. Especially seeing that shill accusations became such a problem after you left that the moderators became much more strict on rule tens application, what you were doing all along, and what a lot of them disagreed with.

In fairness, I've been one of the stricter ones on rule 10s, and I joined the mod team after SM had left.

Yes I know that, I imagine that they realized after SM was gone that if nobody was strict on rule 10 that almost no discussion could happen

There are more reasons than that for my leaving but I really don't want to get into it. I've been threatened with a permanent ban if I discuss certain problems with the mod team again out in the open. It's over and done with.

Sorry not trying to get you in trouble, just liked how you actually applied that rule

Thank you. Yes, selective enforcement by some mods was one of my pet peeves.

You're welcome

I'd love to be able to moderate, it'd be a honor to be put in consideration, I'm available everyday 24/7.

Everyday 24/7, No sleep needed, you're hired!

https://ixquick-proxy.com/do/show_picture.pl?l=english&rais=1&oiu=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fifighter.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F05%2Fwatching.jpg&sp=81b9acfc7a1518041738bd2f5ff4d662

Where do I sign?

Hell no

Haha, I agree.

i'm all

https://ixquick-proxy.com/do/show_picture.pl?l=english&rais=1&oiu=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.densodynamics.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F01%2Fgandalf.jpg&sp=63378ceefdbfa067aa271ee134c3ac02

Aww 😩

I think Reddit is waayyyy over moderated.

I'm hoping we can keep on top of the spammy stuff now too...

"DAILY REMINDER" threads and such... and constant US political posts that aren't even conspiracy based, just annoyed people posting here because no other open forum (loosely put) exists on Reddit anymore...

That's exactly why I come here, to read shit that isn't allowed on other subs

better make a sketchy voting system and bring our friends in as mods while we tell users to vote then....

No shit all it takes is one bad mode and an entire subreddit can turn to complete fascism.

/u/Magnora7

+1

Honestly, I've given it some thought and I'd be willing to give it a try.

It'd be great if we could limit some of the users that do not respect the pyramid of disagreement, and consistently drag discussion to the lower levels: http://fablegod.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/disagreement-hierarchy.jpg

I think that would go a long way toward improving this sub.

It'd be great if we could limit some of the users that do not respect the pyramid...

raises brow

So you want trolls to take over the subreddit even more?

do you respect the pyramid, magnora? because if you don't, you should limit yourself, and if you don't limit yourself, that problem should be fixed, and you should be involuntarily limited. after all, we don't want decaying trolls.

I get your fear, but I'm more worried about the trolls that are derailing so many discussions, because this sub has really gone downhill over the last few years. As long as people are respectful and actually trying to get to a useful point of discussion, I think it's great and people can have whatever opinion they like.

As long as people are respectful they can have whatever opinion they like

disagree, there should be no requirement to be "respectful" to not be limited.

So anyone should just be able to be an ass, and we just have to sit around and tolerate these people wrecking our forums of discussion because they can't have a civil conversation like a grown up?

i wonder if there are ways to encourage, or even normalize, higher-up-the-pyramid ways of discussing things without enforcing limits on anyone.

Sure, but if someone is literally intentionally destroying the quality of the sub by dragging everyone down the pyramid, then they deserve to be banned. I'd rather tend toward being overly light-handed than heavy-handed, but there are still people who majority negatively impact the community and aren't trying to have genuine conversations but instead just make people angry or mislead them. I don't think those people should be tolerated if they're proven to be as such.

This

-1 pro-censorship.

Ugh. I already voted. But I unofficially agree.

trolls be coming...

I offer myself as tribute. I'm on reddit all day at work and check in frequently at home.

This guy's livin' the life.

It isn't too shabby.

What about the guy that wanted Zuckerberg to be President? He seemed pretty level headed. 😐

That guy and Mr fire and brimstone would be awesome!!

That's just Zuckerberg's account, no?

Lmao. I didn't even consider that. Good point.

/u/polkadotgirl

Globalist loving TPTB supporter.... great choice.

Me? Lol Im anti globalism...

And fair and honest : ) Always on this site as well.

Anyway anybody can check my post history.

Trump touting bestiality condoner? Seriously?

/u/stonetear2016

I disagree on this guy, he seems to comment on r/Israel a lot and also seems to favor the term zionist. I'm all for having an open mind but I want to read r/conspiracy not r/stormfront

/u/agastopia or /u/TrumpRusConspiracy would be a good choice.

I appreciate it, but no thanks. Plus, I don't fit the requirements.

Someone nominated you? You're just a troll, you never contribute

I'm not a troll, but apparently someone nominated me as a joke.

https://ixquick-proxy.com/do/show_picture.pl?l=english&rais=1&oiu=https%3A%2F%2Fendmyopia.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2016%2F02%2Fskepticalstudent.jpg&sp=7bde3622b071fcfa4d8e4fcf232c392c

Right? Because we don't have enough /r/politics influence as it is :\

Half the mod team at this point.

"you shill like a younger man. Nothing held back. Admirable.... But mistaken".

Lol, they didn't find it funny. What a shame. (still watchin though ;u) )

why did queeny delete his old account and create a new one? I think i missed some drama

You are suggesting Monsanto cheerleader jfqueeny, who is known to be an alt of a certain professor that took $25,000 from Monsanto!

Also, Adamwho is another alt of jfqueeny...

That's a shit list if I've ever saw one!

LOL like there isn't already enough political nonsense here, so let's add the r/politics mod team (and some are power mods, too).

TOP KEK!

Should I just ban you now or are you going to stop spamming your bullshit and trolling all over this thread?

What was your last account name (which presumably was banned)?

Sorry for breaking the rule against highlighting via jokes, the fact that your sub is hilariously compromised.

So you're not going to tell me what your old username was then?

Regardless I'm not here to play games with you. Quit shitting all over this thread or you're gone, period.

So you're not going to tell me what your old username was then?

Hard to do that when I don't have one.

So you make a brand new account, your first ever on reddit, and immediately in your first ever comment on reddit (according to you) you're already attacking the mods of /r/conspiracy and the sub itself? Explain to me how that works.

It's called lurking. Maybe you've heard of it.

Nice deflection. It's pretty funny how all these "new users" come out of the woodworks every time a mod nomination thread is posted and attempt to sow discord and shit on the sub and its mods.

Go fuck yourself with a glass cactus

This is the most I've smiled and blown air through my nose all week.

It is sad that you needed to add the disclaimer to get the downvotes you were begging for lol

You could make good content for r/WatchRedditDie I think

Happy to see at least someone appreciated the joke :D

Here's an upvote to offset the downvote I had to give you =)

Also there's some positive vibes emanating from my recovering pineal gland with fuckshills written on them

I thought you were being genuine :(

I'm down, fuck it. I nominate /u/highlaman

/u/justin_hergina

+1 for Justin.

New rule suggestion - anyone banned and reinstated multiple times for breaking rules shouldn't get a vote

I bet you agree with making non violent felon's lives hell, too.

I think Justin would be a horrible moderator.

We all have a right to an opinion, now don't we?

Whatever you say non violent felon!

I'm not one. It's an analogy.

How many times have you been banned/reinstated to the conspiracy subreddit?

He doesn't weasel. He Man's up and either apologizes or explains his situation.

I'd rather be someone who occasionally fucks up, than be someone who knowingly skirts the rules, uses alts for nefarious means and generally has a mission to piss other users off.

putin - denies ausrottung translates into extermination.

.

non-rube users - Literally your only argument is denying a words meaning.

of course you'd focus on a subjective word (weasel) and railroad the conversation as you see fit!

you are the perfect addition to the moderator team. +1

I see you ignored the rest of my comment too, which seems that you are doing exactly what you accused me of. (Which I didn't)

Thanks for the heads up.

Omg. You're killing me softly. Lol.

The irony..

Should 8 day accounts get a vote?

Hahahaha! Well played.

Wish I could hug you

Ah yes, the account age fallacy again.

https://np.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/6a2tth/lets_dissect_propaganda_redditcom_the_account_age/?st=j2i0ktqc&sh=1a1c50ec

You sure ran away from the debate there! Lol

I answered you, and this has nothing to do with that. Calling it a fallacy is a fallacious statement in and of itself. Account age is one of several things one should check when vetting content. It is the least important, as post and comment history are far more telling; like how some users only comment to start arguments.

The better question is : why would I want a vote?

The users here aren't vetting the nominees. Odd behavior for conspiracy minded individuals.

You can't just invent a fallacy, especially when it does not correspond to any logical progression. Account age, as stated every other time you've alleged otherwise, is one of several useful indicators to utilize when approaching information. Again, combined with post and comment history, you can seriously determine one's motives. An example of this is how some users only post comments in an attempt to start arguments with other users.

No matter how many times you try, it won't work because your "account age fallacy" is a fallacious statement in and of itself.

Account age fallacy definition - standard debunking/derailment technique designed to attack users based solely on their Reddit account age, generally used to avoid debating content. It also disparage users from commenting based on the age of their Reddit account.

I dissected the propaganda. You don't have to like it, and obviously you don't. Have a great day. Give me a few, I'll link to every instance where you ran away on the account age fallacy post.

Walked away. From someone who only wishes to argue

I offer "dissecting propaganda" posts friend.

Your argumentative attitude is apparent on all of my posts. What was that, over 25 retorts.

25+ retorts is walking away? Sexy revisionist memory stud!

Look at every interaction I've had apart from you and the three comparable posts yesterday, which I'm sure you have, and you'll find cooperative comments and posts. I have been threatened more than once for promoting non-violence and cooperation.

I thought we were talking about interactions between you and I.

Which fallacy did you use here? Hint: Football kickers kick footballs between two ---------

Answer: goalposts

I was speaking of the 100+ days prior, as the days that followed are ultimately inconsequential to any discussion of the coherent.

oh I get it. I've been a redditor for 6 days and ever since I started making "dissecting propaganda" posts you've been on my ass.

I wasn't a redditor during those 94 days. Which fallacy did you use here? Hint - this wizard of oz character was made out of hay.

Answer - straw man fallacy.

I dissect propaganda. ;)

Never said any of that, those are your words. A false assumption projected

You're invited to my next dissecting propaganda post.

You are propaganda

Said in smiley the bears voice - "Only you can harass another user." Take responsibility for your actions like an adult.

They weren't retorts so much as rebuttals, and I addressed your points each time explaining why I disagreed, rather than pantomiming cartoons. It's a conversation, this is a forum.

Good idea. I'll also include a "they did the math" analysis of the percentage of comments you left open ended, still feeling the sting from the many spankings doled out in that treasure trove of a post.

lol you have the worst ideas its very entertaining

https://np.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/66y34q/people_on_this_subreddit_seem_to_be_confused_on/dgm6svo/?st=j2hznb9b&sh=0983e53a

He's too immature to hold debate. he'd fit in really well here!

The rules still apply in this thread friend. I would tread carefully if I were you.

I'm applying 'candidates' words in context to show their true agenda.

Most of these 'candidates' are part of a small cabal of 'power users' who are given free reign to harass users...

remove rule 10 for this post and you're allowing conversation. utilize rule 10 and you're silencing dissenting opinion.

can't have it both ways, IMHO

Most of these 'candidates' are part of a small cabal of 'power users' who are given free reign to harass users...

Do you have any screen shots or links to back-up these claims? I didn't see the comment before it was removed but I'm guessing it was an accusation of being a shill towards somebody?

I've read through your comment history of the last 8 or so days and it appears you're here solely to turn the community on the mods and a select few commenters.

Of course that could be totally wrong so I'm asking you what your motives and goals are by commenting here? You've made some very valid points but I feel like you're only using them to take down your opponents.

So I guess what I'm trying to say is do you care about or want to be a part of this community or is you're only goal to takedown the people you've chosen and the mods with it?

I put this in contest mode.

Why not just bring over one of the mods from r/politics r/shareblue or something and be done with it? That's the type that will get selected anyway, after all.

Thanks for this meaningful insight, it contributed greatly to the thread.

Just so you know, this thread could be manipulated from a brigade. A few years ago, it was proven that many users bypass the "no participation" from a link to a thread. I would normally say the votes don't matter, but in this case, they are deciding on a person who may have the power to censor others.

https://np.reddit.com/r/MarchAgainstTrump/comments/6a84fx/rconspiracy_tinfoilers_are_having_a_mod_election/?st=j2i2ghpb&sh=55d86f60

I'll edit in more threads if I see them.

As stated in the OP, we mods have the final say over who is or is not chosen. If we see evidence of a brigade or feel that a specific mod is not "fit for duty" or have one of us veto a selection, then that user won't be made a mod.

I see some rather obvious likely multiple screen name nominations, but I'm gonna guess you are aware.

I would just like to submit my objection to adding more moderators. I check the new page frequently and it looks okay. Sure, there are too many posts that are thinly veiled campaigns -- but I can live with those. The risk of adding more mods seems greater than the problem.

Bottom line: please keep the additions as minimal as possible. Thanks! :)

We really don't have the manpower to deal with the volume of reports at this point. As you might imagine, we get hundreds of reports every day, and it's hard to keep on top of them. I don't see this as much as introducing more removals, but of spreading out our workload a bit more evenly.

we ultimately have the final say over who is or is not chosen.

translation - Hey Reddit Users, Your Vote Doesn't Matter! Smoke and Mirrors FTW!

and if the 'brigade' really wanted to fuck this sub up, they'd put all their powers into electing 'putinlovescats' as the new moderator. there's no evidence of this, therefore mkultra_escape is spreading nefarious fallacies here.

Are you done?

why the cryptic message? I specifically state I'll erase it if there's proof of the users' claim.

it's ultimately your job to tell me when I'm done...so, am I?

There was nothing cryptic about it. This is a thread for nominating new moderators, not a thread for bitching about what you think is wrong with the mods. So I asked if you're done because if you continue shitting all over this thread with your diatribes against the mods it will be considered trolling and will be treated as such.

Bringing up brigades is a logical fallacy, as the mods have the final say.

I'm thinking logically. That shouldn't upset you

I asked if you're done because if you continue shitting all over this thread with your diatribes against the mods it will be considered trolling

i knew it was a cryptic message. the hidden cryptic meaning is stated in your retort, right after you deny it being cryptic.

you're using an appeal to authority fallacy here.

For the final time: further whining from you in this thread will be considered trolling and treated as such. Address the topic of the thread or find a new thread. No more games.

I don't want to break your rules but they seem arbitrarily enforced to silence undesired content, which is extremely relevant to the conversation of new moderators, no?

further whining from you in this thread will be considered trolling and treated as such.

He didn't say don't talk about it, just to stop talking about it in this thread. Make a post.

nah cuz then they'll delete it for violation of rule 10 or something else petty

they're all about arbitrarily enforcing the rules these days.

i would be perfect for this, but i will not be chosen

That's basically my life motto...

👻👻👻👻👻

Please try to not let SJW's infiltrate the mod team

Too late, Celine's already here along with the rest of the regressive neolib globalists.

I nominate /u/Putin_loves_cats

Thanks. I'm not throwing my hat in personally, but if others would like to see me in, I'd be down. Cheers!

I was going to say you but I was too lazy.

It's the thought, that counts.

I vote for you. You are fair and kind with your encounters.

Its also because i see his posts across a spectrum. he seems to be fair enough when responding. it's not like were giving him the Secretary of State position.

I enjoy the family lines and alternative history posts he makes but I say no to aggressive drunks...

+1

If I can help, I will.

I'm putting in a vote for /u/nibiru_chaser

Thanks! I've never moderated before though..and I deleted my main account of 5 years as something i posted endrd up in MSM. So I've got this one now but don't meet the criteria!

i posted something that ended up in the MSM

link?

Then it would give me away and I'd have to delete this too!

This guy has a more open mind than a couple of the other nominees who seem to get upset about some of the topics discussed on here.

Second.

/u/Putin_loves_cats

I vote against putin_loves_cats. While intelligent, he doesn't seem to have to the best of intentions

he doesn't seem to have to the best of intentions

Coming from the person who constantly says the Rothschilds are behind everything.

Coming from the person who immediately goes to personal attacks when his information is challenged in any serious way.

You talking to your self in the mirror?

Just proving my point...

You always run away when I challenge your Zionist rants about Rothschild. Always. Here and in other places.

That's not true at all. I at least will entertain your /r/romerules ideas, while you seem to be adamant at completely denying the fact that there are many many powerful people who hold a Zionist ideology. Ignoring evidence isn't a good look, especially for a moderator.

I don't nor have I ever ignored any of what you are saying. I call out Zionism, along with all the people you think control the world. Anyone who has read my comments regarding the topic, knows that. I make it perfectly clear. Nice try, maggy.

Yeah, all those conversations we had in the past never happened. Good angle there, putin. We'll just add gaslighting to the list of methods you resort to in order to win an argument. I can't believe people would support such a person becoming a moderator

Are you now just making things up? Give me one piece of evidence of me ignoring anything that you are saying.

I can't believe people would support such a person becoming a moderator

This comment chain right here proves this qualifies to you, not me.

Yes, yes. Drag everyone down to an emotional level, down to the lowest levels of the pyramid of disagreement, then strut around like you have the moral high-ground when they act foolish in response to your crassness. It's worked for several years and has gained you many followers, why stop now? :P

So... No evidence? Thought so. Next step? Skirt, skirt.... Have a lovely evening, maggy.

Lol you look bad so you again just sidestep everything and resort to attacks at the bottom of the pyramid to try and drag me down with you (seriously, trying to make me be offended by implying I'm female? What is this, 1950?)

Always with the same tactic. It's gotten pretty old. Seems you can only have a level-headed conversation when people are agreeing with you, otherwise you just go straight for the ad hominem

seriously, trying to make me be offended by implying I'm female?

I'm not implying you are. Dafuq you talking? Maggy is short for magnora7 and is my nickname for you. Consider it a term of endearment :)

Lol k.

And the mods should see this is exactly why he shouldn't be a mod.

Because I walked away from a situation where someone was messing with me? Seems like what a mod should do. I've spent hours trying to talk with Putin_loves_cats in the past, and he rarely gives you an honest shake. I don't see the need to continue talking with someone who won't respect others enough to offer a fair discussion.

the pyramid

to anyone reading this exchange, here is the comment chain for this reference

Yes, thank you, I should've put a direct link. So here it is: http://fablegod.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/disagreement-hierarchy.jpg

where on your pyramid would you place your comments in this chain?

do you always react that way to opinions or theories that you don't agree with - or just certain things you don't agree with - and what would happen if you are a moderator then and confronted with someone who doesn't believe in nukes, how could they expect anything fair from you?

Ah, digging up old dirt! I see you have a serious investment in this. Wonder why that would be.

I didn't express myself well in that comment chain, it's true. Perhaps I would deserve 1 strike out of 3 for that.

I was simply irritated that people would insinuate nuclear weapons don't exist, which is a viewpoint I consider to be disinformation to make conspiracy forums look bad, because of the absolutely overwhelming amount of evidence showing it to be true. Like the fact nuclear power exists, or that two Japanese cities were completely destroyed. Or all the natives who got radiation poisoning in Bikini Atolls, from all the testing. There's just far too much history to act as though it's a legitimate hypothesis, and this was the reason I was upset in that moment.

Some disinfo will have to be tolerated because it's not always clear what is true and what isn't, but people outright ignoring things where there are overwhelming evidence is disingenuous conversation, which is a form of gaslighting. Intentional gaslighting is trolling. So if I saw that thread as a moderator, I would give a warning to move up the pyramid of disagreement, and then if the tone didn't change or kept derailing the thread with emotional attacks, then a strike would be issued because the person is working against the interests of the forum. However if a person is usually good and just got pissed one day, then maybe a strike could be removed. But if there is a consistent pattern of behavior that is negative and unhelpful to the quality of the forum, then 3 strikes will be accumulated.

<a viewpoint I consider to be disinformation to make conspiracy forums look bad

i see, so you're one of those "don't post that because it makes /r/conspiracy look bad" people.

Yeah, I do think certain topics are dumb and make the sub look bad and should be gotten rid of. It's good to have an open mind, but it's not so good to be so open that your brain falls out

Yeah, I do think certain topics are dumb and make the sub look bad and should be gotten rid of.

I'm with /u/flytape on this one source

sucks when you are interested in a conspiracy niche that people like you aren't interested in, yet instead of just ignoring a post about whatever subject - they feel they must downvote it or attack the person in the comments like you did ... this makes for a lot of animosity where certain topics never are voted up and are always downvoted to oblivion - have you considered this from the perspective of those people? for someone who complains about gaslighting - you are actively participating whether you realize it or not, in the gaslighting of others

Explaining to someone why their ideas don't make sense, and then having them ignore that over and over so they can feel as though the won the argument, and then getting mad at them, is not gaslighting.

You're really abusing the meaning of that term, because it is to deliberately mislead people in to thinking true things are false, or false things are true. If I honestly believe what I say, it's not gaslighting.

If this sub started getting 100 posts a day about how Hillary is actually secretly Dracula and can change in to a bat, and people were upvoting these to the front page of the sub as a joke (or to ruin its reputation) then why wouldn't the sub take action against that? Do you think people should just be allowed to mess with the sub like that? Because I don't.

Are you aware of TAVISTOCK?

Imagine if this person was a mod. And this is how he reacts to criticism?

Context, Rocky... Also, I am a mod over at /r/AlternativeHistory with other mods here. I've yet to ban anyone or remove any comments, based on on our rules (I actually petitioned a ban on a user's asking - which was reversed ultimately).

I'm not even applying here to be a mod, but am willing to it if people want me in and so do the mods here. Think of me however you want, but I do care about our community and am actually fair. Have a lovely morning.

Rules - Plural?

Your sub only has one. That doesn't appear to be a sub where people get rowdy in disagreement, where moderation would even come up frequently.

My sub has zero rules and nobody has ever been banned on mine :P

Everyone has a right to their own opinion, Rocky.. We both clearly have one for each other. Have a lovely afternoon.

I want to clarify something, because you're one of the few users I remembered from years back and I used to have a lot of respect for you.

You are a racial nationalist, correct? Or an advocate for racial segregation?

You are a racial nationalist

Not really, no.

an advocate for racial segregation?

No. I bring up controversial ideas about whether races should/would be better off, voluntarily segregating, though...

So, what do you want to clarify?

What does "not really" mean?

This is what I want to clarify. I wouldn't generally want to apply political/religious beliefs as a metric for whether someone would be good at a balanced/unbiased application of the rules, but if you're biased against a huge subsection of the users then it's a huge red flag for me.

What does "not really" mean?

It means, I'm not what you are trying to portray me as. I'm a voluntaryist. I believe all interactions should be voluntary and do not believe in government. I believe in society and community.

Now, I talk about whether white's would be better off being in a voluntary white society, as would... blacks in the same (and asians, etc etc). We are tribal, as humans. It's an interesting thought. We trade and communicate with all, but in our communities we are the same. Which is why Socialism somewhat works (for now) in Scandinavian countries..

Be proud of your race, your culture, your history. But no one race/culture is superior... My words get warped.. But this is what I mean. Doesn't help I play Devil's Advocate. But, that is another topic...

Did I clarify?

I'm not trying to portray you as anything, I'm asking.

Yes, you've clarified.

Sorry. I get attacked a lot from all angles. Glad I could clarify.. Just my opinions..

I also vote against him.

I'd have to agree as well.

Perhaps this time around putin felt like letting others nominate him would be the best course of action. In the past he's seemed a bit ravenous in these threads. A little too hungry for that mod spot.

He seems to have a tendency to fly off the handle, and also seems to be a very heavy drinker. I also remember him bring totally against voting in general one day, and the next I see him shouting magamagamaga and all other type of nonsense. It was pretty strange.

I think that Putin can be a good contributor here, but they should never be a mod.

I'm not sure that having a vocal Hitler supporter for a mod is a good idea ...

I don't support Hitler, and we've been threw this a million times, yet you continue to go around trying to smear me. Really got a red rocket for me, don't cha'?

Red Rocket

See guys, he likes Putin not Hitler.

Haha

Ahhhh....a bash Putin thread...tricky.

I don't support Hitler

Yes you do:

"I'm proud of my German ancestry and fuck you if you think we are rebels. At least we had the balls....... You sheep dick mother fucker's didn't" - /u/Putin_loves_cats while linking to Hitler victory speeches.

Yes, you keep bringing this up a million fuckin' times. For, the last time stalker, I was playing Devil's advocate during my research of WWII and what happened (ie. Holocaust, Hitler, etc etc). People see through your transparency, just so you know.

No I don't. Yes, you keep bringing this up a million fuckin' times. For, the last time stalker, I was playing Devil's advocate during my research of WWII and what happened (ie. Holocaust, Hitler, etc etc). People see through your transparency, just so you know. I'm well known around here for playing Devil's advocate and that means controversial, at times...

You can say that all you want, but absolutely nobody believes it because it doesn't make sense logically and because you're incredibly transparent.

If you were just "playing Devil's advocate" trying to do research then why did you:

• delete the thread after 1 response
• deny making it
• subsequently lie about not being German, then take that back when called out on it

Furthermore, you create your own interpretations of the German language to try to deny things that Himmler outright stated in addition to presenting a woeful lack of understanding regarding what the Nazis did in Poland in an effort to try and minimize their actions.

All of these things combined would lead anybody coming here to think that you are a Nazi supporter without even mentioning the fact that you literally said "I'm proud of my German ancestry and fuck you if you think we are rebels. At least we had the balls....... You sheep dick mother fucker's didn't" while linking to Hitler speeches.

An outspoken Hitler supporter like yourself as a mod of this place would be a horrible decision.

You're a redditor for 21 days... Not much I'm going to continually add to your blatant attacks... Have a nice afternoon.

You're a redditor for 21 days... Not much I'm going to continually add to your blatant attacks... Have a nice afternoon.

Attacking the account age instead of the points brought up lends credence to their legitimacy, thank you.

Anybody reading what I've posted will see that it is 100% correct and that you had to scurry to account age attacks once you weren't able to manufacture any more illogical defenses for your actions.

Good bye. You're not the first, nor will you be the last...

Obviously I'm not going to be the first or last person to point out that you are a Nazi supporter, thank you for the vote of confidence.

You aren't the first and I'm sure you won't be the last.

Lol run and hide now

From what?

Absolutely transparent?

What do you call yourself? You've been here a hilariously short time yet think you can speak with authority about people who post here regularly.

What do you call yourself? You've been here a hilariously short time yet think you can speak with authority about people who post here regularly.

Nothing I've said is incorrect. Using my account age as some kind of rebuttal to the fact that /u/Putin_loves_cats has repeatedly demonstrated to be a Nazi and Hitler supporter makes my criticisms seem like they're hitting a bit too close to home. Everything I've discussed with the user has taken place since I've become a reddit member, not sure why my account age is relevant.

Your one example didn't exactly prove anything about the claims you are making against the user.

If you think its obvious that the user is some kind of genocidal Nazi I think at least some kind of demonstrable evidence or proof is required.

This is not r/politics

the user is Some Kind of Genocidal Nazi from the 1930s

I never said anything even remotely resembling this.

Since the other nomination for him was removed I am going to comment again.

While I enjoy his posts regarding family lines and alternative history, he is aggressive and seems too impulsive and vindictive to mod.

Agree with this. I like the thesis statement type comments like your "while I enjoy, he is". We need more of that. We need people willing to qualify other sides of arguments before they make assertions. It makes the sub a whole lot more bearable.

Here here!

Hear, not here.

'Preciate dat fam.

I vote against PLC for the many reasons people have already stated.

Nah he's unhinged and a little nasty at times.

https://np.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/69k7wp/z/dh78jyh

His (or her) duties would be different as a moderator.

To make a sports analogy someone can still be a solid referee while not being an innocuous player who never brushed up against any rules.

I too voted against him, he/ she seems a little close minded at times. Sorry. Truly.

i second this nomination...would love him as a mod

Voting for /u/Putin_loves_cats

please do not vote for me, i am only interested in doing my research. but putinlovescats is very well educated, honest and fair. he would be a great mod

I don't really want to, but we need good mods that are proven to be on the side of the people/users/subscribers, and not the ones who'd wish to infiltrate us and run us off course.

• I've been around Reddit to see the changes.
  
• Believe in less moderation the better.
  
• Periodically reference this post: How Reddit Was Destroyed
• Been voted up 417,039 times on /r/Conspiracy
• Comments been voted up 17,662 times on /r/Conspiracy
• Brought in James Corbett, Russ Baker, and Bill Still for AMA's
• Supported the Kevin Ryan and Sibel Edmonds AMA's
• I also co-own [911Blogger.com](www.911blogger.com) which some felt was a conflict of interest last time I moderated here.

I always take the side of the users here. Mods should look at the user base as the treasure and not the enemy. Some mods I've noticed have taken the authoritarian tact of looking at the subscribers here as their adversaries rather than those they are part of and serving. Typical political/authority/power dynamics.

Obvious shills should be dealt with of course. But those who moderate least, or as little as necessary, are moderating best. Moderators should also be open to constructive criticism and feedback and not abuse Rule 10 to ban any perceived adversaries. If a moderator loses faith or hope in the user base, they should resign because that is what has historically made Reddit the awesome site that it is and has been.

The list of rules should be reconsidered from time to time as well as the mods in my opinion and discussed. Some have the potential to be abused like many of us have experienced in other major subreddits around here.

Peace. And put forth some good names if you pay attention to that sort of thing.

Not appropriately applying rule ten almost completely destroyed this sub. You could not present any viewpoint without it being completely disregarded if you were in a thread were your opinion was in minority. Applying it strictly allows for more free exchange of thought and prevents conversations from being stifled with shill accusations.

Rule 10 allows shills to continue to exist. That's the point of it.

The shills will continue to exist whether you complain about them or not. Plus the mods already have and still do encourage reporting accounts that you think are actually shills, and they'll deal with it accordingly after reviewing the account.

Crying "SHILL" in a thread does absolutely nothing to contribute and just results in a ton of back-and-forth between the left and the right rather than encouraging discussion surrounding the topic of the post.

Typical trash logic that has no bearing on reality.

When people have highly suspicious post histories, they deserve to be called out; allowing them to persist despite zero history or suspicious history is why it's a pro-shill rule, period.

This shouldn't be a safe space to protect the feelings of paid shills.

Yeah, but when "highly suspicious post histories" means "I disagree with this person's opinion", you're just being an annoying child.

Aggressive rule 10 enforcement also allows blatant shilling to continue.

how?

Please choose one user to nominate and remove the others from this thread. You can nominate yourself and one other user.

I do love this place and want to help it.

You should nominate yourself in reply to the actual OP instead of to my comment. It's likely that very few people will see this comment chain.

God damn voter fraud. I demand a recount if I do not like the results. ^/s

/u/orangutan gets my vote

Ugh. Already voted. Unofficially agreed.

We appreciate your application, but after failing to disclose paid conflicts of interest when you were previously on the team your application will not be accepted.

We very much appreciate you applying though.

this guy... gets my vote...

Definitely second this one.

Great choice! Thanks for volunteering. I second this! :)

This guy also gets my vote.

Most things are fine in moderation.

This includes moderation.

+1 for /u/Orangutan

I vote for /u/Orangutan. Those were all awesome AMA's, I really enjoy them and hope if you are the new mod, you'll work on getting some more AMA's.

This guy should be head moderator here. He doesn't like power.

You should've never been demodded to begin with.

Exactly. That's why I'm skeptical of them.

never knew you were a former mod, TIL, and TIL to be even more skeptical

you've got my vote

What is your stance on rule 10?

+1

I support the nomination of /r/Orangutan. In the years I've used reddit and frequented this sub he has proven himself a valuable contributor and all-around respectable user.

I agree here.

I like u/orangutan too, I'd love for him to come back

We've talked in private message a few times recently, which I enjoyed.

You are the only one in this thread I can confidently give my vote to.

You also bring up old conspiracies and cold cases and that helps the newer members get familiar with the meta, while reminding the older members to keep digging because there are still questions to be answered.

those who moderate least, or as little as necessary, are moderating best.

Can't agree more...

YES for Orangutan.

They don't even deserve you, man. OG mod team for life.

I also co-own 911Blogger.com which some felt was a conflict of interest last time I moderated here.

LMAO, shills/brainwashed idiots thought that, anyway.

Mods should look at the user base as the treasure and not the enemy. Some mods I've noticed have taken the authoritarian tact of looking at the subscribers here as their adversaries rather than those they are part of and serving. Typical political/authority/power dynamics.

Especially since the globalists' pet shill lost despite rigging her hardest. They're VERY pro-shill and anti-regular-user.

I saw several of them claiming "certain people" were "regulars" despite those people having nothing but history in globalist safe spaces like r/politics prior to the $40m injection to ShareBlue/CTR, then boom - they're "regulars" and never post outside this sub, pretend to chum it up with people here, but ONLY post pro-globalist pro-establishment comments.

The new mods 'curiously' LOVE these users to the exclusion of everyone else.

I'm legitimately confused, I post primarily on /r/politics, and generally match the description of the 'shills' you say have invaded this community. I'm not getting paid, but am I considered a shill? Is a shill only a person being paid by CTR and shareblue, or is this like a guilt-by-association thing? I joined this subreddit during the election and have hung around for the Trump related conspiracies, as I'm sure is the case with many if not most of the other liberals who lurk here. Are we all guilty until proven innocent or what

Are we all guilty until proven innocent or what

I would say yes, except for the fact that I'm not sure that you can be proven innocent if you didn't participate here before the election cycle. Swarms of actual paid shills on both sides of the aisle are active on Reddit. Cambridge Analytica + Shareblue have both seen to that. So honestly, unless you've been posting here for a while any time you get really involved in a partisan way you'll be looked at with suspicion.

Fair enough.

I vote this this guy /u/Orangutan

Make sure to crack down on shills. They like to deflect everything.

Fat chance, considering rule 10 exists to protect those very same shills.

put me in! I have been here for 2 years, 1000+ Karma on comments.

I'd be willing to if my alt can fulfill the account-age requirement lol.

In all seriousness though, I think /u/ThePaperStreetSoapCo would be a good mod

+1 for u/mastigia

Don't renominate anyone...just upvote the first one.

Yep. My bad. I honestly missed that he had been nominated.

that is kind of hard, with the random sorting in contest mode :-D

I'm interested! I'm a long time (4+ year) reddit user (this is my third username so it's only 1 year old). My most frequented visited sub was r/politics until the DNC primaries; after that sub became compromised I started to frequent this sub. My aim is to allow for free discussion of what the msm refuses to discuss. I'm not hiding my political preferences (which is obvious by looking through my history). I'm also not afraid to reveal my real background/identity so it is clear I'm not paid by the Russians ! (/s).

/u/factbasedorgtfo

Totally legit user!

/u/barawo33

/u/ShellOilNigeria

+1

Thank you.

I would urge everyone to look closely at this users account, it's suspect as hell.

No submission history before 3 years ago. Then almost nonstop news article posting to all the big news subs, quite bot like with zero comments. Then almost all submissions stop and it pretty much full on comments.

I have never even heard of this guy but he has a special flair for some reason when they seemingly don't even post here that much, more often at the_donald. I will admit that I almost always have the CSS turned off, and it was a fluke that I even noticed his flair, so maybe that's why I didn't notice this user sooner.

I mean seriously, two whole years of nothing but submissions to /r/politics, worldnews, news, a bit of funny, cars, and conspiracy.

Plus we've got a mod here flexing their green muscle, a mod who vanished and suddenly in a strange way and reappeared later. Make of that what you will.

I would ask users to vote against this person due to their sketchy history.

checking history....

Check away. Anything you're looking for in particular?

Word Frequencies

Word Total said 90 government 75 saudi 65 wikileaks 60 report 57 united 52 shit 51 used 48 documents 48 former 47 states 46 million 45 obama 45 surveillance 44 american 44 company 43 secret 43 trump 43 house 43 data 42 information 42 world 42 media 40 clinton 40

I've got some more for you, this is from the last 6 months.

total words in your posts

23649

unique words

3902

16.50% of total words

15.32 less than the average user

time spent typing posts

9.85 hours

karma per word

1.01

What's the goal?

to see if you're a little bit shilly or not. don't seem to be so yeah all good.

Glad I have your blessing, sire.

Thank you.

suspect as hell.

sketchy history

I have never even heard of this guy

Saying all of this about someone without even knowing them or interacting with them before? That's quite the leap you're making. On another note, look at my history all you want. If I knew what you were looking for I'd try to help you out.

I mean seriously, two whole years of nothing but submissions to /r/politics, worldnews, news, a bit of funny, cars, and conspiracy.

And that's bad, why exactly? I enjoy keeping up with the news (as an interest), politics (part of the news), cars (as a interest), and conspiracies (interest and deal with both politics and news).

Plus we've got a mod here flexing their green muscle

I can't help who comments on my post. Just like you are hear trying to bash me. If I were in cahoots with any mods, don't you think I'd have them remove your post?

I would ask users to vote against this person

This is based off of what exactly?

I'll admit that I am making a leap without having interacted with you or recognizing your name. But what can I say? I love this sub, and I don't want people getting into moderator positions when they shouldn't be. If jumping to conclusions about some things with the chance of being proven wrong in the end is necessary, or judging someone when I know little about them, so be it. I don't mind looking like a fool as long as I've done what I think is best for this place in the process.

If I knew what you were looking for I'd try to help you out.

I'm not really looking for anything in particular, just making observations.

And that's bad, why exactly? I enjoy keeping up with the news (as an interest), politics (part of the news), cars (as a interest), and conspiracies (interest and deal with both politics and news).

Well, bad because many bots use methods like this to increase their karma, spread a particular message, get in good with a community.

There's nothing wrong with having those interests, I think many here probably share them.

I just find it strange that you have a 6 year old account, with history going back only three years. The start of your posting history a solid block of nothing but posts, no comments. Then suddenly you begin making a majority of comments with little submissions.

Did you erase your posting history or something, or did you just not make a single post to reddit until you were a member for 3 years?

I can't help who comments on my post. Just like you are hear trying to bash me. If I were in cahoots with any mods, don't you think I'd have them remove your post?

Indeed you can't. But that wasn't really the point.

I'm not really trying to bash you, I just don't think you should be a mod.

This is based off of what exactly? After all, I'll go ahead an quote you here:

I have never even heard of this guy

Well I think I made it pretty clear why I would ask others not to vote for you.

You have a sketchy posting history.

• Three years of nothing, suddenly submitting all the time, but no comments.

• Don't start to post comments until 5 years after your account is made.

• You have somewhere under 20 submissions here

• Around 150 comments. You have only started commenting

• You only started to comment here 3 months ago

If I may ask, how did you get your flair here and who gave it to you?

Why do you think you'd be a good mod here? You said nothing besides tagging yourself in your original post.

Also, let me be clear. I'm not trying to attack you, so don't take this personal. I just want whats best for this place.

with history going back only three years.

I believe that is a reddit thing and they only keep your account history for 3 years.

I just don't think you should be a mod.

Why?

You have a sketchy posting history.

No I don't. What is sketchy about it? You keep bringing up 3 years and other nonsense when my very first post here was back in 2010 when I created my account.

I certainly have not deleted years worth of reddit posts. Do you know how long that would take?

If I may ask, how did you get your flair here and who gave it to you?

I can't remember. I was browsing a thread and there was a discussion about the flair one mod had and I said "that's pretty cool, how do I get one?" They said send me an image and I'll give you one. So that's what happened.

Why do you think you'd be a good mod here? You said nothing besides tagging yourself in your original post.

The reason I would be a good mod here is because I have been coming to this subreddit for years and always post and share worthwhile information. I even created a write-up in the wiki for /r/conspiracy to try and help people interested in 9/11.

Many of the mods are familiar with me and they already know that I regularly show up and post here. I stay out of the drama and I care about this sub. If you'll go back the last few days in my comment history you can see me talking about trying to clean it up before a mod spot was even purposed.

I believe that is a reddit thing and they only keep your account history for 3 years.

No, that's incorrect.

Why? No I don't. What is sketchy about it? You keep bringing up 3 years and other nonsense

I have already explained it twice. Also it's not nonsense.

when my very first post here was back in 2010 when I created my account.

This is the oldest post I see for you

https://www.reddit.com/r/MURICA/comments/1htb0j/it_doesnt_get_more_murican_than_this_116_trillion/

Could you link your first post from 2010?

I can't remember. I was browsing a thread and there was a discussion about the flair one mod had and I said "that's pretty cool, how do I get one?" They said send me an image and I'll give you one. So that's what happened.

Well that seems a bit strange, they are usually reserved for outstanding members of the community, not people who just ask for them.

The reason I would be a good mod here is because I have been coming to this subreddit for years and always post and share worthwhile information.

That's a lot of people though. Do you have any experience modding? I'm just saying that many others are in the exact same position, helpful members of the community, what sets you apart from them?

If you'll go back the last few days in my comment history you can see me talking about trying to clean it up before a mod spot was even purposed.

Yes I saw that post. It's been known for awhile though that they would be searching for new mods, a post was originally put up asking for mods then put on hold.

While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Here's one from six years ago - https://www.reddit.com/r/greed/comments/g66aa/just_a_reminder_of_everything_wall_street_has/

While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

Alright, I'll admit that I was wrong about your post history.

I opened up your user page in another browser and was able to go beyond 3 years. So it must be some sort of error with my RES.

So I apologize for that.

I singled you out here because for one, you have a flair and that's pretty rare, and two you had a mod give you a nod in the comments. That leads me to believe you probably have a good shot a getting a mod spot.

Can't say I'm 100% on board with that, but the users and other mods will decide. I just hope you have good intentions and aren't apart of some scheme or group to disrupt or hurt this sub in any way.

So again, sorry for calling you out about your post history, I was wrong about that. I'm not gonna keep going through your history now since I was wrong before. Plus three more years to look through? Nah.

Good luck, and if you are chosen, good luck as a new mod.

Also, any mods out there want to give me a flair? :D

Thanks, glad I could clear this up.

Nice job here.

It is unfortunately just one of those things that you have to do from time to time.

Good to see you lurking this deep in the thread haha.

I'm always here my man. It would be fun to have you here too.

It could be like old times...

Maybe the stars will align in my favor!

,)

Didn't realise you'd nominated yourself. You have my vote.

/u/justin_hergina

Would help us cover a much needed timezone, and is a long standing user of the sub.

u/Faugleheim

He seems knowledgeable and fair

I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

• [/r/marchagainsttrump] r/conspiracy tin-foilers are having a mod election - Drumpf supporters flooding in and shilling the recommendations!

^{If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)}

/u/BumBiddlyBiddlyBum

I don't want to be that guy, but maybe we should start this over in a new thread with the edit rule of one nomination per comment? It seems like this thread is inaccurate now since the rule was added after nominating, commenting and voting.

No we dont

No we dont

No we dont

No we dont

No we dont

No we dont

No we dont

No we dont

No we dont

No we dont

No we dont

i nominate myself /u/Rezasaurus_

I like to spend majority of my time on the internet on Reddit and about a year ago /r/Conspiracy became my home-sub.

I love crazy conspiracies and not so crazy conspiracies. I navigate through HOT, NEW, and RISING and see duplicate posts waaaay too much. Happy to help out in that sense to ensure the content is clean and not being doubled or trippled.

Also, i have never been a mod on Reddit. I have a history of "modding" as i have run @Games on DALnet and EFnet on IRC waaaay back in the day so i have some experience working with large communities.

I am on EST and work from 9-5 but am on reddit for most of those hours and when i am at home, reddit is fun is always open on my tablet.

cheers.

/u/snowmandan

Ayyyyyy gracias. I'll do it! Im not sure they'd allow me though, so we'll see lol

You do a good job going through all the thread. I'll give you a vote.

Seconded, he is my favorite kind of smart, classy, and paranoid.

Yes.

I'll give it an honest try.

The irony if a TPP supporter were made a mod here - too rich.

So mod positions should be awarded on a basis of political or economic beliefs?

So you think it's appropriate for someone who believes in the idea of corporatocracy and turning people into corporate serfs to be a moderator here?

The linked post was me providing information and not necessarily support.

If that's your view of TPP supporters then you should try to explain why. You sound a little extremist here and the post you linked doesn't support your view of me.

Neither have you answered my question or explained why ideas on free trade determine moderator suitability.

What's really ironic is the thing you link to as being some sort of super indictment is him stating an uncontested fact and being puzzled why people downvote him.

I nominate this OG:

/u/Amos_Quito

Seconded

Well researched. Hes got my vote.

/u/Amos_Quito gets my vote as well.

I think /u/Amos_Quito would make a fantastic mod.

He stated that he was not interested. He should be using his time to write his book though. I do back up his nomination.

Seriously?

Why not?

Yeahy, good dude.

/u/deagalprojection, /u/magnora7, /u/Chokaholic, /u/WeAreTheResistance, /u/zeropoint357, /u/AhdoanbilivtForilido, Thanks to all of you, I am honored and flattered.

As /u/sep11insidejob said, I'm really not interested - mainly because don't think it would be in the best interests of /r/conspiracy if I were made a full mod. The topics I write about are "controversial" - borderline taboo - especially in the eyes of "The Usual Suspects", those who are doing all they can shut this sub down, and push censorship across Reddit and in social media in general.

Making me a mod would stir up a shit storm of drama: "Look! They made a known anti-Trilobite a mod!!!", lol!

As far as I'm concerned, this sub is precious, in that it is one of the few places left on Reddit with a GREAT mod team - one that hasn't either been infiltrated by saboteurs, or BULLIED into enforcing censorship by "The Usual Suspects". I want to see the integrity of this sub preserved, and I sure as HELL don't want to give those clowns any more ammo in their relentless poop-flinging.

There are a number of other nominees here that I would fully support, and whom I'm sure would do a better job than I.

Thanks again!

Let's do this!

U/Homer_Simpson_Doh

AND MY AXE!

/u/HailedAcorn

nothing to lose.

Me?
Was an admin/mod on the BlameTruthProject forums back in the days for 3-4 years.
Lurk everyday periodically.
Moderate and healthy balance in terms of political/wordly views
Not really willing to speak/judge unless all facts have come into play.
Not an idiot.

/u/sacrimony I am naughty so I know how the bad guys think

No thanks.

We need fewer regressives here, not more. You are, I'm sure, more than welcome in places like /r/politics, r/worldnews and r/hillaryclinton, though.

Source: https://np.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/679563/emanuel_macron_fake_nose_fake_curls_fake/dgp86fd/

u/Orangutan

I'd like to throw my name into the hat. My account has been active (with regular activity) for over 2 years and I have 35.7k karma. I believe in transparency (without completely doxxing myself), so here's a little bit about me. Feel free to ask any followup questions.

This is my top submission to /r/conspiracy [OC] https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/56u8vz/new_evidence_of_ctr_on_reddit_from_podesta_emails/

I am a progressive that caucused for Bernie in IA but voted for Trump in the general because imo the least progressive thing you can do subvert our democracy... especially when you're getting rid of our democratic process to cheat progressives.

I also am a strong supporter of the DNC Fraud Lawsuit https://www.facebook.com/DNCfraudlawsuit/ which I have been following I guess for at least 8 months (proof: example 1, example 2)

I got banned a few days ago from /r/politics for 21 days because I kept responding to a harasser / stalker. This shouldn't happen on any sub and I will fight to defend you all from users like this. https://np.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/69exrs/yes_bernie_would_probably_have_won_and_his/dh6l372/?utm_content=permalink&amp;utm_medium=user&amp;utm_source=reddit&amp;utm_name=frontpage

I think it's too risky to support Democrats especially with Tom "Bernie only appeals to young white liberals" Perez as the new chair (none of the other chair candidates addressed the rigged primaries either though). Because of this, I also started a new sub called /r/New_Movement/ that aims to support 3rd parties, or force the Democratic Party to reform (fair primaries, an apology for 2016, and ending FPTP in favor of scored ballots).

I always try to use sources in my submissions & comments, and I expect others to do the same. In this sub I really have found that there are too many low-effort posts, and too many of them are efforts to spread disinformation (I am definitely not the most tactful... so if that's a requirement I might be out of luck) e.g. https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/69nwuc/wikileaks_calls_npr_out_for_spreading_false/dh8wuc3/?context=10000

How do you weigh the balance between the free flow of information and the necessary enforcement of certain rules to ensure that subverisve manupilation is not able to undermine discourse?

How much do you value free speech as an ideological concept, and do you defer to that maxim when determining what should be removed/censored?

Are you offering? Just curious.

Sorry for the delayed response. Got busy with work and then got busy again. Plus these questions aren't that straightforward ;)

How do you weigh the balance between the free flow of information and the necessary enforcement of certain rules to ensure that subversive manipulation is not able to undermine discourse?

Well here it depends. I'll give you a couple examples. Sometimes it should be pretty obvious. If someone is doxxing a private citizen, no matter how good the cause, it threatens this community so it really can't be tolerated. Generally I think it's best to let upvotes & downvotes do their job, but at the same time I think it's clear to most of us that have spent any time online, we're going to experience trolls and others who will actively work to hurt the sub. For example, I tend to get annoyed when people refuse to back up their claims, or when the sources people give me don't back up what they are claiming. I'll admit that I'm guilty of breaking rule #10 and calling another user a shill. But what's the best way not to be called a shill? Imo the best way is to back up your claims. Personally, I'd like an open discussion about extending rule #11 to comments, but maybe that idea is a little reactionary. However, I'm in this sub because I'm seeking the truth. And imo that should be the guiding principle for the sub. I'm more than willing to change my views when presented new data. But show me the data! And don't do it just for me. Do it so another Redditor who's reading our conversation can be better informed.

How much do you value free speech as an ideological concept

As an ideological concept, beyond the cliche yelling "fire" in a movie theater, free speech is a must. Whether free speech is working optimally in the US is another question.

do you defer to that maxim when determining what should be removed/censored?

I'd like to say that I do but I don't, but I also don't think that it's a big deal. Even if I wanted to make the argument that Reddit supported free speech I wouldn't use specific subreddits as an example to prove my point. I'd say that you have free speech on Reddit because if you don't agree with a particular sub, or if nobody is talking about what you want to talk about, then you can create your own sub. The question is what kind of community do we want?

If I am selected as a mod of this sub I promise to go by the book, but that doesn't mean I'm not going to try to change the book. Personally I think this sub has been flooded with meta posts. Do we really need 5 different posts on the front page of this sub saying how 'this sub has changed' or 'has anyone noticed all these shills posting'... yes... yes I have noticed your shill posts that pushes good content further down. And these posts never have any sources, not even Reddit links... and some of them get tons of upvotes. I don't think they need to be completely banned from the sub, but what if we limited meta discussion to a daily thread or made Friday a "Free talk Friday" kinda thing (allow memes, etc). I'm just spitballing but I think there has to be a better compromise. I also think we should do the best we can to promote good comments & the truth. How do you win an argument with someone who lies over and over again and doesn't include sources? And we're all aware how easy it is to make low-effort comments, right? Why should we give astroturfers a free pass to shitpost in our sub and paint a narrative by commenting en masse.

Hmm, this kind of post reads like a political campaign.

I'm just going to group this other user's comment in with this while I'm at it. Sorry for only talking politics... I'm into other stuff too, but politics does take up most of my Reddit time. Overall, if it's good conspiracy content I will support it.

Anyway, thanks again for your time and consideration.

I'd like to extend rule #11 to comments

and another contender bites the dust, RIP

( if this is your position there is no way in hell you will be a mod here )

Very much appreciate your response, but sadly your stance on the free exchange of information disqualifies you from moderating the sub.

Cheers.

Can you elaborate? This sub already limits free speech, so what in particular am I saying that's any different? You aren't allowed to doxx here. You aren't allowed to call users a "shill". You aren't even allowed to post obviously fabricated stories.

So am I allowed to spam the shit out of users, to the point where I either astroturf the narrative my way with false information or they call me a shill and good users get banned? Am I allowed to astroturf this sub with shitposts / shitcomments to undermine the sub's entire message? I don't want to do that, but that's what you seem to be telling me people are able to do. And imo there should be no surprise that this sub is filled with trolls & shills if that's the case.

Honestly your short dismissal kinda pisses me off a bit. You asked me an extremely philosophical question and just brushed it off in a sentence, and your response is quite contrary to how the sub actually works (I.e. It already limits free speech). I guess I'm not sure what you think I want to do and why you think that. I'm no vigilante dictator. The only thing I'm looking for is the truth.

I apologize for the short reply, its not that I don't value your input on the point its just that your mentality, sadly, is incompatible with the mechanisms of moderation which facilitate the organic curation of content on the sub.

The mentality that you hold opens the door to a paternalistic approach to moderation which has simply never been allowed to take hold on the mod team, and sadly it was that core maxim within your argument which resulted in a prima facie exclusion from consideration.

The issue is not that what you propose is unreasonable (and I very much respect where you come from with your desire to ward off untruths and attacks); but the bottom line is that the mod teams will never assert themselves as arbiters of truth, which is why you are, sadly, fundamentally incompatible with the moderation of the subreddit. And, no, we don't want you to re-write the book, we have fought hard to keep the organic curation of content as the fundamental maxim of this subreddit, and that will not be changing.

We welcome your contributions to the subreddit very much, and your ends are surely noble, but sadly they also clash, on the most basic level, with the mod's team unwillingness to paternalisticly determine truth from on high.

The issue is not that what you propose is unreasonable (and I very much respect where you come from with your desire to ward off untruths and attacks);the bottom line is simply that the mod team will never assert themselves as arbiters of truth, which is why you are, sadly, fundamentally incompatible with the moderation of the subreddit. And, no, we don't want you to re-write the book, we have fought hard to keep the organic curation of content as the fundamental maxim of this subreddit, and that will not be changing (if you notice, we moderate behavior on this subreddit not content. You've suggested mods begin to moderate content for "truth", which is simply not happening).

It's not the content or the truth that I'd like to see get moderated. Maybe I emphasized certain examples too much or maybe you are trying to err on the side of caution, but that's definitely not what I'm trying to talk about.

The behaviors I'm talking about are repeated lying, not trying to help the discussion by providing relevant facts/sources to back up your claims, etc. Obviously none of that can be determined by a single comment and I'm not saying we ban anybody who 'sounds' like a shill. I imagine you guys don't ban users based on a single post or comment, but rather you look at their history and see if there is good evidence to determine if the user is legit or only works to troll other users, right? That's all I'm saying... that there are limits to free speech even on this sub (just like the sub is already supposed to limit self posts with lack of context or content; no memes; etc).

There is a difference between users saying they believe "X"; users asserting that "X" is true with supporting evidence; and users that assert "X" is true repeatedly without supporting evidence, even when they are pressed or questioned for more information. And sometimes you'll see tons of users submitting low-effort comments with none of them backing up their claims even when asked. They blanket the post (astroturf) with these comments to influence other visitors who also take a look at the comments. The goal is to paint a narrative via hivemind i.e. if everybody here believes it then it must be true because only a few people are saying otherwise. Shouldn't we empower our active community members moreso than the people trying to troll us?

I've experienced the following so many times.

Redditor: X is true

Me: No, it's not. Why do you believe that? Do you have any links?

Redditor: It's obvious X is true, there is plenty of evidence to support it [does not include any links to said evidence]

Me: Ok... can you link me to that data? I've already Googled the subject and can't find anything that supports your claim

Redditor: Post proof that the sky is blue

Or here's an actual example that happened to me recently in this sub (I wrote the above inspired from this link). https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/69nwuc/wikileaks_calls_npr_out_for_spreading_false/dh8vyru/?context=10000

In the link directly above it looks like a mod even removed that user's comment, but maybe the user just deleted it on their own? If it was a mod then how can what I'm saying be fundamentally incompatible with the moderation of the subreddit if what I'm proposing is just more of the same? Maybe we just need more people in the community to stop the trolls?

The behaviors I'm talking about are repeated lying, not trying to help the discussion by providing relevant facts/sources to back up your claims, etc.

Fundamentally, what such a thing requires is a top-down judgement of veracity by moderators which is something we simply are not willing to do. You can say that you're moderating behavior in that case, but at the end of the day "behavior" becomes a subjective term in the context of requiring sources and such to back up claims. We want to encourage discussion, not put limits on what is acceptable by virtue of adapting a standard of "veracity". Such a thing undermines the very nature of the subreddit, as it functions as a space curated entirely by votes with regards the content of a given submission or comment.

What it sounds like you might be better served doing would be to be active in the comment sections of some of the submissions on the sub, as we much rather you have a horizontal playing field with other users when debating veracity/sources/etc.

So yea, I suppose my response again is that, although it may seem like you're going after behavior, your perspective eventually requires subjective determinations of veracity and is simply incompatible with the hexis of the current mod team as, again, we would not a vertical control structure with regards veracity

.

Aren't mods already removing comments / banning users for trolling? Can you tell if a mod deleted this comment in the middle of the page then, or did that user remove it on their own? https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/69nwuc/wikileaks_calls_npr_out_for_spreading_false/dh8vyru/?context=10000

If a mod removed it then what's the difference between what I'm saying and what's already happening?

You can say that you're moderating behavior in that case, but at the end of the day "behavior" becomes a subjective term in the context of requiring sources and such to back up claims. We want to encourage discussion, not put limits on what is acceptable by virtue of adapting a standard of "veracity".

Rather than encouraging discussion, doesn't this encourage and empower trolls to post completely unverified information and lies?

What we should have no problem with: I heard X from a friend so I think this (we shouldn't have an issue because 'it is what it is' and it is anecdotal evidence that the user didn't exaggerate or lie about)

What we should have a problem with: Google it yourself [sometimes a "you idiot" gets thrown in there] (I hear this one a lot even when claims don't match up to Google results)

Such a thing undermines the very nature of the subreddit, as it functions as a space curated entirely by votes with regards the content of a given submission or comment.

MANY things can undermine the very nature of the subreddit. As soon as a post reaches /all we're going to get users who never would comment in our posts before who will work to undermine our community, astroturf us with low-effort comments, and upvote other low-effort comments (or has this sub opted out of /all?). Obviously that's not the only time it happens, but if we want good discussion shouldn't we discourage discussion that hurts our sub? I wouldn't even call what many ppl do in this sub 'discussion' - many have an agenda to just keep repeating a lie until another user snaps and calls them a shill or troll or something. That's what happened to me in /r/politics and is why I got banned for 21 days. Is THIS the kind of behavior you're saying should be allowed in this sub?

What it sounds like you might be better served doing would be to be active in the comment sections of some of the submissions on the sub, as we much rather you have a horizontal playing field with other users when debating veracity/sources/etc.

How is it a horizontal playing field when people in this community have to constantly deal with trolls? You originally asked about rules to ensure that subversive manipulation is not able to undermine discourse. Isn't trolling, astroturfing, and brigading inherently subversive manipulation?

I'd like to stick around, but I don't think I'm the only user tired of the clutter (e.g. constant meta posts) and tired of meeting trolls here.

yes they are, these mods are hypocrites at best

Assuredly basically admitted that he doesn't want you as a mod because you wouldn't go easy on the hyper obvious CTR/ShareBlue trash that constantly shit up this sub since they were given $40m more to shill for regressive globalists.

MANY things can undermine the very nature of the subreddit. As soon as a post reaches /all we're going to get users who never would comment in our posts before who will work to undermine our community, astroturf us with low-effort comments, and upvote other low-effort comments (or has this sub opted out of /all?).

Notice how the rules are specifically catered to those exact people that destroy this community, and against actual users.

We also request that anyone who is interested be of open mind and that they be individuals who can commit a some time to guard against low effort content and to uphold the values of the page.

A day later and I'm still trying to wrap my brain around you being auto-disqualified because "curating content" when the OP specifically mentions doing that exact thing in very broad, non-specific terms.

:(

TL;DR: One of the primary things you look for in a moderator is a willingness to ignore obvious shills in order to further deteriorate the sub.

How else is your comment supposed to be taken, because I can't see any other way.

In the link directly above it looks like a mod even removed that user's comment, but maybe the user just deleted it on their own?

I'm not sure if you have received an answer to this yet. I didn't see one so I figured I'd chime in.

If the user deleted it by themselves it would say [deleted]. If a mod (or an admin as well, I think) removes a comment it will say [removed].

you guys moderate content all the time. idk how many messages ive received from you guys to delete a post or be banned.

Hmm, this kind of post reads like a political campaign.

Are we sure we want a career-politician to moderate?

I agree. I nearly dozed off reading through those carefully thought out responses he thinks we wanted to hear.

Woah way too fucking political. Huge conflict of interest here.

I agree that you're a good contributor to our community and that you'd be a good mod.

Who ever you pick, make sure you do not pick /u/Mike_McDermott. I cannot participate in any forum that would allow a person like that to be a moderator.

Why the fuck would you have a vote from a known-compromised source.

Antlyone you pick should be subscribed for at least 1 year

I don't meet the criteria, but I would like to help clean up the board if possible.

I was an intelligence analyst in the Marine Corps with TS/SCI clearance.

I have years of strategic analysis, and geopolitics.

Are you aware of Strategic Sentinal forums? If not you should check them out. It sounds like something you would be interested in.

Oh lord. Honey, regardless of the fact that the Chinese already have everyone's info because of that OPM boondoggle, there are just some things you don't say on the internet.

What could possibly go wrong? Obviously every analyst has a clearance, and obviously I dont have it anymore.

Try again sweetie.

The still having it part wasn't obvious, carry on devil dog.

If selected, I promise to smite evildoers, shit talkers, sayanim and other assorted miscreants.

I would've considered nominating fuckaduckfuckaduck, or globalhell. But both of them deleted their accounts a few days ago.

Fuckaduckfuckaduck is here. I think he commented in this thread actually.

I see you are correct. Glad to know I'm wrong about that.

Guys you know what would make me take this subreddit seriously?

Actual research done. Please heavily moderate this sub perhaps closely like /r/askhistorians does. Require submissions to be only text. Make sure that statements or evidence actually have citations.

I'd much rather my conspiracists actually have an element of independent journalism rather than what I would say is the equivalent of Flat Earther ramblings.

All these memes and quotes over pictures do nothing but lead it more towards /r/circlejerk.

plz make me a mod so i can further my agenda and censor anything that goes against my beliefs like the rest of the fucking mods on this fucking website. thank you.

Just no one who posts often in r/The_Donald or r/politics. It would be nice to have the new guy/girl be a moderate moderator who doesn't play into the political bullshit that came close to taking over this sub.

Is a subreddit able to enforce a 100-500 comment requirement or a 6 month waiting period for new members to Submitting Posts/Links? That would definitely scale back the recent barrages of controlled spam posts, and that may bring back accessibility and discussion that was once present.

u/polkadotgirl

u/putin_loves_cats. really open minded doesn't mind talking about anything. Only person to post about the papal bloodlines :)

Well I wouldn't personally say he's open minded, but I like his conviction to a cause. So even though I disagree with him on a lot of his stances I second his nomination too.

Somebody recommended me and then it got deleted. Why?

Because the user who nominated you already nominated themselves. Their other nominations were removed I believe. Go ahead and throw your hat into the ring if you are interested.

Thank you!

"one year old account and +1000 positive karma."

So basically you want karma-whores as moderators?

Is that wise?

I would think that /r/conspiracy would be beyond such requirement. The 'truth' hurts, and is therefore often downvoted, and people not afraid of the 'truth' are the ones who should be moderators imo.

1000 karma is no where near karma whore status.

Perhaps not, but so long as karma is used as requirement for nomination then the point still stands.

I was responsible for bringing down Milo, I can help weed out other undesirables. Count me in.

/u/polkadotgirl

^{I had erroneously removed another user's nomination of her, that's why I'm making a second nomination}

Thanks!

I nominate myself /u/polkadotgirl

1) Any user can check my post history 2) I am fair but respectful of the rules 3) I am on here a lot anyway 4) I am passionate and offer a woman's perspective (do not see a lot of women on here) 5) I am open-minded and love this subreddit.

Also, I am a huge contributor here. I have written some pretty popular posts, and I write whenever I can!!

I am a compassionate person who cares deeply about others, but as a teacher, I also understand the necessity of rules. At the same time, I am definitely one who believes (for the most part) the less moderation the better. I feel I would be balanced and fair.

Also, I have no agenda.

You definitely have my support, especially now that I see you actually have the time and desire to become a mod.

I could think up of a bunch of people that do deserve mod that I trust on this site (you definitely being one of them), but it does tip the scale in one's favour for me if that person actually wants to be a mod. That implies they would take the time to actually do the work required as a moderator, which is definitely an important part of the deal.

I see a lot of people saying theyd be good at it, but they do not want to.

As for me, I definitely could devote some time. Are there shifts?

The one negative thing is I really do not have mod experience, though I have been made a mod of subreddits before.

Do you mind if I ask you a question before you become a mod? What is your opinion on the presence of shills on this sub and what would you do to prevent them from taking over?

This one is tough because we have all been in a situation where we have been attacked by shills, and at times we just cannot prove it.

I hope that this does not weave around the question, but the less moderation we have, the more free speech we have. That leaves us more susceptible to trolls, shills, etc. It is kind of a risk we take.

I do NOT want to turn into one of those subreddits where there are a thousand rules and everything gets removed.

If I seriously became a mod, Id be surprised. I feel like that it would show this sub is somewhat 'real'...and I would do my best to protect that.

What you can know about me is that I have no agenda and I am not power hungry. I would do my best to be fair, balanced, and open-minded.

I would continue to comment and not lose that passion. I would ensure that I am still a member of the sub, not just somebody who removes comments.

I hope this answers your question without going around it.

I think the shills are just going to exist. What we can do is have fair mods who make all users feel welcome.

From my understanding, there is a rule where we cannot call out shills? Perhaps that can be changed into something that makes more sense.

I feel you, its sort of a catch 22, less rules, more opportunity for manipulation. I just feel like its sort of hypocritical to have a rule against calling people a shill but also allow shilling to take place. What recourse do us users have against this sort of thing? I mean, i just want a place to read about interesting stuff without having to be constantly in guard against misinformation. The shills make reddit unbearable and there is basically nothing the users can do to stop it.

Yes, the shills are the worst part of Reddit. Yet we must pretend they do not exist.

I definitely would take an active part in fighting against shills!

that sucks. the rules literally protect the shills

I would advocate to change them.

I nominated you, good luck I hope you win :)

I will confirm everything polkadotgirl is saying, it has been true time and time again with every post they make. If anyone has good intentions on this sub, it's polkadotgirl.

Thanks! Id nominate you as well. I am allowed to nominate myself and one other correct?

Yes, those are the current rules as I understand them. Thank you for the nomination!

Already voted. Unofficially agreed.

Seconded.

Ive been called a shill by every side am I qualified?

That describes most of the current mod team, so yeah, probably ;)

Haha. not making a great case for yourselves

More a commentary on the fact that many people call anyone who has a less extreme position than themselves a shill.

Fair point. It's a messy situation, I just wish it was acknowledged better and treated more seriously because it is a problem. It may be nearly unsolvable, but it's getting worse as time goes on.

I don't think any of us on the mod team deny that there are shills here — though I think there is fair debate as to the prevalence of honest to god paid shills. I personally think the useful idiots and common trolls outnumber them by a good margin.

The problem is what to do about it. We rarely remove posts or comments that talk about shills in the general case, but directly calling other users out as shills doesn't clarify or elevate the discussion; it just muddies the waters.

I agree. A sticky comment on threads that are obviously taken over and have bot upvoted comments that are either paid shills or the common trolls, that simply addresses the issue and alerts anyone reading the thread and reassures folks that r/conspiracy is NOT t_dlite, that would be great.

Also describes most of the shills, just sayin

Probably describes just about everyone who's been on this sub for the last year and expresses any kind of a nuanced opinion. For most of the "actual" partisan shills, I'd imagine most of them only get called shills by one side. The ones I think we have to worry about more, the JTRIG/Elgin types, are the more subtle ones, who will take any positions as long as it distracts and divides. They probably get called shills on all sides.

But as mods we are just more visible. I remove a blatantly rule-breaking post from a Trump supporter, and I'm automatically CTR/ShariaBlue. Do the same for a "leftist" comment, and I'm on Putin's payroll. Somehow I'm both a holocaust denier and an SJW Zionist shill. Go figure.

If you get the job and apply the rules consistently, this is what you have to look forward to. Good luck, though. I hope you get in.

Well of course anyone in a position of power is going to get accused of shilling, probably mainly by the shills themselves.

I realize what a mess it is, and on how many levels it is a mess, and honestly I'm ready to deal with it. "Tread lightly and carry a big stick."

However I've never worked with a mod community before, that's my one weak spot. I don't quite understand how that dynamic will play out, but I hope everyone is working together to benefit the sub with good intentions and there's no bad actors on the mod team (or even worse, if it was the majority of the mod team). I hope it's not like that. If it is like that, I'd hope someone with knowledge would PM me and tell me just what I'm getting myself in to.

one of this (new) mod gave me a warning in this sub here, because i called someone a shill and he said "next time i will be banned" ...

I nominate myself /u/polkadotgirl

1) Any user can check my post history 2) I am fair but respectful of the rules 3) I am on here a lot anyway 4) I am passionate and offer a woman's perspective (do not see a lot of women on here) 5) I am open-minded and love this subreddit.

Oh good, an opportunity to compromise this awful subreddit even more than it already is.

I nominate /u/Orangutan

Mods, my only request is that you select someone who is fairly impartial politically. Anyone heavily active on any of the political subs (left and right) should be excluded. Tip for other people nominating: use snoopsnoo.com to check out users reddit history

Oh hey, this again. I'll throw my hat in the ring.

Before you ask, I have actually been a reditor for over 6 years, but I have had multiple accounts that I usually keep deleting (for privacy's sake). I had a four year one at one point--my longest concunrrent account, and I have been active in /r/conspiracy for the past 6 months only. But the reason I am applying is I am situated in New Zealand and free to do some moderating during my day time hours which are, of course, your late evening hours. The reason is I think you should have people from a few different parts of the globe to keep the sub/moderating team relatively active all hours with as little stress or burden on 1-2 people. I am suitable for this role because I actually have a good sense of what is evidence, what is proof, what is useful information. In fact, in the past I've made a few requests to the mod team to have one or two things sticked that had a lot of evidence and were useful resources for people looking into certain conspiracies. So, basically, I want to help the users beyond just cleaning up the forum: my end-game, so to speak, is to make this a great resources for people to go to to learn about conspiracies while largely being unimpeded by false info, or relatively unsubstantiated claims. I want people to be able to come here, learn a lot as easily as they can--we all know the learning curve for conspiracies is quite high, or rather the suspension of disbelief can be--because I know there is some truth out there, and I want people to get on that wavelength where we, as a society, start questioning fractional reserve lending, banking practices, spying, war, hatred, bombs, propoganda, everything that is making our society worse. I realize this was a bit of a rant, but y'know you gotta see I'm on board. So good luck with the modding process and if you don't pick me this time around (cause of karam/post history or something), just keep me in mind for next time: maybe I won't delete this account.

I like your pitch and upvoted you. How exactly would you decide what is considered as "having an agenda"? I know it's a tough question, but where would you draw the line?

I liked this list a lot, btw:

start questioning fractional reserve lending, banking practices, spying, war, hatred, bombs, propoganda, everything that is making our society worse.

I will nominate myself, /u/kybarnet

Another solid choice IMO.

And me

Thank you :)

I support this nomination, I am familiar with some of the other subs in which kybarnet is active.

Thank you very much :)

I support this nomination.

/u/kybarnet is an active user and is always asking tough questions to explore deep into theories.

They promote out of the box discussions while still moderating when necessary.

Thank you Occupy. Glad we've been working together. Soon we will get to updating our CSS (mobile link images aren't working). I'll invite you to a test sub (or make your own) and we will copy it over and practice. :)

can i second this nomination and still have my original nomination up? or is this considered double voting?
kybarnet is a really solid choice!

This is great feedback. I normally don't ask often but was hoping thing were going well, thank you.

I already know your modding from other places, if you are willing to add to your workload, you would be very welcome here.
But since you will get a lot of support anyway, I wanted to nominate a lesser known name ;-)

Btw, I still owe you one for vouching for someone, when I had doubts.

Support this nomination

Set me up to mod. I'm active and understand the flow. I will fight for our users and not back down.

/u/polkadotgirl

I can promise everyone she is one of us. If you need proof, check her history. She is an outstanding teacher who has to moderate some serious and difficult situations at school so being a moderator here will be a walk in the park for her. :) I understand there are quite a lot of differences between moderating students and a subreddit but I know she would be great for us. :)

+1

I would personally gladly nominate a bunch of regular posters from r/C_S_T that I know well are great people, but my intuition tells me they wouldn't really have the time or desire to become mods

Second!

Having someone who's job it is to gt people to submit to authority probably won't make a good mod.

A moderator is supposed to enforce the rules of the sub.

As you know, being a teacher is much more than getting people to submit to authority. You should read her teaching posts if you really want to get a better idea of what it is like to be a teacher in today's day and age.

Excellent teachers like /u/polkadotgirl make the best out of difficult situations by being fair and understanding of all different kinds of people. These are qualities that are desired in not just a moderator but also in a person in general.

It is just my word but I know, without a doubt, that she would be a great moderator.

/u/m2fresh

4 year old account.. top comment is in conspiracy. love the sub, visit daily.. sometimes for hours clicking through the content.

Deep^{intherabbithole}

where have you been for months?

thanks everyone who is willing to put in the time to help us! thank you

u/Putin_loves_cats

No. Please no. Literally anyone else.

Definitely agreed. Should not be a mod.

That's what I like about him... he's got my vote!

Second u/Putin_loves_cats

Thanks, guys & gals. Cheers!

Cheers love!

Cheers!

I'd go for that guy over all the self nominations I've read so far.

Nice

I'm going to nominate myself /u/SnowySaint

I do not have a reputation on this sub, which may preclude me from the job, because I am a someone who generally enjoys reading (listening to) other people's thoughts. A luker in other words.

• I have about 10 years experience moderating several diverse communities.
• Mature adult, on AKST (UTC -9:00, EST -4:00)
• Most active primarily between 9:00-23:00 local

Will happily give more personal details, and answer any reasonable questions. Thank you for your consideration.

/u/SpongeBobSquarePants which is me. Reddit user for 9 years with the ability to have an open mind and enforce the rules as written.

I like you!

Checked your history, is it allowed to endorse someone?
You seem reasonable. I like reasonable.

Long time Canadian reader, well before the recent election and the dramatic shift in this place. Wouldn't mind helping out with sifting through the riff raff. I am a web developer who spends quite a bit of my downtime on this sub.

I keep an open mind, enjoy poking my head down every rabbit hole. Not a fan of partisan politics and sensationalism. Lemme know.

I nominate myself, I'll officially throw my hat in to the ring. I already run the subreddit /r/magnora7, and I've been on reddit for 8 years and on /r/conspiracy for probably about 4 years. I would be happy to help clean this place up and maybe stop the decay if possible, and the pyramid of disagreement would be my fundamental basis for deciding how to apply the rules existing rules: http://fablegod.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/disagreement-hierarchy.jpg

People who strive for the top are good for the subreddit, and people who are regularly dragging conversation toward the bottom and are arguing disingenuously are damaging this sub and should get 3 strikes before they're out. This will ensure the sub is about conversation regarding the topics, rather than derailment and anger that obfuscates the subject for people who are truly interested. This will be an accurate application of rule 5, no trolling.

This will be my approach if I am made a mod. I want this sub to be a place where people can talk and learn new ideas, rather than being intimidated in to silence by hyper-aggressive trolls.

Please pick him! Please! We need productive discussion!

+1

I support this nomination, I am subbed to r/magnora7 because it often has interesting content.

pyramid of disagreement

Fucking thank you for this. Probably one of, if not the only, hierarchy I would consent to be governed by.

Glad someone else out there likes it as much as I do

This guy gets my vote

I miss the days pre-election. I use to come here everyday. I still am here a lot, but I try my best to not reply to anything even though there are times I really want to.

The comments that drive me crazy are similar to: "Oh, you must be a Trump voter, ugh"

"Russia is at fault for Trump winning which caused the newest Earthquakes"

"Only shills would think Israel has done anything wrong"

"Hillary is the reason Aliens won't ever come back"

"Go back to Th_Donald"

"Go back to HillarygotRobbed"

"It is a FACT that Russia is the cause of all our problems" "Proof? Only a Commie would ask for proof"

"Syria is run by the Devil! It should be destroyed." "You think Assad is not a problem now? So you like to see babies be gassed and die?!"

"Trump will destroy us all." "I don't care that this is a thread about the newest pyramid found. Trump will probably sell it."

Yes, I made up all those comments, but they are actually not far off from a lot I've seen lately.

Just trying to give examples of what I hate seeing here when NONE of it is constructive.

Bringing up how much you hate trump, or how he is bad when it has nothing to do with what is being talked about is crap.

I am not good with putting names to things, or what all the labels of bad behavior are. So if this is what you are talking about, sorry.

Politic posts that have nothing to do with Conspiracies shouldn't be let through, but that's my opinion.

Sorry for the rant lol. I guess I'm posting this here under your nomination because you are the one I'd nominate.

Again, I was just posting the above comments as crazy examples that are pretty close to a lot of recent posts lately. I'll stop rambling lol

I vote /u/WitchyWarrior

Needs more +1's

I'm a day late here, but consider this an endorsement for sure.

Big thumb's-up for M-7!

/u/Jango139

I'm a conspiracy theorist, I have conspiracies.

I nominate myself. I would do my best

Seconded.

Others I would suggest have been nominated so /u/SovereignMan is my nomination because I think he should come back.

Clean up bots and more transparency on deleted posts. We do not need more mods.

I nominate myself as moderator. I want to banhammer all the shills. Vote for me if you dont like shills.

Who would ban you then?

Its a surprise.

Sounds more like a conspiracy!

How can you tell someone is a shill with enough certainty to ban?

You cant. Ban them anyways.

That sounds like something a deep-cover agent would say.

Better ban everyone, just to be certain.

Banning shills is simple - identifying shills correctly isn't. What's your plan?

u/Putin_loves_cats

Seconded

I second Putin_loves_cats

I don't always agree with PLC, but I'm confident he'd make a fine mod.

+1

I nominate me.

If chosen I swear not to run out for a pack of smokes.

I'd love to moderate here. My 2 year + account was unjustly banned from this sub about a month ago. I've posted about it and others being unfairly banned from this sub.

I believe in freedom of expression, unless someone is attacked personally. I will not ban anyone because their opinions differ from my own, which mods here haven't followed. We are all adults. Adults argue and curse and get frustrated. Being an adult shouldn't be a bannable offense. If you attack someone personally then I'd put a temporary ban. I don't believe in banning anyone outright unless they're clearly trolling, and even then, they deserve a second chance.

/u/desecration29 I'd be interested a lot in doing something like this, I take a great interest in this sub Reddit, and have been around for what seems like forever:)

Not a fan of the right or left..only a fan of equality, rights, and truth..

I just dont want anyone who wants to supress the russia-trump conspiracy. it has stayed hot (comey just fired by the guy he was investigating) and I think its clear there are motivated groups out there interested in suppressing it.

No thank you. I don't fit the criteria anyway.

What if I don't have over 1000 positive karma but do have previous experience as Mod on conspiracy forums? Was Mod for VigCitizen for a while. :x

/u/nanmart. Openminded. Critical thinker. Never been banned.

I'm not sure that's something to be proud of... ;)

I would love the opportunity to mod here, and help keep junk submissions to a minimum. I found Reddit, and specifically /r/conspiracy during the whole Find the Boston Marathon Bomber incident. This to me showed how powerful Reddit and the free flow of information can be, and where Reddit went out of their way to apologize for that incident, but this single event, and the coverage of it has shaped my world view, and opened my eyes fully. I will always cherish this sub, and the people who contribute here because of it. I also arranged the James Tracey AMA, and will work hard to bring in more quality AMA guests.

I really don't even bother posting or lurking in any other sub but this one, and would really enjoy the opportunity to help mod. I nominate myself /u/WeAreTheResistance

I want to nominate u/d8_thc

I'm not sure if he wants it, but I've been a part of /r/holofractal since the early days and he has done a wonderful job growing that small sub into something.

He has some distance from all the political bullshit, and seems highly in-tune with the occult/esoteric side of things, which I think we all agree we need more of on here.

Check out his post history -- some of his recent posts have crushed it on the sub.

Anyone from holofractal is probably legit. I live that sub even though most of the parts go over my head

Definitely support u/d8_thc if he has the time to do double duty and work as a mod here as well of course.

Seconded. That user would bring such an incredibly refreshing change. Super nice, wicked smart, would certainly trust him.

<3

I also support u/d8_thc, but I wonder whether he really wants to be bothered with the drama here.

I love r/holofractal, and am extremely grateful for its existence.

yeah, I didn't ask him before the nomination -- I just thought of him immediately when I saw the post because I think he'd do a great job.

Agree

I've reconsidered about u/d8_thc. Not that I don't trust him or think he wouldn't be a good mod, quite the contrary.

It's just that he is one of the few people that are doing the very important job of sharing and explaining the fractal holographic unified field theory and everything related to it (relating spirituality to physics) to a wide audience here on Reddit. If he became a mod I'm just afraid it would eat up so much of his time that he wouldn't be able to do the work he is doing right now.

So u/d8_thc please don't accept the nomination (if you win) if that would infringe on your spreading of the work of Haramein or anything related to r/holofractal :)

Hey thanks :).

I declined the offer for similar reasons.

<3

It's happening. Pick me. I'm down pick me. I kick ass everyone likes me

I expected nothing less from you. Thank you.

Ah yes, just what we need here, someone who is a staunch TPTB supporter, loves the idea of TPP and corporatocracy, and is anti-conspiracy /s

Yea that's not me.

I nominate u/Loud_Volume.

+1 for him. He has a great grasp on the esoteric, occult and metaphysical aspects of various conspiracies.

There it is. Love this guy!

Agree. We need a mod who will push the esoteric, which is the root of all conspiracy.

/u/loud_volume

/u/conspiracyseeker

/u/astralrocker2001

/u/lightbringerflex

Excellent choices, and I wholeheartedly agree.

Seconded /u/astralrocker2001

/u/C1in

I didn't see anything saying I can't nominate myself. Been around a while now. Love this sub, happy to offer objective help.

/u/snowmandan

/u/d8_thc

/u/Putin_Loves_Cats

Haha thanks man I already got nominated, I was pretty far down I think.

"Contest mode" means that the top level posts are changed around randomly. I show I've upvoted you quite a bit so you can't be all bad ;)

Oh neat! Thanks! I haven't checked it out on anything but mobile yet

What are you guys doing to ensure shills don't become mods?

How can you be sure someone is a shill?

Am I a shill? How do I know?

using simple deduction and research. I.e. I know shills exist, I have read about their tactics. I open a thread and see a bunch of users coordinately using those tactics, i assume that the thread is being brigaded by shills. its pretty easy to spot a thread filled with trolls, they all sound exactly the same with the same talking points.

Maybe you shouldn't be a moderator then.

I dont want to be a moderator, Im sure I would be terrible at it. I am also rather contentious and argumentative

Tagging each of you.

arent you too busy watching td?

I nominate myself /u/VladimirPigPutin.

I have tons of moderating experience; running both /r/Geosim and /r/IntelCrab.

I also run a small scale media publication entitled "The Intel Crab"; a place where I often share a variety of concpiracy; related content. This publication has over 4,200 followers on twitter and continues to grow.

All in all, please nominate me. I am a big news junkie who knows a thing or too about...things.

I'd like to nominate myself!

U/Ragnarokcometh

I'd love to help, but I'm sure there are more qualified individuals.

That alone puts you ahead of most in my book, assuming you're not using some reverse psychology on me ;)

/u/elnegroik

I wouldn't mind modding another sub. I mainly ghost here but post occasionally.

Self nomination.

I periodically check this sub on the daily, my method would be casual but the quality of my moderation would be high.

I have been a casual moderator for 8ch's /pol/ in the past and through that I have learned that the best form of moderation is to take a step back and let the community point out the frauds (before stepping in.)

Freedom of speech and expression is of the highest priority. Identifying threads that are purposely spreading misinformation will be my job, and closing those threads down is what I will be here for.

Get in contact if you would like further info.

I am interested and meet the requirements, PM me for any further information required

I nominate myself /u/the_gray_ghost. I do solemnly swear if nominated I will do my best to get 9/11 on our list of confirmed conspiracies as it is the greatest act of deception committed against the world. My interests in conspiracies include thiomersol and foreign animal DNA in vaccines, big pharma poisoning millions of people world wide to get rich, fractional reserve banking/ the federal reserve, manufacturing the refugee crisis in order to get cheap labor and new globalist voters into Europe and obviously 9/11. I usually get into hot water with a lot of other members of this sub over most of these topics but we need diversity in the sub, not just political posts like the past few months.

I worry that your more right/traditional views will get in the way of moderating. I might be wrong too, but I do know I don't want someone who associates with any US or any country political leanings. I just worry what might happen if most of the sub would happen to disagree with something you do agree with. While I know we won't find the perfect candidate for moderator, I wish we came as close as possible. (p.s. as a gay guy I don't appreciate my moderators calling people faggots).

I worry that your more right/traditional views will get in the way of moderating. I might be wrong too, but I do know I don't want someone who associates with any US or any country political leanings. I just worry what might happen if most of the sub would happen to disagree with something you do agree with. While I know we won't find the perfect candidate for moderator, I wish we came as close as possible. (p.s. as a gay guy I don't appreciate my moderators calling people faggots).

I worry that your more right/traditional views will get in the way of moderating. I might be wrong too, but I do know I don't want someone who associates with any US or any country political leanings. I just worry what might happen if most of the sub would happen to disagree with something you do agree with. While I know we won't find the perfect candidate for moderator, I wish we came as close as possible. (p.s. as a gay guy I don't appreciate my moderators calling people faggots).

More hot water here I come, you just said you don't want mods with any political leanings yet I don't need to look far in your comment history to see you saying fuck Trump? Double standards much? You obviously have a political leaning against trump, so it's ok for you to have political leanings but mods can't? They must be neutral on everything? I was banned over saying the /u/ redpilledfaggot says things that a normal faggot would say..... Making a joke about his user name got me banned for a day with no warning what so ever when I never had any previous problems in this sub. Just because you're gay doesn't mean you have special status over others. You have no right to control what others think or say. Getting offended by what someone else jokes about is completely your problem. You're making the choice to be angry about it. It seems like others rights to free speech end where your feelings begin. The thought police have no place in a sub of free thinkers

I worry that your more right/traditional views will get in the way of moderating. I might be wrong too, but I do know I don't want someone who associates with any US or any country political leanings. I just worry what might happen if most of the sub would happen to disagree with something you do agree with. While I know we won't find the perfect candidate for moderator, I wish we came as close as possible. (p.s. as a gay guy I don't appreciate my moderators calling people faggots).

No nomination but I don't like the whole 'no offensive comments' rule. We are adults here and do not need to have language monitored. What are we, an Ivy League school?

And with that, I nominate /u/HarvardGrad007.

I have seen a number of quality posts by you as well, very well done. I would like to see you on the mod list.

Thanks for the kind words but I'll respectfully decline.

I have a ton of vaccine links saved, might need to start posting again.

Can I request a few of these links. I just don't want to miss them in the multitude of new posts that grace the "new" part of conspiracy daily. I've been very interested in Vaccines lately. It's one of those things that people have pushed too hard for, and too many people are against. Too much controversy, keen to hear what you've found!

Sure

Vaccines have many risks. Here are a few --- Most of the viruses that vaccines are made for have a very low (sometimes near zero) mortality rate in healthy individuals. A cost/benefit analysis should always be undertaken.

Vaccines and flu shots containing mercury may contribute to severe neurological diseases and/or death in children. - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19205900

Vaccination in infants less than 3 months is associated with an increased risk of sudden infant death syndrome. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7557822

DTP or tetanus vaccination increases the risk of allergies and related respiratory symptoms in children and adolescents. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10714532

Over 600 cases of sudden infant death syndrome following vaccination were reported from 1990-1997 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11760487

There is a highly statistically significant correlation between increasing number of vaccine doses and increasing infant mortality rates. - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21543527

Vaccination in infants less than 3 months is associated with an increased risk of sudden infant death syndrome. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7557822

Vaccination is associated with an increased risk for hemolytic anemia. - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19766577

A modified self-controlled case series method links multidose vaccinations to sudden unexpected death. - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21337361

Children vaccinated with MMR before age 10 are at significantly higher risk of multiple sclerosis. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19633994

Diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine administered simultaneously with measles vaccine is associated with increased morbidity and poor growth in girls. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21093496

DPT vaccines have been associated with recurrent seizures. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6206715

Evidence exists demonstrating that diptheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP) vaccines increase mortality in children. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17207144

In the US the highest number of cases of Guillain-Barre sundrome are associated with influenza and hepatitis B vaccines http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19730016

Influenza A vaccination containing adjuvant causes cardiac autonomic dysfunction and inflammation which may transiently increase the risk of cardiovascular events. - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20964738

Measles-mumps-rubella vaccine that is given in the second year of life is associated with an increased risk of immune thrombocytopenia purpura. - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18310189

Symptomatic Gulf War Syndrome is strongly associated with the presence of autoantibodies to squalene, an adjuvant used in vaccines. - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10640454

Vaccination can precipitate lupus erythematosus. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10622677

Inactivated flu vaccines have not been proven to be effective or safe in preventing influenza in healthy children under two http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18425905

Influenza vaccination for healthcare workers who work with the elderly has no effect on laboratory-proven influenza, pneumonia or deaths from pneumonia. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20166073

Maternal influenza vaccination during pregnancy does not reduce the incidence of acute respiratory illness visits among infants. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17146026

There is a lack of evidence for the effectiveness of influenza vaccines in adults aged 65 years or older. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22032844

There is currently no evidence from randomised studies that influenza vaccine given to people with CF is of benefit to them. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19821281

There is little evidence supporting the belief that vaccines are effective in preventing influenza in healthy adults. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20614424

"Chart-confirmed guillain-barre syndrome after 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccination among the Medicare population, 2009-2010." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23652165

An association between Pandemrix vaccination and narcolepsy has been observed in Finland and Sweden http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24821121

Influenza-related mortality is not prevented with increasing vaccination coverage. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16876293

Vaccines and flu shots containing mercury may contribute to severe neurological diseases and/or death in children. - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19205900

Vaccination in infants less than 3 months is associated with an increased risk of sudden infant death syndrome. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7557822

DTP or tetanus vaccination increases the risk of allergies and related respiratory symptoms in children and adolescents. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10714532

Over 600 cases of sudden infant death syndrome following vaccination were reported from 1990-1997 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11760487

There is a highly statistically significant correlation between increasing number of vaccine doses and increasing infant mortality rates. - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21543527

Vaccination in infants less than 3 months is associated with an increased risk of sudden infant death syndrome. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7557822

Vaccination is associated with an increased risk for hemolytic anemia. - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19766577

A modified self-controlled case series method links multidose vaccinations to sudden unexpected death. - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21337361

Children vaccinated with MMR before age 10 are at significantly higher risk of multiple sclerosis. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19633994

Diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis vaccine administered simultaneously with measles vaccine is associated with increased morbidity and poor growth in girls. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21093496

DPT vaccines have been associated with recurrent seizures. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6206715

Evidence exists demonstrating that diptheria-tetanus-pertussis (DTP) vaccines increase mortality in children. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17207144

In the US the highest number of cases of Guillain-Barre sundrome are associated with influenza and hepatitis B vaccines http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19730016

Influenza A vaccination containing adjuvant causes cardiac autonomic dysfunction and inflammation which may transiently increase the risk of cardiovascular events. - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20964738

Measles-mumps-rubella vaccine that is given in the second year of life is associated with an increased risk of immune thrombocytopenia purpura. - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18310189

Symptomatic Gulf War Syndrome is strongly associated with the presence of autoantibodies to squalene, an adjuvant used in vaccines. - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10640454

Vaccination can precipitate lupus erythematosus. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10622677

Inactivated flu vaccines have not been proven to be effective or safe in preventing influenza in healthy children under two http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18425905

Influenza vaccination for healthcare workers who work with the elderly has no effect on laboratory-proven influenza, pneumonia or deaths from pneumonia. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20166073

Maternal influenza vaccination during pregnancy does not reduce the incidence of acute respiratory illness visits among infants. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17146026

There is a lack of evidence for the effectiveness of influenza vaccines in adults aged 65 years or older. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22032844

There is currently no evidence from randomised studies that influenza vaccine given to people with CF is of benefit to them. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19821281

There is little evidence supporting the belief that vaccines are effective in preventing influenza in healthy adults. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20614424

"Chart-confirmed guillain-barre syndrome after 2009 H1N1 influenza vaccination among the Medicare population, 2009-2010." http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23652165

An association between Pandemrix vaccination and narcolepsy has been observed in Finland and Sweden http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24821121

Influenza-related mortality is not prevented with increasing vaccination coverage. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16876293

Goodness. Thanks for this! This is hopefully going to answer a lot of questions I have had recently, champion!

Thanks as well. I too, must decline. Time constraints. Plus I swear way too much and I can't control myself. A disaster in the making.

No I don't think we are an Ivy League School; but you have answered your own question in asking what you have. It is because we are adults that we should understand that most people we don't know are worthy of basic respect. This basic respect may fall under, for example, not cursing or abusing someone. I'm sure if you said shit or tit, no one is going to flip their lid. I think it's the intention behind the comments that matter.

For what I think you were actually getting at though; I think people choosing to get offended by what you say, and what you say being truly offensive, are two different things with a very fine line separating. I think if articulated correctly, you would have received a good response for what you are asking, not my bullshit long one that will probably just leave people annoyed, haha.

I'd love to mod, I'm super skilled (not to brag) at shill-spotting and also at separating my political views (I'm conservative) from discussion (I lean liberal on some issues).

Hi mods,

Long time commenter and member of this sub. While I don't think all conspiracies hold water, I believe in a free and open platform in which everyone is able to speak their mind, post their opinions, and have an open forum/discussion.

Feel free to browse my history. You'll find that while I may agree or disagree with people, I am almost always open to having a discussion/debate about it.

My personal philosophy is that as a mod, you must do everything you can to separate your personal ideologies from your moderating responsibilities.

Our credibility as a sub comes not from the content posted, but from the ability of any user to post any theory and it be discussed openly.

For your consideration, I nominate myself, /u/inventingnothing to be moderator of this sub.

It would be an honor, and I thank you for the hard work you to do.

I'd like to nominate /u/NutritionResearch.

A great user who's always helpful and always gives boatloads of information, also has modding experience.

It was a toss up between Nutrition and /u/knightbeforetomorrow for me. I think they are both equally deserving and both great contributors. But even though Knight is very active I'm not sure if they are interested in modding, whereas Nutrition currently mods four subs. So in the end that helped me make my decision.

That said, I do think Knight would be a great mod and they should nominate themselves or someone else should.

Thank you for the honorable mention. You're right though. Moderation isn't for me.

Sign me up, Sally.

I nominate myself. Truth

I nominate myself. How much actual work do I have to do?

just 1 year old account is not enough ... a requirment should be no post in the_donald. this people nearly destroyed this sub since the US election and are still fucking annoying ...

I'd like to nominate no one.

No more new mods plz

I wholeheartedly agree with this user. +1

I agree. This sub has already taken on a pretty authoritarian tone in recent years, not sure why you're trying to bring in more power trippers.

I nominate u/polkadotgirl

Thank you!

seconded.

+1, well deserved

/u/magnora7 unless otherwise stated.

I'd give magnora my vote too, he's got his own sub and is a wonderful contributor to this sub, that's for sure

just check out his post history to see a nice awake person in action!

I also vote /u/magnora7 . Quality posts and high interest in the sub.

Thank you both, I'd be happy to give it a shot.

Holler if you still need a mod. I'm by no means dying to do this work but I don't mind investing my time and energy into bettering this sub.

I'd like to nominate myself. Long time subscriber, and one admittedly dumb mistake on my part aside, I do my best to contribute and keep partisanship out of it. Zero prejudice in terms of subject matter.

/u/sixvisix

Nominating myself. /u/Icirus

Long time member of this board. I enjoy this board more for the inside baseball on story's happening around the world, but I also miss the conspiracy days of UFOs and the Illuminati and such.

I don't really believe in censorship of ideas, but if people are just typing out obscene rants that don't add to the discussion or community it should be cleaned up.

Make sure you don't fly to close to the sun if you do make it :)

I'd be happy if you were a mod.

Agreed

One of us!

/u/Spez he edits so fast

Fuck u/spez

Surprised no one else said it

Hell yeah.

Hell yeah.

Hell yeah.

what ever happened to that guy that was predicting earthquakes? He delete his account?

His name is globalhell

His name is Robert Pauls....
Errm...

Yes. /u/GlobalHell was quite actibe and reasonable. Too bad he quit. Anyone knows why or how?

I nominate myself.. This is my third reddit account, which is why it's only 2 years old. I spend most of my time reading rather than commenting/posting, which is the reason to why I only have 1040ish total karma (but should meet the criteria). Anyways... Been on this sub for about 4 years now and would love to contribute to the community.

I'm probably too unaware and haven't been around long enough, and I know it's lame to ask to help but why not. I really enjoy this place. Usually on in early morning and late night est.

I worked with CSS, flair and I moderate hundreds of actions a week and I have experience in Modding and had my fair share in conspiracies.

I'm interested. I nominate myself, /u/leftofmarx

I would like to nominate myself, my account is new, I have been a conspiracy enthusiast for 16 years. Many of the subjects discussed on this sub I'm familiar with. The change I would like to see is knowing how to gather the intel that is received properly.

Actions may speak louder than words but I advocate looking at a subject matter from all angles and evidence, the proof in the pudding.

My very love of the truth. I want to know whole heartedly what's really going on, even thought about working for the "gubmint" and seeing what's really true.

With being a Mod its a civic duty to allow everyone to express their opinions but we must provide facts and evidence that is as irrefutable as water being wet.

Thank you for reading!

/u/TecumsehKing

The best way to win an argument is to listen intently, ask questions, and empathize with the opinion coming from the other side. Sometimes you end up winning by realizing you were wrong in the first place. Other times you help someone else see something from a different perspective.

I am willing to serve this community and its members by helping moderate. I have the time and ability to help this community. It would be a privilege to be able to contribute to the moderation team here.

I think you'd make a good mod!

Thank you!

nominating /u/Orangutan

Agreed

Orangutan is solid.

+1

100%

I nominate myself.

I have a general disregard for people

I don't really get offended by anything or care about anything online

I'll probably check at least once a day

I'd really like a small amount of power to make me feel like a winner

I've been shadowbanned at least 25 times

/u/magnora7

I nominate my other account /u/noopept_guy

thanks!

:/ whats the point of having multiple accounts if you give away that they're from the same person? Really just curious.

Ban evading a couple subs

That's why you keep them separate, admitting to that can get your accounts banned as a whole...

I don't really care. And if I got an IP ban I'll just use a VPN so whatevs

/u/snowmandan

/u/Orangutan

+1

Just don't select liberal pedophile and Soros lovers, or we'll have another r_T_d here.

They do? Can you provide any examples of this(serious)?

While the mods don't always agree with the content they usually allow posts to stay up as long as they don't break reddits sitewide rules such as doxxing.

I think he meant r/The_Donald - but those guys delete pretty much everything. They banned me for my only comment in which I expressed my view that Sanders was better than Clinton or Trump as a candidate (not that I think he was flawless and he might be controlled himself, but out of the three, I still think he was the best)

I think he meant r/The_Donald - but those guys delete pretty much everything.

Oh that makes a lot more sense now, thanks. I must've read it wrong.

I was banned from there also the day Trump ordered the missile strike on Syria. The reason for the ban was not a Trump supporter.

I'll take them serious the day they allow civil debate instead of ban everyone who doesn't follow their carefully crafted narrative. It's obvious they're communicating directly with someone from the administration as they have long detailed response prepared the moment a big story breaks.

Obviously I can't provide links to deleted posts, but you can try posting something about Israel or pizzagate there yourself and observe :). Almost all comments in my post about Soros were deleted there.

I thought you was talking about conspiracy, my bad. I would never defend TD mods. It's like a psychology expuerement gone wrong over there. They've successfully weaponized ignorance .

/u/magnora7 has my vote, and has been a great addition to this community.

Thank you, I accept your nomination and would be happy to try and help.

Self-nominating, thanks

I nominate myself, I'm available 24/7 and will do my best to help moderate this subreddit

/u/elnegroik

elnegroik for days.

Best poster on this sub hands down. Helped me out a lot. Also, helped make criticism of Trumps regime mainstream in this sub, which was needed in a non-partisan conspiracy sub that was brigaded by the Donald and Alt righters. Him and /u/Orangutan get my nod. Sorry, cant pick just one.

/u/Orangutan

Ew, please no. They post way too often on /r/worldpolitics and /r/sandersforpresident. Please no more partisan hacks.

I nominate myself.

As mod, I'll refrain from participating in any discussion here (as mods should, in my opinion) and I will relentlessly enforce the rules, PARTICULARLY rules 4, 10 and 11.

so you're who reports everyone for rule 10 violations..

and yea with your -44 on my RES score, no way you should be a mod.

Do you think that rule should be ignored?

yes, we're not children. we do not need someone to control our words and thoughts. why do you feel the need to snitch when someone uses bad language? feelings get hurt too easily? Or would you just hope they get banned so they don't bother your agenda further?

Do you want this place to look like The_Donald?

somehow bad language = T_D? nice try, guy.

Have you ever been there?

/u/magnora7 or /u/Orangutan for sure

I will do it.

I nominate myself, I'm pretty open minded and willing to quietly observe and secure as necessary. My schedule is overall open for moderating, and I have experience in moderating nearly two dozen subs (down from over 80 three months ago).

I work with css and flair, have toolbox, know how to configure automod some. I have modded r Android and Apple in the past, but was demodded. Still mod Google and hardware significantly.

If you mod google, I'm not sure this is the job for you... unless...!

Ehhhhhh I used to be a Google fan boy. Not at all about anymore. Still mod it, cause hey, why not

I was just joshing ya

Greetings,

I've been part of this community for the last 3 administrations. And it's become really awful the last year or two. It's gone from a bastion of intellectual skepticism and critical thinking, emotional intelligence and a place for dialogue to take place to a hot bed of warring factions who are continually seeming to be unaware that they are truly on the same side. That it isn't left or right, it's We The People VS Tyranny. So whatever you do choose someone who isn't an apologist for some side or official just because it happens to be serving their interests while painfully neglecting many others. For true wisdom, according to Socrates, is to "Know That I Do NOT Know". Which is to always allow oneself to be ever teachable, and open to evolve, adapt, grow, expand and become better for being so. Ignorance is stubbornness guised as certainty. Although I would like to nominate myself, I just ask that whoever you choose be someone who is not both a regular participant in t_d or regular participant in whatever the opposite of that would be. This subreddit used to be where you'd go to question authority and the official story, and be cynical about what is being passed around as truth. And not it's unfortunately turned into a place where people call each other shills for merely disagreeing with them.

Fear always loses. Truth always prevails.

Thanks for your consideration.

/u/punisher2404

I nominate SandyBdope

I'm not adverse to giving it my all... Especially during the late night shift... I could prolly do the most moderating 10PM-4AM EST... but I am also available during the day. I browse on PC, not mobile... and hang out in the new queue most of the night. I have my own opinions on a lot of matters, but I can easily stay impartial when it comes to enforcement of the rules... if it comes to reddit-wide rules, I'd prefer to err on the side of caution, because those kinds of violations are the ones that could get /r/conspiracy/ in some hot water. I would be into moderating, because I feel like this sub needs someone on the ball during those late night hours a lot of nights... I've watched the modlog enough to have a general idea of what I'd be dealing with.

I nominate /u/kybarnet

They are an active user and are always asking tough questions to explore deep into theories.

They promote out of the box discussions while still moderating when necessary.

Fuck it, do they require seconding?

Seems like an interesting enough guy.

/u/911bodysnatchers322

Recently banned for some reason? Great poster here - got a shout out from George Webb recently.

Yes, i too nominate him!

Yeah, no. His time is better spent doing what he does imo. Selfishly, I'd hate to see the content he contributes reduced because his time is being spent attempting to moderate this particular playground.

Really. I hold him and his work in such high esteem, reduced content and all the juice he puts into it would be wasted if his time became consumed rule enforcement here.

Can't really argue with that.

I'm really struggling with this mod nom thing. Consistently high quality content/comments are why we all know of specific people. It's also the likely loss of their contributions due to being a mod that has me wondering who's contributions could/should be sacrificed to become a playground monitor.

All of the people, including yourself, garnering support from others as a potential mod are all more valuable, imo, as contributors.

Ideally, someone that's awake and also burned out on contributing would make a great mod. Many left in the recent migration out, so would any of them be willing to help fix what drove them away?

I agree... kind of a diff set of skills for a mod. I don't want any less of the great commenters doing what they do well.

I am glad that everyone is taking this so seriously. There's a lot of responsibility with role.

I'd vote for him.

Remember don't apply unless you're a trump supporter and believe in Pizzagate.

And also dick ride Hillary ?

Whilst sucking trumps pussy

And defending podesta da molesta

I'd take a Trump supporter over an overt big government advocate any day of the week.

Why would you think I'm advocating the "opposite".

Im just saying /r/conspiracy mods are biased/trump supports

oh i see

It is definitely not broke so fixing it is a negative move.

I'd like to give it a try. I'll be honest and say i haven't modded a sub before so i wouldn't remove/ban posts as much as others until i fully understand what you guys deem acceptable and not.

Delete everything flat earth, that's the rule.

The least possible qualification for power over others is Wanting it. That goes for here there and everywhere.

I agree, this is dangerous. More than in the past with the sub still recovering from the bomb that got dropped on it around election time, and with less and less users you can seemingly trust.

But it seems like they need the help, and this is gonna happen.

I'm hoping they pick something like two long time trusted users and don't go overboard.

The surge in users present at any given time is declining. There were 2000 here even on Christmas morning and now there's typically much less.

I wish they would reconsider. The people nominating themselves tend to have authoritarian user names and that's a very bad indication of what they would try to do here.

Yeah. I've been looking into some of these users who are nominating themselves, not too pretty.

Guess all we can do is cross our fingers.

This place is shill city since last night, I've never seen so much shilling here before. Bot central too.

That was a shill storm like never before.

/u/dantepicante

I have no mod experience but I like to think I have a good head on my shoulders and I want to counter shills/astroturfers any way I can.

With my good looks and boyish charm, I could do it.

/u/Fuckaduckfuckaduck

solid user so far.

Thank you. If I were offered a mod position, I'd do it. Wasn't going to nominate myself though.

Thanks again.

I nominate myself. Recently started modding a 100k large sub, I'm good at it and I enjoy it.

Recently started modding a 100k large sub

which one and as who? Let's check out your 'credentials' baby! We are conspiritors after all!

Check my sidebar, r/ClashRoyale as a post mod.

I would like to put myself in the pool of options, I have been an active users in this subreddit for over 5 years and I feel I meet the criteria.

Thank you.

I could be interested. Should I just write here or send a PM? For me the most important thing in moderation is integrity and Id like to think I have that.

I have been following this subreddit for a long time. I check in here almost daily as well as a couple other subreddits I follow.

I am from Denmark, so perhaps that is a plus. I follow a lot of subjects, but what interests me the most are conspiracies which are palpable e.g. political corruption or 9/11 where it is possible to obtain hard evidence and conduct scientific research. That being said I am also interested in things like consciousness, DMT etc., but more as a distant observer.

I watch many of Joe Rogans podcasts as they often are really great, as well as follow Luke Rudkowski on youtube.

As I am in university and have a personal life aswell, I have be able to dedicate all my free time for moderation, but I will come here very regularly, if just for 30min a day. The way I personally use this subreddit is to get newsupdate on contemporary conspiracies, as well as being a place where you can seek out things you did not know anything about.

As regards to previous moderating, I do not have previous experience from reddit, but I have from others social platforms like gaming forums.

I hope you will consider me as a mod. I love this subreddit and I would hate to see it go down the drain.

Regards

//Chilly

Wel I don't have enought karma... but I'm a long lurker and sometime poster of /r/conspiracy for more than a year, I've been looking in the subject for more than 10 years (god dam it I'm old now) mostly alien, illuminaty and cabale I know my subject pretty well. I would be honored to be part of the moderator comunity of r/conspiracy.

Plus side I'm french and I'm on tons of other subs regarding the subject.

I'm willing to put in some hours. Based in Australia if that helps. Pretty impartial to US politics. I don't think many political systems are worth keeping at all to be honest.

Keen to help clean this place up.

9/11 got me interested back in 2002. Been down many rabbit holes and I can see where they meet up...

Based in Australia if that helps.

Active military?

Nope. Active IT dude.

Mod team, I want to nominate myself. Mostly online in the EDT timezone and mostly just lurk. I am slightly left leaning politically and travel a lot around the Americas for work.

Some Mod experience (small youtuber subreddit).

While I enjoyed the sub more when it was less politicized, I think the fact a sub like this exists is important to the health of a online community, and would love to help keep it going.

Feel free to reach out if you have any questions.

See this is the problem, you require LESS moderators and less moderation, not more.

Greetings,
I, /u/sweetholymosiah, request that the mod team consider my application to join their team. As a long time redditor and politically engaged North American citizen, I would greatly appreciate the opportunity to help the mods here keep discussion civil, and keep the sub open and transparent. While other big subs have succumbed to corporate pressure, and now function as an extension of the mainstream corporate media, I believe /r/conspiracy must remain free of overt corporate influence. With the ongoing destruction of /r/politics, /r/conspiracy remains a precious resource for free communication about the corruption of powerful groups.
The best way to uncover the truth about this world is through open communication of free thinkers. Even if corporate donors buy upvotes and push manipulative comments to the top of every post, by engaging in critical thinking with our peers, we can undermine the forced narrative and regain our agency as online citizens.
I'm online daily, and can contribute to moderation efforts regularly. While this would be my first mod position, I've been using reddit and /r/conspiracy for almost a decade. I believe that through mutual respect and adhering to the rules, we can keep /r/conspiracy an essential resource in the fight against tyranny.

make a requirement no post in the_donald on this 1 year account. enough of them here allready

Yeah, we need some mods from rPolitics

I nominate myself. If you read my resume it simply states "Anti-Globalist, Anti-Agenda 21, 9/11 was an inside job"

We are looking for diverse users

You won't fit in. It's a globalist conspiracy.

I nominate /u/TrowwayFiggenstein

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/6a7o4m/we_require_more_moderators/dhdfrzb/

Me. I have been paid by all the right people so I am perfectly balanced.

I nominate /u/Puntin_loves_cats

/u/zahher

I would like to help.

Bots, lots of bots !!

We don't need more mods. Just automods deleting spam,flaming, and other nonsense. Produce transparency reports. And if all this isn't enough appoint janitors, not full fledged mods.

/r/digiorno

I have been a member of reddit for 6+ years and a member of this community almost that entire time. I know how useful this forum can be in regards to exchange of unconventional ideas and I would like to help foster that sort of discussion. Several of my top posts were on this sub-reddit including one specifically thanking the mods for all the hard work that they do. I have benefited from the mods' efforts for many years now and I'd be happy to step in and help with some of the workload.

You would be a good addition to the Mod team here.

Thank you!

I'd do it. I'm very centrist-moderate, do not believe anything from the MSM, have working knowledge of many of the major conspiracies we all talk about, have no political horse to ride (I distrust all politicians equally), and I would come down hard on shills and their tactics. I think everyone is in agreement that more needs to be done about them and their corrosive effect on this sub, and we as a whole should get back to basics - fighting the mainstream narratives and questioning everything and everyone.

I nominate myself: 10 year old account, over 1000 karma.

/u/ShellOilNigeria

Thanks /u/MollyNostrils23

Post history and mentality when commenting say it all. An obvious choice as far as I can see.

Much appreciated.

I spend a silly amount of time here, I'm willing to help if anything :)

Can we nominate certain mods to be removed?

CelineHagbard #1 to be removed IMO. Clearly a partisan who favors globalism.

I'd nominate myself but apparently I'm not wanted :-(

I'll toss my hat into the ring. /u/BarryMcCaulkener

Long time reddit user (just celebrated 6 years with this account) and long time conspiracy head. I am not the most active poster (but I do have over 3000 comment karma) but I am someone who checks reddit for reading material many times a day.

Have some experience modding smaller subs; would love to help in anyway I can. Big fan of this sub in particular and I feel it is one of the most important aggregators of interesting content with a Realist POV.

Hope your search is successful either way!

/u/Fuckaduckfuckaduck

I've already been nominated. Just upvote that comment instead of nominating again.

Just grab a few from the_donald, very similar subs anyways, same shitty top threads minus the autistic memes

Not even, maybe that's why they're asking for more mods.. to keep the trump tards spastic fits in check.

I've mostly moderated on gaming platforms in the past (some game-centric subreddits, moderator on the forums of the websites of internet-based games, etc.). I currently moderate a few lower-traffic subreddits. I lurk (and occasionally post on) left- and right-wing subreddits, and have no strong affiliation with either side, as they are really just two forms of the same thing: control.

I'm glad you've made this call, as this subreddit has seen an increase in low-effort, low-quality troll posts lately. More alarmingly, there have been noticeable attempts to discredit posts using obvious propaganda techniques. I've seen a lot of "grouping" lately, where some of the more incredible conspiracies (the world is flat, CIA mind control chem-trails, etc.) are being lumped in the same group as the much more plausible conspiracies (9/11 was an inside job) and the almost-certainly-true conspiracies (the richest people sensationalize social problems to distract people from economic problems).

I think this is being intentionally done in order to discredit the true conspiracies and keep people from seeing the world around them as it is. I think it is the job of moderators to allow legitimate users to contribute different opinions and disallow paid workers from being able to use propaganda to distract people from real discussion, and this is something I'd like to help with.

/u/polkadotgirl

I'd love to help.

I mean I don't know how anyone could possibly nominate me, but feel free to check my comments and if you think I can be a good mod for this awesome sub.

so I guess, I nominate myself: /u/RikaMX

Considering the current ones blow off most users, yes new mods would be great.

/u/Putin_loves_cats has always been a good face around this sub. I see him/her nearly everyday with an open mind and vast understanding of nature of the user base around here.

I don't put up with other peoples shit here so I certainly wouldn't put up with any mod bullshit either.

Pick me cause I'll fight against the hostile take over.

No, really don't. I'd rather eat a bullet than manage a subreddit.

I nominate /u/TheGreatRoh. He's one of the best moderators on the_donald and he has a very good sense of reddit's expectations. He's certainly not a ban happy fellow either, he's not cancer.

was the thread for /u/Putin_loves_cats removed?

Thanks, mate. Yeah, the mods are removing duplicate nominations. Find my SN and upvote according to the mod rules for this if you'd be in favor me. I didn't put my hat in personally, but lots of people have been nominating me, and I'd be down if the people would like to see me in. Cheers!

/u/jonm111

/u/edgarallenbro humble self nomination, I know full well that the job actually kind of sucks, but someone has to do it, and with what time I have (which is too much), I will do my job wisely, with a critical, reserved usage of the banhammer.

As proof of my contribution to this sub, I submit one of my recent front page posts, as last snapshotted by me, and call digits.

test nomination, please ignore

I shall lead!

I'm interested. If it hasn't already been filled.

This guy has been around this sub for years. He remembers how it used to be. He'd fight to keep this sub a place for fee thinkers and open discussion.

Thanks! I have watched a lot of fellow users I used to talk with regularly becomes mods and they are doing a good job. I would like to help if I'm considered. But all gravy if not. This sub is a big part of my life!

I nominate myself. I consider myself to be open minded and I have a lot of time on my hands on reddit

Nominating myself. Long time poster and lurker.

Have plenty of karma to go around.

I'm bi-partisan, patient, and most importantly open minded. I don't tolerate shilling, bashing, and close-minded shills from any party. Listening is important, from all sides.

I've seen this sub tear itself apart and put itself back together more times than I can count due to a lack in respect for newcomers as well as old based on beliefs rather than ideas. I've seen this sub go from an intellectual water cooler that devolved into a 4chan thread.

Even if I don't get the upgrade, I would like to share the above perspective. And I appreciate that you guys are human and need help.

Good luck!

Hello conspiracy, I'm 6 reddit years old and have 7000 comment history. I'm a pretty open book and have been through lots of controversy on the many subs on this site and avoided all the drama while enjoying the popcorn. I nominate myself zen, assisted by my dachshund zed. We are free speech advocates.

I would probably be a terrible choice because I am a free speech and truth advocate and would never delete a ton of stuff i'm sure a bunch of users of this sub would want me to, but I would do my best to uphold the culture, rules, and the truth, and hold the other mods responsible for their actions.

Nope. Duck it. So tired od the censorship I think I'm going to go elsewhere now.

THIS. Why do we need more mods? There's no way in Gods green earth any mod can get rid of the shills, so apart from that, what's the fucking point?

U/ragegenx

The page grows and so does the need for active and enthusiastic helpers.

We also request that anyone who is interested be of open mind and that they be individuals who can commit a some time to guard against low effort content and to uphold the values of the page.

I've heard several times over the years, regarding this sub in particular, that people wanting the responsibility are not desirable for that reason alone. The above suggests differently, for something that is completely volunteerism. That makes no sense. Not even slightly.

The only set criteria we are requesting is that anyone who expresses an interest in moderating r/conspiracy have at least a one year old account and +1000 positive karma.

Those requirements may be suitable in less toxic zones, but not here. Those are poor qualifiers and it should be clear on just why by observing the the past 9 months of activity here.

We Require More Moderators

No, you require a different view on quantity vs. quality--as well as a more consistent application of oversight pertaining to the sidebar rules (also adding some). The problems are glaringly obvious to anyone who looks at it without subjectivity, mod-goggles, partisanship, etc. You need a revised direction, not a bunch more soldiers. The game has changed since mid- 2016/ the elections, and the old ways of running this place are no longer effective.

I'm returning to my hole now.

I nominate myself. I would like to help keep this place from turning into r/politics, we are so much better than that. I feel there is a concentrated propaganda effort from main stream media, and I would focus on allowing dissenting points of view, as long as they were respectful of other users.

Shout out to Axol for getting me unbanned from Conspiracy for posting proofs of Boston Marathon fuckery.

More GOOD mods are a must.

I'd love to help. Have been in the truth-game going on 10 years now. Thanks to my father and this little documentary called 'Loose Change.'

/u/Putin_loves_cats

Guarantee the mod(s)selected is either 1) A very new account, 2) Already a mod of places like /r/politics, 3) an SJW.

Yes, they "need" new mods, because this is one of the last few subs that are not totally infiltrated.

Howdy,

I'll nominate myself /u/manny_bothans. I'm just a spy with zero prior mod experience who happens to be very much alive, contrary to popular opinion. I'm fond of the occasional drive-by comment and upvote here on /r/consipracy when i see good things. In all honesty I wouldn't spend a huge amount of time moderating, but the time i would spend would be fair and impartial.

My main wish for this joint would be to promote more stuff from the alien/paranormal/suppressed technology end of the conspiracy spectrum. More philadelphia experiment shit, less goddamn pizza. Yall motherfuckers have fallen off and gone too political. This place used to be awesome like 2014 and prior. Return some balance to the force motherfuckers. Make me a mod.

i nominate soonerchad

I nominate /u/URIDIOTLOL because I want to join the secret shadow cabal that governs reddit and this is as good as any other way to membership.

I want to join the secret shadow cabal that governs reddit

You might want to try at the big default subs then.

I can help. This isnt my main, but I have been here for over a year. Im open minded enough and like a good debate. Hell, I can engage flat earthers, that alone should be enough right? Lol. PM me if youd like me to join.

I nominate myself /u/MBGLK

I moderate /r/Alberta /r/Edmonton and /r/Testosterone

My account is 5 years old, I am in the MST time zone.

I'd like to volunteer.

If anyone would like to nominate me, I'm willing to do the job. I'm a lurker here for the most part, but I've made posts in the past. I'm a moderator of /r/holofractal, which is a largely speculative science oriented subreddit, as well as other subs, all of which you may inquire about via PM or here in the comments if you have concerns as to their nature. I was one of the earlier members of the HF team, having been invited nearly a year ago now by the founder (who was promoted as a candidate elsewhere in the comments) and am active there sometimes in posting mostly math based ideas which are relevant to the ideas already found in Holofractal. One of these posts is found in the sidebar as "Gematria, God, and 64," and the suggestion of the sidebar link to "Entropic Gravity" was also my suggestion. However, I will only try to become a moderator if it is wanted - I personally vote for /u/d8_thc as a new mod.

If you start kidnapping people from mental health institutions, I'm sure you'll hit your numbers in no time.

I'll nominate me, u/Annakha I've been reading and commenting on stuff on this sub for...a long time, I don't recall exactly. Used to be somewhat active on ATS years ago.

I'll nominate myself, u/yungcattdamon PST timezone with years of lurking followed by years of posting. lots of time spent volunteering and enlightening as many people as possible. Would be diligent in following the rules and making sure the most accurate info is being consistently promoted.

I'm in.

Sure, I'm up for it. No previous experience moderating on Reddit, but I've moderated a couple of fan wikis before.

I come here mostly for the alternative views on things, so I think I can definitely keep an open mind.

Just me ;)

/u/rrggrr

/u/capitan_canaidia

I nominate /u/shelloilnigeria and /u/d8_thc. Both amazing contributors on various subreddits.

/u/ambiguously_iron tagging you in case you'd miss the comment on account of me being late to the party

I nominate /u/shelloilnigeria and /u/d8_thc. Both amazing contributors on various subreddits.

/u/ambiguously_ironic tagging you in case you'd miss the comment on account of me being late to the party

Preciate that!

congrats :)

Thanks, I hope it won't be too dramatic of a "job" haha.

Looking forward to giving it a shot though

Nominate /u/chags I would like to bring /r/conspiracy back to 3 years ago. Would not tolerate trump bullshit posts. Maybe I can ban current mods and bring back OGs.

No topics should be off limits.

I'd be willing to mod

I am willing to help out.

I bet this is like when companies post jobs online because they don't want it known they already decided on who they're going to hire.

Woopa gangam style

U/nonameanarchist

This is literally the only sub I read or care to read. Also I meet the reqs

I'm up for it... I'd suspect every post is a distraction from something else so everyone would get banned. Do I qualify?

Bonus: Chemtrail and flat earth threads would get autopinned

I nominate /u/News2016

Does the karma have to be post karma or a combo of both comment/post?

I also would like to nominate myself u/jaydwalk. I love this community, and have been here before the 2016 election changed it. I've seen the ups and downs and would love the chance to bring a balance back to r/conspiracy!

I nominate /u/ramblinrambo3

I want /u/ramblinrambo3 to mod here as he is a very good mod from my experience

More mods to damage control flat earth?

I nominate u/ramblinrambo3

An brand-new alt-right account, nominating a alt-right account.
Nothing to see here.

My account has been around for three months, that's not new.

me, me! And I take payments of dogecoin instead of that sweet sweet greenbacks

I'd like to nominate whoever is openly against this current administration, and is actively engaged in pursuing the truth to all the crazy shit going on around us that /r/t_d cretins are trying to sweep under the rug. Any takers?

In reference to your earlier question about being innocent until proven guilty... this stuff doesn't really help your case. r/politics cretins are just as bad as r/t_d cretins. We'd like to get rid of both groups if possible, but unfortunately can't.

Are you speaking as though you don't participate in one of those two communities? Your post history is public, you know.

You could always just ask. I'm Canadian and wanted to see Bernie win. I think it was all lost the moment the Dems rolled over at the DNC.

MKULTRAserialkillers is my nomination.

By the way. I get a bad feeling about this. Why are we adding more mods here? I feel like it is another attempt at slipping in people who would do damage to our community and movement. Remember after the last run of new mods, there was that debacle over the stickyed post that was obviously shilling against Trump and the guy was insidiously using conspiracy terminology to try and push it? I think Trump is a stooge for the NWO, but I also know that the anti Trump shills are legion here, even worse than the Russian shills that litter this place. I dont like it! This seems like further r/conspiracy manipulation!

Me. Approaching my 10th year on Reddit. I'm an ex truther and based in Europe. Owned a big board for 6 years.

Have CSS resources.

Gone through the conspiracist to skeptic transition so can appreciate all points of view. I think your rules are fine, just not enforced fully, probably the reason for this thread.

Can commit 1-2 hours per day, Monday to Friday.

I would love to be a mod.

Got my 7000 Karma ;)

I volunteer.

pls don't make putin_loves_cats a mod. look at my post history, he plays another game.

i nominate myself btw /u/Zerwe

I would like to apply for consideration to become a moderator.

I affiliate with no political side, a centrist you might say. I use common sense and my brain when reading/responding. I don't blindly follow and always ask questions.

I am a long time lurker of this sub. I visit daily and read almost all threads from the day. I hop in from time to time but I like to be nice and not stir up anything since I genuinely enjoy the conversations in the comments.

Thanks for the opportunity. u/tygorn

I'd like to nominate myself. I've participated lightly in this sub, believe in absolute freedom of speech, no matter how much I don't like what you have to say, and would love to contribute to this sub in more ways than I've been able to with my comments and submissions. I'd also love to learn the ins and outs of moderating a subreddit

I know I'm just suggesting that y'all might check and see if he is, I always thought he was a good moderator and understood his frustration with the lack of fair rule application

The rules still apply in this thread friend. I would tread carefully if I were you.

It's called lurking. Maybe you've heard of it.

Nice deflection. It's pretty funny how all these "new users" come out of the woodworks every time a mod nomination thread is posted and attempt to sow discord and shit on the sub and its mods.

Account age fallacy definition - standard debunking/derailment technique designed to attack users based solely on their Reddit account age, generally used to avoid debating content. It also disparage users from commenting based on the age of their Reddit account.

I dissected the propaganda. You don't have to like it, and obviously you don't. Have a great day. Give me a few, I'll link to every instance where you ran away on the account age fallacy post.

Walked away. From someone who only wishes to argue

Go fuck yourself with a glass cactus

How do you weigh the balance between the free flow of information and the necessary enforcement of certain rules to ensure that subverisve manupilation is not able to undermine discourse?

How much do you value free speech as an ideological concept, and do you defer to that maxim when determining what should be removed/censored?

Hmm, this kind of post reads like a political campaign.

Are we sure we want a career-politician to moderate?

Perhaps not, but so long as karma is used as requirement for nomination then the point still stands.

I see a lot of people saying theyd be good at it, but they do not want to.

As for me, I definitely could devote some time. Are there shifts?

The one negative thing is I really do not have mod experience, though I have been made a mod of subreddits before.

that sucks. the rules literally protect the shills

You cant. Ban them anyways.

Woah way too fucking political. Huge conflict of interest here.

I'd give magnora my vote too, he's got his own sub and is a wonderful contributor to this sub, that's for sure

just check out his post history to see a nice awake person in action!

Most of these 'candidates' are part of a small cabal of 'power users' who are given free reign to harass users...

Do you have any screen shots or links to back-up these claims? I didn't see the comment before it was removed but I'm guessing it was an accusation of being a shill towards somebody?

I've read through your comment history of the last 8 or so days and it appears you're here solely to turn the community on the mods and a select few commenters.

Of course that could be totally wrong so I'm asking you what your motives and goals are by commenting here? You've made some very valid points but I feel like you're only using them to take down your opponents.

So I guess what I'm trying to say is do you care about or want to be a part of this community or is you're only goal to takedown the people you've chosen and the mods with it?

then it sounds like you have a petty problem with someone and should be mature and move on.

I've expressed my concerns to the mods and have moved on?

I agree that you're a good contributor to our community and that you'd be a good mod.

yes, we're not children. we do not need someone to control our words and thoughts. why do you feel the need to snitch when someone uses bad language? feelings get hurt too easily? Or would you just hope they get banned so they don't bother your agenda further?

K.

I also vote /u/magnora7 . Quality posts and high interest in the sub.

I already know your modding from other places, if you are willing to add to your workload, you would be very welcome here.
But since you will get a lot of support anyway, I wanted to nominate a lesser known name ;-)

Btw, I still owe you one for vouching for someone, when I had doubts.

I sure hope not, but thanks for turning me on to that trend, I wasn't aware of that

Yea that's not me.