I'd really like to know why some users that have been banned numerous times, are allowed to come back again and again. Why does this favoritism exist?

That doesn't really answer the favoritism part, but I didn't expect a real answer.

I think their point is more to the fact that there are users who constantly go around calling people shills and trolls, and breaking many of the rules here, but never getting banned for it.

the problem is that there is a flood of these accounts that do this sort of shit, and then report people for calling them on their shilling.

so unless you guys can do something to deal with the actual shills, you are just going to keep banning legit users who get baited by groups like JIDF and TMOR and try to call them out on their bullshit.

banning people for calling out the shills just makes it easier for them to do their work as you guys end up being their strong men and ban anyone who tries to fight back against it.

i've actually gotten a few messages from people who pm'd me regarding this being their exact situation.

its pretty hard to take the mod team seriously when they are banning people trying to call it out, and letting the "shill" continue to do their work.

i mean things need to be more civil around here, but you guys need to to figure out a better procedure to police the accounts doing the shilling, instead of just banning those of us who try to call it out.

I think the mod team, or the average /r/con subscriber should have methodology and/or tools for identifying these sorts of accounts. Surely there is enough information that can be derived from an accounts history. Perhaps the community to can engaged to come up with criteria as to what makes an account a "shill" account. If account matches a certain number of this criteria they can be issued a warning and subsequently banned if their behavior is not corrected.

Why is Fox news accepted as a source here? It's just as bias as other news sources that aren't allowed but is proven to push false information to drive a narrative.

This is a difficult one because we do not want to censor content.

But we as a sub do censor certain content. Which is sad?

Any domain bans have to be decided on by the community, not the moderators.

What does this process look like? I don't think it's mentioned in the side bar unless I missed it.

What content is banned?

Currently, I think only CNN is sort of banned. Well, not "banned" per-say, but you can only post links to articles on their site through archived links so they don't get ad revenue.

I seem to recall a lot of users suggesting (or supporting) the idea of YourNewsWire getting a similar treatment or being banned altogether, not too long ago. I don't know what became of that, though.

The CNN direct link boycott was in response to them breaking site rules by doxxing and blackmailing a Reddit user, not because of their content.

I agree with both, and to say CNN content is censored is dissingenious for the fact they allow archived posts. The CNN ban wasn't about censorship it was about cutting off their clicks for trying to blackmail a redditor by threatening to sox them. Which everyone on reddit should condemn.

So the mods do decide what should be banned but it's based on up/down votes?

I'm all ears

Remove bans. Let people upvote and downvote. If someone doesn't want to see certain content they can hide the post.

A conspiracy sub shouldn't be banning sites. It's just wrong IMO.

"The moderator team is human (mostly) and we are not perfect but above all we want to uphold the page's mission statement and listen to the user base."

I'd like to see mods limit their stickying and sorting by controversial to very specific scenarios. Like, definitely not on personal posts. I don't even like it on the "suggest a roundtable" threads because it seems to be applied arbitrarily depending on what was leading the vote at the time of its application. If you really want to listen to the user base, this is a pretty common complaint I've heard from the community in the last few months.

What would be the issue on "suggest a roundtable" posts? The whole point is to get as much input as possible to decide on a round table that the community would enjoy.

Well last time "Russian influence on the US election" was leading when I checked in the morning, then I checked in the afternoon and it was in contest mode.

Oh, so contest mode is your issue, not stickying.

Stickying on personal posts, and non-administrative posts, is extremely tacky IMO. If a mod is stickying a post at the top of a meta thread about the sub, that seems reasonable.

But I was addressing your issue about stickying "roundtable suggestion" posts.

Don't you think "roundtable suggestion" threads are administrative? The community voted on the process ages ago.

But they didn't pick the one he wanted so reeeeeeee

Serious citation needed on this one!!

No those are always set to contest mode.

At least at one point it wasn't. There were a dozen comments with "Russian collusion" leading the pack.

Good thing you got all that evidence to back it up

What are my options? The wayback machine and other archives don't crawl often enough to show anything.

Here is the post now that voting was final and revealed. Russia collusion lost fair and square:

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/7xj3ie/suggest_a_topic_for_the_next_rconspiracy_round

I never said it didn't? And, uh, what good is posting the thread as it is now? What's that supposed to prove - we're talking about contest mode being enabled for roundtable discussions.

Maybe you aren't understanding the purpose of "contest" in a contest. The point is to avoid the first or top comment from being disproportionately upvoted simply because of it's placement. Contest shuffles placement and hides votes so comments are voted by merit.

I'm showing you how the voting turned out because you seemed to suggest that Russia Collusion may have won by votes and it was hidden from view. Even if you weren't inferring that, others may have gotten that as your point and I wanted to show that Russia Collusion lost fairly.

I'm not implying that at all. I'm talking about a standard that should be applied across the board. Contest mode should be put on immediately every time, or not at all. Mods shouldn't put contest mode on their own personal posts, and they shouldn't sticky their own posts when they're acting in a non-administrative capacity.

I am specifically discussing your point about the "round table suggestion" posts.

Right, and at least for a certain amount of time the roundtable thread was not in contest mode. The leading topic happened to be a volatile, controversial topic in the community. Now, for context, there's a very visible mod that conspicuously, almost blatantly, takes one side on that issue - that's just a fact - now say that the leading topic at the time had been more towards their own personal opinion on the topic? Would they have put it on then, or let it ride? The thing is, it doesn't matter how you feel about the issue in particular, it's the handling of any controversial issue in that scenario that bothers me. The situation is ripe for personal biases to influence their decision to put on contest mode or not, so just be consistent.

Maybe the mod forgot to contest mode it?

And your issue was clearly contest mode at all, not when. You said as much in a different comment, that you think a contest should be set to top or best.

Not true!!!!

Sorted by "best" or "top" seems to be the natural way to sort a "contest" more than the actual "contest" setting, ironically. If the goal is to find the most popular posts, why obscure the votes.

Sorting by best or top gives an unfair advantage to the top spot and those who made the topic suggestions first.

Contest mode is always removed after voting is done, and the vote counts are completely visible and verifiable.

I maintain that the system is working great as is!

More AMA's

It would be nice if discussion around here was more collegiate. I don't like any oppressive rules, but if real discussion was promoted over pointless insults I think it would help this sub become more bearable. I myself, and many others I'm sure, are sick of the pointless name-calling and the use of labels. It would be nice to see more actual discussion

Put all posts in contest mode for at least the first 12-24hours would cut down on the brigades.

For posting, commenting and voting users must be subscribed here in conjunction with the two months rule would cut down on some of the noise.

I'd support at least a trial run of putting everything in contest mode.

Currently it seems to be used as a punishment of sorts for specific posts. In turn, opinions on Contest mode seem informed by whether individuals think said threads should be punished.

I think the rules on accusing people of being shills should be tightened up a bit.

There are lots of people who very obviously imply someone they disagree with is a shill without outright saying it, and it really stifles discussion

So what I’m getting from this is that now, it isn’t even okay to hint that someone may be a shill, or involved in a post with the purpose of division and derailment of discussion? Mmkay.

Give me a fucking break. Do you guys actually want to do something about the shills and trolls around here or do we just wanna keep protecting them and acting like we haven’t been completely invaded by inorganic individuals trying to deter truth and shit all over any constructive discussion.

I mean really. I’m a pretty well known user here, I rarely get downvoted, except when I pop in a thread with an opinion that goes against the narrative of said thread. For instance; If I popped in any number of the Russian threads, and said I don’t believe the Russians hacked our election, I’d get downvoted to hell and back. If I said they absolutely hacked out election, I’d probably get gilded.

For fuck sake, there was a post the other day about Adam Schiff, and every comment in that thread defending Schiff was upvoted while every comment calling him out was downvoted. But that isn’t vote manipulation or brigading, right?

What the hell are us regular users who have been around here for years supposed to do? At what point can we actually feel like the mod team as a whole has our backs? Don’t tell me to “report what you see” either. We both know that would never work as the amount of reports you’d receive would far outweigh the current mod team’s ability to handle those reports.

This is the only sub I’ve ever seen where it’s resident users are allowed to be bullied, and we can’t say shit about it lest we hurt someone’s fee-fees by insinuating that they may not be genuine and then we end up getting banned for it. Kinda ridiculous IMO.

Watch, I bet I get drilled with downvotes for this comment.

Well said, mate. Well, said!

Thanks putes. Cheers, mate.

This.

Absolutely agree with this. Seems like those here for nefarious reasons are becoming more welcome than regular users who actually care about this sub.

We should shut up or put up, and should definitely not mention the toxicity that’s being allowed to fester.

lol then these idiots have the balls to ask the mods for protection from being called out. how fucking pissed do you think these losers gotta be? They've spent so much time and energy trying to manipulate this sub and they suck dick at it. The most fucked up part is that these shills are allowed to come here and attempt to push their bullshit. How many times do these shills need to be called out by the community before the mods take action? The mods are choosing not to take action. Even with the mods turning complacent, it's still not stopping from the community from calling out these dumb fuck shills and their vote brigades. These shills suck so fucking bad at propaganda. It's embarrassing

Perfectly stated.

To be fair, so do the "anyone who disagrees with me is a shill!!" rebuttals when someone points out ridiculous voting patterns.

yeah, that’s actually a fair point.

but at the same time, the “pointing out ridiculous voting patterns” thing is, in and of itself, the sort of “implying there’s shilling going on without saying it” that I’m talking about.

But it is often worthy of pointing out.

For instance, in this thread I've been downvoted for this comment:

Don't you think "roundtable suggestion" threads are administrative? The community voted on the process ages ago.

Why on earth would anyone downvote a simple question as that?

And suggesting vote-botting or shilling is happening in a general fashion as an observation is not breaking Rule 10. Are you suggesting that it be against the rules to never observe crazy vote patterns?

I gotta be honest, I think a lot of the time where people are “observing vote patterns”, they’re just complaining because they’re getting downvoted. I just don’t understand what “pointing vote patterns out” is supposed to solve or add to the discussion

Often they are seeing what seems inorganic voting throughout and pointing it out is their only comment in the thread.

Again, are you suggesting that pointing it out in a general fashion should be a Rule 10? We are supposed to be conspiracy theorists here. We should welcome people pointing out oddities.

And I gotta be honest; I see you do nothing but shit on conspiracies and derail conversations that you could easily avoid given your belief on said topic.

Tell me, Joe. What conspiracies do you believe in. Don’t deflect, don’t ignore my question. What conspiracies do you believe?..

I would consider the fact that a presidential candidate worked with the Kremlin in order to affect the outcome of an election to be a conspiracy. Or that Russian official managed to weave their way, in terms of money and influence, within powerful American lobbies like the NRA.

Or, an anonymous former NY FBI agent (Thomas Paine) working with current and former FBI officials (in the NY office), the NYPD, and Rudy Guiliani to coerce the FBI to reopen an investigation into Clinton right before the election. I think that is a conspiracy,

I think the fact that a local news story about Seth Rich that the local station redacted, based on the findings of a man now suing the person who hired him as a PI for helping spread fake news, was used as the basis to push the Seth Rich conspiracy theory into the mainstream (onto FOX news), is a conspiracy.

Do you disagree with me on any of those being a conspiracy? Is it only considered a “real” conspiracy if the MSM isn’t talking about it? And even then, was the MSM talking about a superseding indictment for Manafort a month ago? Cause I was.

See, this is what I mean about you.

Everything you spit out supports the MSM narrative. The MSM has been proven to be corrupt and in it for ratings and money, yet you hang on everything they say like it’s the fucking gospel. The MSM is literally, by law, allowed to spit propaganda with no repercussions. And people like you swallow it up like they are beyond reproach. When did it become the norm in society to accept anything you are told without questioning it? Germany had this same problem with it’s MSM in the 30’s ... how did that end up? A dumbed down, uninformed people are easier to control.

When I see the MSM attack/expose both sides (as they should be doing), then I will begin to believe them. As is, CNN, NBC, ABC .. they all make a living attacking Trump. Fox makes a living attacking the left. But not a fucking one of them attacks both sides at once. I dunno about you, but to me that is a huuuuge clue THAT IT’S ALL BULLSHIT.

Why did you approach me with conspiracies concerning Russia, and Trump? Because you know it’s a hot topic, and you know people will react. You assume I’m a Trumper, and it was a weakass attempt to draw me into an argument.

I bet you think Oswald acted alone, don’t you? What about 9/11? What are your thoughts there? Or the Bush family’s ties to Nazism? What about the Clinton Foundation? Are they a glowing example of helping humanity? How do you feel about The Catholic Church?

How do you feel about the Federal Reserve, or the fact that Obama and Clinton abused FISA and the FBI in order to spy on people? Does the fact that Henry Ford was awarded a Nazi medal bother you? What do you make of the CIA, and various operations like Paperclip, Mockingbird and the like?

Funny thing is; I’m totally willing to believe Trump colluded with Russia (in fact, the only reason I’m glad he won is because he is just enough of a cocksucker to take everyone down with him), and I don’t disagree with the points you brought up, but are you willing to believe Obama and Hillary are as crooked as he is? Probably not.

This is what drives me nuts about people like you. You only see one side of the coin. To your mind, conspiracies are one sided and can’t exist across the entire spectrum. And it simply does not work that way. People like you didn’t give a fuck about conspiracies while Obama was breaking laws in office, or while Bush 2.0 was using false evidence to invade Iraq. Nope, you only began to care after it became obvious Trump could win. Why? Who knows. I have my guesses, but I will keep them to myself at the current time.

Let me clue you in; these “elite”, the left, the right, the middle ... they’re 95% crooked as fuck. Bush, Clinton, Obama, Trump, even fucking Reagan ... they’re all dirty. Difference between you and I, is I can say “yup, Republicans are dirty as fuck, annnnd so is the DNC.”

But I’m not just “supporting the MSM narrative”

Who in the MSM is talking about TruePundit?

Who in the MSM is talking about the artificial nature of the reigniting of the Seth Rich conspiracy as a distraction for Trump giving intelligence secrets to Kislyak?

why are you assuming I don’t think Hillary or Obama did anything crooked? I got into this sub because of Seth Rich, I was skeptical but I wanted to learn more for myself. Now, based on my own research I don’t think he was the DNC leaker and I think it was a narrative pushed by Trumpworld to absolve Russia of blame.

And most importantly, why are you talking a topic about how to improve the sub as an opportunity to vent your hostility towards me?

You made accusations towards me and asked me what conspiracies I believed in. This isn’t the point of this topic and is a way to derail discussion. I obliged, and now you’ve:

• Accused me of calling you a Trumper, which I didn’t
• Accused me of making a “weak ass attempt to drag you into an argument” for answering your question by mentioning the conspiracy I post about most
• Explained to me what “people like me” care about
• Told me what I do and don’t believe in

It honestly just seems like you have a personal issue with me. If my posts bother you so much, feel free to block me

You don't understand or you do but you are willfully missing his point.

Who in the MSM is talking about TruePundit?

Who in the MSM is talking about the artificial nature of the reigniting of the Seth Rich conspiracy as a distraction for Trump giving intelligence secrets to Kislyak?

You pick 2 smaller topics which all fit into exactly what MSM is saying. Your entire theory is based upon trusting in the intelligence communities and people who have continually lied to you. The second one I've seen parroted all around r/politics and there is still 0 evidence of Trump giving anyone "secrets" let alone the stretch that anything questioning your narrative can somehow be spun as evidence because it's somehow "deflecting"...

Let's get on this Seth rich thing, what are you talking about?

I got banned today for name calling, after I was name called... I think I have a legit post history.

I didn't get a warning. Just banned. I messaged the moderators and one said it was harsh and it seemed I was unbanned.

The original moderator comes back and tells me he will give me a second chance, lol, I had already been unbanned by a mod... Read the following, this is wrong.

(Me )I don't know any mods, can you get another opinion, it's definitely not fair for me to get called a prick on my own post... and not be able to defend myself.

(Mod)Responding to people attacking you with attacks of your own isn't the answer and doesn't help anyone. You can have a second chance if you give me some assurance that you understand what I'm saying and will try to mind the rules going forward.

dontdothey • 2h Thank you

dontdothey • 2h I will 100% do that, did you ban the guy that called me a little prick? :) You should unban him too... if you did ban him.

(Mod)• 1h 2nd chance is granted.

Is Sunday afternoon the best time to get community feedback? I can only find rudimentary traffic stats so I have no way to be sure.

Unless/until reddit changes its design, monetization scheme and administrative policies this sub is running about as well as it can run.

Yea I see more political posts now. Has been getting more and more political. But maybe that the sign of the times. People might be forcusing more on this topics due to what is happening in the world.

I'd like to know why no other mod seems to care that one mod does whatever he wants without care:

1. Baits brigaders

2. Uses the victim mentality to react however he wants

3. Ignore reports and brags about it

4. Reinstated his post removed by another mod when it didn't follow the rules

5. Actively makes partisan politics posts that dismiss a popular conspiracy

6. When comments speak out and explain why they downvoted him organically, he puts the thread into contest mode and sometimes stickies it

I just don't get why a mod is so actively posting to smear a conspiracy, reacts by abusing his power, and the other mods don't give a damn.

Nah, you've always been good from what I've seen.

When one of Reddit’s biggest investors is Peter Thiel you’re never going to see a community like this go back to the way it was 2+ years ago.

Baits brigaders

Brigading is extremely disruptive and counter to the idea of this being a forum for free thinking and discussing issues which have captured the public's imagination."

Those who engage in actively manipulating our discussions here (ie from TMOR) lose the privilege to participate here.

I'd be willing to wager that not a single veteran of /r/conspiracy would disagree.

Uses the victim mentality to react however he wants

Wow if that isn't a biased statement, I don't know what is! As for the "victim mentality"...I get threats on a regular basis from a significant contingent of insane individuals. Reddit inc. knows all the users that regularly send me death threats, yet each account is still operating with impunity. I'd say that's a fairly valid reason to be upset! Also, I'm keeping a list of these accounts to eventually bring to the authorities, so there's that!

react however he wants

How would you react to this scenario?

Ignore reports and brags about it

Bots (or really, really bored individuals) have been tasked with reporting every post and comment of mine. Since we came up with the excellent submission statement idea, as well as the 2 month account limit, those who would disrupt this sub have shifted tactics. One of their new "strategies" is to flood the mod queue with superfluous reports, and my account is one that they target aggressively.

As a result, it's gotten to the point where my merely participating in the sub creates more work for the mod team since everything I do or say gets reported by these bad actors. To prevent the already overburdened mod queue from filling up even more, I frequently preemptively approve my posts.

When I see that my comment or post has been reported multiple times in seconds, I often will let others know publicly what I and the rest of the team are dealing with.

In fact, when I signed in this morning, every post on the front page of /r/conspiracy had been reported by these serial abusers of this function.

I approved them all as well.

What you call "bragging" I call "transparency".

Reinstated his post removed by another mod when it didn't follow the rules

Citation needed on that one! I'm assuming you're referring to this post?.

The moderator who removed it did so by mistake, as they hadn't seen my submission statement that was buried to the negative by the TMOR brigade.

Can you think of a single other example that's actually true?

Actively makes partisan politics posts that dismiss a popular conspiracy

lol you mean Russiagate?

Let me explain something: It's the very nature of the conspiracy theorist to be skeptical of the majority. I've been sharing material on /r/conspiracy for a decade on every topic from modern politics to Babylonian bloodlines.

This morning I made a post specifically calling for the boycott of mainstream partisan politics.

There's a significant agenda at play here to frame the /r/conspiracy mods as right-leaning partisan hacks.

Don't fall for it.

he puts the thread into contest mode

Contest mode is a reaction to the aforementioned brigades. The majority of those complaining about contest mode are those with minimal constructive history on /r/conspiracy and the brigaders themselves who are disrupted by the use of contest mode.

Contest mode literally gives every comment a fair shot, and I find it rather amusing that its use has been weaponized into an anti-/r/conspiracy talking point.

so actively posting to smear a conspiracy

IOW, you're frustrated that /r/conspiracy as a whole isn't completely accepting the Russia collusion conspiracy theory. Sorry not sorry!

[removed]

lol

Aaand, TMoR has linked your comment..

aka "monday"

What nitwits.

Brigading is extremely disruptive and counter to the idea of this being a "forum for free thinking and discussing issues which have captured the public's imagination."

You made a post saying you're baiting them. You bragged about it. You also ignored my comment in that post.

Those who engage in actively manipulating our discussions here (ie from TMOR) lose the privilege to participate here. No rocket science necessary.

I didn't even comment on your banning, so not sure why you're making snarky rocket science comments here.

I'd be willing to wager that not a single veteran of /r/conspiracy would disagree.

For people that post in TMOR sure, but I saw a lot of people get banned in the modlog. Are they all TMOR posters?

Wow if that isn't a biased statement, I don't know what is! As for the "victim mentality"...I get threats on a regular basis from a significant contingent of insane individuals. Reddit inc. knows all the users that regularly send me death threats, yet each account is still operating with impunity. I'd say that's a fairly valid reason to be upset! Also, I'm keeping a list of these accounts to eventually bring to the authorities, so there's that!

Biased statement? You admitted to baiting them, then you react with mod powers to gain visibility. That's just a fact, not a bias. I'm sorry about your death threats? Guess you shouldn't bait them? I hope you pass those on to the admins.

How would you react to this scenario?

You encourage them to brigade you more by whining about it happening every political post you make. Why are you making so many political posts when your other non-political posts aren't getting brigaded?

To prevent the already overburdened mod queue from filling up even more, I frequently preemptively approve my posts. When I see that my comment or post has been reported multiple times in seconds, I often will let others know publicly what I and the rest of the team are dealing with. In fact, when I signed in this morning, every post on the front page of /r/conspiracy had been reported by these serial abusers of this function. I approved them all as well. What you call "bragging" I call "transparency".

I'm not just talking about this comment, but also ones like this:

To those reporting this thread for rule violations, you do realize that I'm a mod and I can ignore reports?

And for those peddling manufactured outrage who get miffed when I do that, please cite the rule that this post breaks (you can't).

Cheers!

spez: lol this comment was reported twice in minutes. ignores reports and stickies comment well that was easy!

This is bragging, not transparency. You're laughing about how you get to report things. Looks like you're waving your power around laughing at people who use the report system because it doesn't apply to you. I've reported some of your comments before for legitimate reasons, they never went away, imagine that.

Citation needed on that one! I'm assuming you're referring to this post?

Apparently citation wasn't needed, because you knew which one it was. Thanks for explaining one thing here at least.

lol you mean Russiagate?

Let me explain something: It's the very nature of the conspiracy theorist to be skeptical of the majority. I've been sharing material on /r/conspiracy for a decade on every topic from modern politics to Babylonian bloodlines.

Let me explain something to you. Skepticism is holding doubt about the truth of something. Skepticism is great, but it's not what you're practicing. Everything you post that is anti-russiagate isn't skepticism. It's your bias. You are posting things that push the anti-russiagate narrative. Then you make posts that say "hey, partisan politics are terrible and dividing us!"... then more partisan perspective anti-russiagate posts.

This morning I made a post specifically calling for the boycott of mainstream partisan politics.

You made a post that was aimed at a sub that will never read it saying "hey, if you guys want to boycott republicans, might as well boycott the dems too!!" because your bias is anti-left. Not to mention, your post wasn't even a conspiracy. What were you hoping to achieve with this post other than saying "WELL THEN GUYS, GOTTA DO BOTH SIDES IF YOU HURT THE RIGHT!"

Here, I'll even point out some of your posts that are obviously partisan narrative posts:

A Kim Dotcom tweet claiming that the DNC was hacked, and hasn't put up the proof - It's an unreliable source pointing to the "memory stick proof" we heard about months ago without proof of his claims. You put it in contest mode.

Your zerohedge post here, or your other zerohedge post - in one of them, someone calls them out for being a poor source, your response was "yawn". You're not trying to have discussions about what you post, you're trying to post things that dismiss it, and walk away from it without downvotes. If anyone buries you, you just flip it to contest mode and laugh.

Here's an interesting post where your title mentions "Liberal Totalitarianism" and you call out propaganda campaigns, but specifically Russiagate. It seems like it feels right to you that propaganda is being used to pretend Russia is the boogeyman.

I'm sure you're already claiming these are just skepticism, but it gets better, just wait. Like this one that "proves" that Russiagate was a conspiracy to bring down the president. In it, you detail how anyone who believes Russiagate is just caught up in propaganda. You posted propaganda about how a different belief is the propaganda you shouldn't be caught up in.

Or here's your cheerleading post to tell everyone else to keep up the good fight who is skeptical of Russiagate. You're basically telling people to fight if they don't believe in it. THIS IS ENCOURAGING PARTISAN POLITICS BICKERING. You made this post in reaction to an earlier post that got brigaded, so you put this in contest mode and stickied it so everyone could see it.

And today, when I question the Russian collusion/bogeyman narrative I'm labeled a pro-POTUS Russian "agent."

Again, you want to call it a bias when I say victim mentality? Your words and reaction sure seem like you're capitalizing on being a victim.

They are attempting to use these issues to turn us against each other, when we should really be setting our sights towards the top of the pyramid.

Is the president not somewhere at the top of the pyramid? Should we not be able to peacefully discuss Russiagate without a mod claiming that it's bullshit and banning people that talk back?

Just remember that if you get attacked by these partisan hacks, then you know you're doing something right.

Yeah, just remember, if anyone is calling you out as pro president, you're on the right track, right?? Healthy skepticism here.

Surely though, this post dismissing Russiagate as a sham is completely unbiased and skeptical. You seem to like how the author claims they're grasping at straws and going after anything they can find because they have nothing. Surely that's skeptical of an ongoing investigation right?

I'm not going to keep going. You get the point. Maybe you still somehow claim that these are skeptical, and if so, I'll agree to disagree.

There's a significant agenda at play here to frame the /r/conspiracy mods as right-leaning partisan hacks.

Don't fall for it.

Don't post like it is then? You and a couple mods with supporting comments in your threads sure come off as pro-right. You're "skeptical" of Russiagate, but you don't actively try to tell everyone why any other conspiracy is bullshit. Just this one.

I could just as easily claim that there's an agenda here to frame everyone that believes Russiagate as a TMoR brigader. I'll give you the same advice. Don't fall for it. Real people here are interested in this even if goes against your bias.

IOW, you're frustrated that /r/conspiracy as a whole isn't completely accepting the Russia collusion conspiracy theory. Sorry not sorry!

No, I don't care that you don't accept it. It's that you're actively trying to get others to believe that you're right about it not being real, and then abusing your mod powers to keep your posts visible.

I'm frustrated that you, a mod, is actively posting threads that go against an ongoing conspiracy. There's an ongoing investigation into collusion with Russia with several indictments already. Do you just believe it's all a deep state conspiracy or what? What is it that makes you believe so much that Russiagate is false that you have to frequently post things calling it a lie? Why can't you let others make up their mind instead of trying to get them to believe your narrative?

My response to you has been brigaded to the negative by TMOR, but I hope you still take the time to read it.

I did, and so I hope you take the time to read mine as well. I get that we don't see things eye to eye, but I hope you give mine as much consideration as you'd like me to do to yours. We see things differently, but we're both people that come here for conspiracy discussion. Hopefully you'll take a commentors view into perspective, even if it differs from yours.

I've told you before what I truly think needs to happened, but for the sake of this post. Slam the hammer down, and ruthlessly enforce rule 9. This would also require mods to do their due diligence, and do their homework, on who is here in good faith and who is here in bad faith.

Less political posts please. I feel like this sub has been saturated with it. They are repetitive, and distractions from the real crap that's going on behind the scenes. I know this is not the mods fault but it is so easy to tell that these posts have a clear agenda.

I really like u/axolotl_peyotl 's conspiracy table talks. I wish for them to continue ;D

I’m a firm believer that contest mode would help take the incentive away from those constantly vying for top comment, only to deride topics they’re offended by or slide discussion. It’d also nip vote manipulation in the bud.

Users who participate in hate subs that attack r/Conspiracy should be instabanned, as should those clearly acting in bad faith.

I really like the sentiment behind your post, but unfortunately I think suggestions likely to upset the agitators will be dismissed.

I'm personally still on the fence about contest mode. It seems like a decent idea, but it has a few problems. For one, it really scatters the conversation. A very informative and helpful comment may be completely buried just by the random sorting. That's not a big deal early on, but if the post makes the front page and gets really popular, people who are late to the thread may never even see half of the discussion that has already taken place.

Then there is the issue of how easily it is to abuse these randomized comment sections. If one user (or multiple users) decide they don't like they discussion that is taking place, they can flood the post with a bunch of top level comments to bury the actual discussion. In a normal post these comments would quickly be downvoted and hidden, but in contest mode they will be scattered throughout the thread and if there are enough one will always be at the top. We have already seen this happen in the past when one (now ex) moderator decided they didn't like the discussions in any post critical of Trump so they used alt accounts to post numerous comments and completely derail any discussion that was taking place.

I'm afraid that all contest mode would do is turn vote brigades into comment brigades.

I agree, but are THAT many people really reading sorted by top/best?

Informative comments are brigaded and completely hidden from view now. It’s unfortunate that all regular users know they often need to sort by controversial in order to find a genuine conversation.

The system in its current state is heavily abused, so its absolutely pointless relying on the community to “quickly downvote” as vote manipulation ensures certain users or topics rise to the top comment spot and remain there. Contest mode eliminates this and gives everyone an equal opportunity to share their opinion. It’s quite clear if someone’s spamming top level comments, and in those instances people can report to the mod team.

There’ll be absolutely no point in continuing with comment brigades if they can’t guarantee control of the conversation.

Our opinions may differ and although we cannot agree with everyhing, if we were all united in the search of truth, while respecting each other along the way, having empathy for each other, trying to understand each other's viewpoints no matter how alien they may seem - we would come not only to truth, but to compassion and love.

We would create an intellectual and collegial Utopia from which boundless new discoveries and insights could flow.

There are still more of us, real users, more than the provocateurs, more than the bots. If you disagree with someone, take a breath, try to understand it from their point of view, try to see the human behind the username.

If we go down this route, we can still keep this sub alive and well - and truly create a bastion of alternative and critical thought on Reddit, that it will so desperately need in the future.

Too many people have been banned. There's no way all of those folks were hardtrolling or brigades. There's hardly any variety in posts anymore.

I don't think partisanship can be eliminated here until the results of the Mueller investigation comes out. Even after the fact, there's gonna be allegations of collusion by either party.

More warnings about shill accusations, please. It's tiresome to open a post and see the majority of comments are infighting.

Also, kill the conclave. That was a bad idea from the start and shouldn't exist.

Why am I the only one who thinks the shill subsection of rule 10 is horseshit?

If someone wants to use that as their argument, then let them. But ignoring a serious problem this sub is having by turning the word "shill" into the likes of Voldermort is fucking stupid.

Ban anyone that uses larp to shutdown discussion.

I want to hear every kind of suppressed knowledge or wisdom that will help me and/or others to be the kind of person we really want to be and to understand how the world really works. The more effective it is, the more I want it to rise to the top. However, it may be that the technology of reddit simply doesn't make these goals feasible against an army of trolls, shills, tards, AI, etc.

Try using the standard at r/EndOfInnocence or r/conspiracyundone, which is that anyone not acting in good faith will be banned. It seems pretty obvious to me when someone is not acting in good faith.

If it were done here it could save this place.

Shills would cry censorship or some nonsense and theorize(lol) about mods being altrite and shilsplain about shill accusations. And if the mod team is more coopted than not - it would show very quickly and this place would be cemented into the approved safe space many are gunrunning for.

I would love it if post tags/flairs became an option. It's certainly important to keep up on politics, but having to wade through all of the political posts any time I want to find something non-political gets very draining. It would be fantastic to be able to filter topics for ease of access.

What do I like about the page? It's my news of the day synopsis where I can usually get a good idea of what's going on regarding my particular interests.

I like looking into potential conspiracies..I like theories and speculation. I like well researched/sourced information and thought provoking posts that present potential conspiracies.

I like seeing logical/rational debates on the merit/credibility of conspiracy theories.

This is what I like about the page.

Suggestions for 2018:

Keep striving to give a platform to conspiracies. All of them/Any of them

Contribute..make quality posts about conspiracies/theories you're passionate about when you have the time to do so. Also consider expanding your horizons into other conspiracies/theories.

Avoid jumping the shark. Do the research, apply due diligence to the best of your ability. Learn to admit when you've been wrong or operated on false information. Have the courage to retract an inaccurate post or comment.

Avoid equating "credibility of one" to credibility of the entire sub. This applies to posts and users.

Political conspiracy posts - This is obviously where the friction is emanating from for the most part. A few observations I've had.

1. Taking precedent into consideration: There is no comparable precedent regarding the 2016 presidential election. We are, all of us, in new territory. Ergo, we are all experiencing new things. Stay flexible and open minded in order to derive as much truth as you can from these new experiences. (Be true to thine own self)

2. Hot topic political posts that hit r//all front page that result in heavy traffic from users who don't normally contribute to this sub through posts and comments. There are only a few realistic options here.

3. Voluntarily vote on the possibility of blocking r/conspiracy from r//all until the Mueller investigation has finished, thereby insulating the sub while at the same time depriving the sub from having a larger impact on reddit as a whole.

4. Take contest mode for the full Monty test drive on all political conspiracy posts to negate partisan brigades from having negative effects on the sub.

5. Bring out the banhammer. If so, be prepared for all that will follow. It will be messy.

Or...adopt an attitude of "this too shall pass". These current investigations into the establishment (past and present) and the current administration will end at some point. r/conspiracy will still be here after it. There will still be much to discuss whichever way the findings of the investigations go. More importantly, we will be here discussing that and all of the other conspiracies and theories we love to discuss. The rest of it is temporary if we choose wisely.

Finally...to all the real conspiracy lovers on this sub...lead by example. Exemplify that which you wish to see. Just because there's a -100 next to your comment doesn't mean I don't/can't see the merit/value of the truth/logic in your comment. Instead of being discouraged I shall choose to take the time to point out the merit/value/truth/logic of said comment and not worry about the -75 next to mine.

PS - We've lost alot of good contributors to this sub due to partisan politics/beliefs over the last year. They've gone elsewhere for a variety of reasons. We should do everything we can to curb that trend.

It's not an easy commodity to replace in terms of years of research and knowledge that leave with them.

Well said.

Submission statements turned out way better than expected, and obnoxious divide & conquer stuff is down from its post-election peak. Nice job mods!

I think it would be nice to have a rule against whataboutisms and/or even insults in general. That's really what I'm disliking most about the new environment.

Often they are seeing what seems inorganic voting throughout and pointing it out is their only comment in the thread.

Again, are you suggesting that pointing it out in a general fashion should be a Rule 10? We are supposed to be conspiracy theorists here. We should welcome people pointing out oddities.

And I gotta be honest; I see you do nothing but shit on conspiracies and derail conversations that you could easily avoid given your belief on said topic.

Tell me, Joe. What conspiracies do you believe in. Don’t deflect, don’t ignore my question. What conspiracies do you believe?..

aka "monday"

What nitwits.