Thanks. Who is in control of that community and why was it created? What gets discussed there? Are moderation decisions being discussed there and are non moderators of /r/conspiracy participating in those discussions?
From my view, it's a community of core members invited in by the mod team (I have no idea how we were chosen) to try to find solutions to some of the problems facing the sub. There are discussions about things that can be done to try to bring it back to it's roots pre-2016 election hysteria.
I have lobbied for an open forum where any conspiracy can be discussed in a CIVIL manner.
If I described that subreddit as a secret cabal of /r/conspiracy posters that are actively targeting people on here with opposing political views and formulating rules specifically meant to silence those posters, would that be a fairly accurate description in your personal opinion?
You mean like the 800+ anti-trump subs that do just that? Or how about TMOR who just hates all Conspiracy talk in general and also happens to be anti-trump?
They get a free pass, no mention from you but you're worried about a small gathering of long time members from here being pulled aside to be able to discuss things without "all that noise".
It doesn't sound like you have the best interest of this sub in mind.
I'd assume there's a greater likelihood of non-Reddit hangouts on Discord or IRC, among other places. Of course, this goes for all interested parties and not just the TMOR types because other groups have an interest in disrupting places like this to push their own agenda. During the 2016 election I would periodically watch accounts that caught my interest and look at their comments for a couple days. A few times I found people talking about heading to other sites to coordinate their memes and messages, and I'm guessing it didn't stop after November of that year.
You mean like the 800+ anti-trump subs that do just that? Or how about TMOR who just hates all Conspiracy talk in general and also happens to be anti-trump?
What does that have to do with creating a secret cabal to target posters who have a different political leaning or believe conspiracies you personally don't believe in? Censoring opposing viewpoints is pure intellectual cowardice.
It doesn't sound like you have the best interest of this sub in mind.
Didnt you try to make this place a right wing shit hole not too long ago? Didn't the admins have to get involved? Sorry if I don't trust you and your Ilk to pick who should be allowed on this sub...
Yes, exactly, and the concern is that a great number of users can't handle that. We don't want this place to become just like everywhere else. There are a number of conspiracy theories which vindicate Donald Trump and those are allowed to be discussed here just as much as Trump/Russian collusion.
That actually pisses me off, too. I'm not a FE person, but damn it if they can't even have a conversation in a post without being jumped with insults calling them LARP, moron, retard and downvoted to oblivion.
I happen to believe that the Russia stuff is way overblown. I've been around awhile and I've seen a lot of "enemies" come and go and, in hindsight, it wasn't what the press led us to believe. I lean that way this time, too.
Please don't twist my words. It seems like you are trying for some "gotcha" here for a "win" and that isn't honest discussion in my opinion.
Dismissing a theory of any kind is acceptable. The trouble lies when it becomes an absolute battle of insults and dishonest discourse. It isn't exchanging ideas, exploring a different point of view, looking at it from another angle like it should be. It is flinging shit until you feel like you won a battle of verbal trickery.
For the record, everything is allowed to be discussed there. Also for the record, there is nothing there that breaks site rules.
There are a couple users who have raised points about certain issues regarding some users. I do not agree with these points the same way I do not agree YouTube banning opposing view points if they are not breaking the rules.
Not even close to accurate. Political leanings are irrelevant to discussion there. Sorry, but you are seriously barking up the wrong tree. Believe me or not, I really don't care.
I think they're targeting users that support the trump-russia theories, as far as I can tell all of those users do.
I'd be more inclined to believe politics aren't involved if any of the users who support Trump and violate rules or whatever else had made it on the list as well. But as far as I can tell that's not the case.
That seemed to me like a pretty apolitical and respectful discussion.
Who would have thought that when you get a bunch of like minded people together in a private sub to plot ways to silence posters with different political beliefs that things would be civil?
No, because it's impossible to even address your question without a firm definition of what a shill is. If you don't want to give one that's fine but without a definition it's a meaningless discussion.
It's entirely apolitical and 100% about civility, ingenuousness, and combating manipulation.
Odd, reads to me like a bunch of /r/conspiracy mods and their internet buddies creating a secret group to figure out ways to ban posters who have a different political background. One of the posters even says he's not interested in fairness, he just wants to kill any opposing views.
I just searched and didn't find the word "kill" anywhere there, so surely you must be paraphrasing. Mind giving me an exact quote so I can determine if you characterization is even partly accurate?
Again, it's not about political views. You can discuss anything you want here. But there are apolitical aspects of behavior which are abhorrent to this community.
Then why is it only people who support a certain theory who made it on the list? If it was apolitical don't you think at least one person who is a Trump supporter or doesn't believe in the theory would make it on that list?
At least some of those users don't fall into that category, and I've seen people who do fall into that category considered good members by users who are contributing there.
Definitely not the case. I was invited and have access to the sub and it's really no big conspiracy. It's simply a place where users discuss how to deal with the overarching problems that plague this sub.
Politically, there are plenty of people on both sides. I can absolutely assure you that it's not filled with "Trunp-supporters", as I feel many are trying to imply. I myself am not a Trump supporter in the least, but to be fair I'm not a supporter of either main political party.
There is definitely nohing sinister going on there, but I do agree that the name "conclave" may have an ominous ring to it. But nope, I haven't seen anything there that could be dubbed as a "conspiracy" against this main sub, the opposite really, it's more like a place to help make the sub better and not more filled with crappy partisan politics.
I would definitely not say the purge list is related to any political leanings. Heck, even the screenshot you posted implies that Trump is not the issue here.
It is simply the case that this sub has been overhwelmed with users that are parroting MSM talking points. Whether these points are left or right leaning. This sub should be a place to discuss alternative views to mainstream events, thus I see no point in having threads here that actively support mainstream views. Whether the alternative theories are true or not (depends on the case of course), this sub should be the place to discuss them.
I don't supoort a "purge list" personally, but something should be done about the influx of users that are unable to entertain any thought that is not part of the mainstream narrative. We have plenty of other subs for that, conspiracy should remain a place for discussions on alternative viewpoints, both those that appear less and those that appear more fringe.
It is simply the case that this sub has been overhwelmed with users that are parroting MSM talking points.
The 'deep state is out to get Trump' is a MSM talking point, it's just it's a right-wing MSM talking point.
I don't supoort a "purge list" personally, but something should be done about the influx of users that are unable to entertain any thought that is not part of the mainstream narrative.
You're pretty much advocating for thought police, you understand that right? It's okay if people disagree, in fact disagreements are healthy provided they don't turn personal. Hiding from them or worse setting up a secret sub to create lists of people who don't subscribe to your chosen MSM narrative is pure intellectual cowardice.
Did I ever say the deep state is out to get Trump? The deep state is its own law and is behind any president that is in charge. One way or another, the deep-state calls (or at least tries to) call the shots, regardless of who is president. It is up the people to wake up and see this, the change must fundamentally come from the bottom up, not the top down. Thus politics is not the answer in my opinion. That is my perspective on the issue.
No, I am not advocating thought police whatsoever. I think all viewpoints and opinions should be respected. That is why I said that a purge list is not the answer, if you re-read my post. However, I said that this sub has been swamped with people that parrot MSM talking points, whether they are related to Trump or not (I don't see why insistance on bringing up Trump anyway, he doesn't really have any power, a president is always mainly a figurehead). I don't think this actually helps discussion and I think that people with any viewpoint should be able to explain themselves better and listen to each-other's viewpoints in a well-mannered fashion, without ad-hominem attacks and sliding the conversation off topic, making a non political topic political....etc. all of which often happens on this sub.
If there is nothing sinister going on, then why in the fuck is my name on a list simply for speaking out?! I say what's on my mind and I get put on a list?! How the fuck is that not sinister?!?!
That was one user from that sub (that created a list) and is not representative of that sub as a whole. I have created and endorsed no lists and the majority there hasn't as well. It's not a group with any unified "agenda", it's simply users discussing how to make this sub better. And one user thought the way to do this is to expose those who he thinks are being provocative. But that doesn't mean everyone there or even the majority feels that way. I myself don't even know half the users on those supposed "shill-lists". As said, it's just one user's perspective.
It's a place where users can discuss an agenda bit it's a closed group. So the only way to discuss anything is to get an invite. Yet I'm supposed to believe it's not sinister. Yeah.......my common sense is tingling.
The reason the group is closed is in order to prevent brigading from anyone wishing to subvert this sub and that one as well. Shills, provocateurs, trolls....abound on Reddit these days, that is why the sub is closed.
Have ya'll tried asking r/politics to blacklist CTR(and i should say CA aswell)
No matter how you divy it up, left shills, right shills, all shilling is gross.
I dont even check the r/politics subreddit anymore, fucking decepticons did a damn takeover. There is no autobot in this fight. Only corporations have enough money to do this shit.
Basically, sorry for hopping this ship after the dnc nomination. But i like abit of egypt and esoteric knowledge too.
Ah, the old CTR boogeyman. A website whcih was out in the open, with every cent accounted for and which was never about secret online accounts. You know how I know someone in gullible? When despite all evidence to the contrary, they spout ctr bullshit.
And it takes a special kind of mind to think that a pac of a candidate who lost the election and is just a private citizen id still being funded and active for some reason. At this point this has to be some kind of mental disease right?
Or CTR themselves did it, but they burnt that subreddit
But either way its goddamn apalling. thats all you had to say? CTR represent the donors not hillary, the global agenda must go on. Btw, saw jimmyD breakdown of HRC in india, if shes over why tf is she campaigning in india?
I do not agree with banning anyone because of an opposing view point.
I agree with banning abusive users and those here not contributing to discussions in a civil manner. I'm a centrist both "sides" annoy me, but I wouldn't say ban them.
I was pretty surprised to see people like me and fkagn on there, tbh. I think I've been civil and, I thought, helpful w/r/t the sockpuppets problem here.
I mean, I’m sure I’ve been a bit sassy at times, but I’m def not into the whole “you’re a shill!” “Nothingburger” culture that’s been spreading. I’m more into evidence sharing and clearly stating my opinions as opinions, rather than facts.
I've never seen an issue with you and have no problem standing up for you as a user. With that said, TMOR are using a user's comment to build the idea that the mods endorse that list and are going to ban those users. I personally don't agree with banning people unless they brake the rules, even if I don't agree with them (Shit I could even be wrong with my point of view and have been at times). With that said, I wouldn't be to concerned and please feel free to hit me up if you ever have a issue and would love to help.
My biggest question was who tf was that person making lists, since I don’t recognize their name. Some regular seemed to agree with them, but obviously the screens don’t show much discussion about each individual, and of course don’t allow for us to respond or defend ourselves there.
My personal belief is that paid shills obviously exist, but that we have no way of knowing for sure or proving any one user is one. The best we can do, IMO, is raise the standards of discourse and track alts based on writing style and some other patterns. Thanks yo!
SUPER helpful with the sockpuppets! Yeah, I can't say I agree with all of that list, and I think only glanced over it, but you definitely don't deserve to be on there, nor fkagn.
Yeah that was surprising to me as well, you bring an analytical approach to sockpuppets and spammers. Seeing the original nomination thread I was surprised you weren't nominated, to be honest.
Maybe bc I wasn’t around for a bit. Also i think some people were under the impression I was creating sockpuppet... false flags, I guess? But you couldn’t pay me to do what some of these crazies do. Tens of alts, obsessed with reddit 24/7.
As someone who was banned - not for being abusive or lack of contributions but because I had an opposing view from a mod and dared to speak up about it - that list irritated me significantly.
What's your opinion on the scope of the TMOR problem? I know often times I'll see the mods talking about them crosslinking and brigading when the posts have very few upvotes. Regardless of the low amount of upvotes, it seems that it is treated like they're influence is massive and I know it worries me that they could be used as a scapegoat to block out dissenting discussions.
Even in this thread I can see flytape responding to another user asking about the sub and saying they're not entitled to the happenings of the sub, and then telling them to go back to TMOR.
I just know from my perspective seeing TMOR being blamed for everything and suddenly having a secret group of conspiracy users to fight it and help change the direction of the sub just feels fishy. Especially when as I said above, we can see members of the community, flytape in particular, gatekeeping and talking down to those that are questioning the decision
You can check their sub right now and see their "declaration of war". The number of comments in an X-post there is not necessarily evidence that their alts are not here. In fact it stands to reason- If they busy here with an alt shitting up a post, they are too busy to be there commenting, right?
Where do you see a declaration of war? I just took a look over there and don't see anything regarding that. My concern is just that it looks like scapegoating that is leading to a community deciding how they want things to change in a non-transparent way. I know I hadn't heard of the conclave until the new mod announcements were made, and it seems that was the case for many others in here as well.
I just know from my perspective a conspiracy community should not have a shadow group working behind the scenes to think of how to push the community in the way they want. It may seem useful for countering shilling, but shouldn't one of the goals of this community be to act transparently?
As for the Conclave sub, I feel it is necessary to discuss what is working here and what isn't in a constructive manner without a bunch of arguments. We've tried it here before and it was a disaster.
People have a really hard time being civil here. It is a shame, but it the facts.
Is this the only comment you feel like replying to, in this entire post? As someone who's listed as one of those - what is it you and your friends called them? Persona non grata? As a "PNG", I'd really like to know more about why I, among other members here, have been singled out as, essentially, needing to be banned for my beliefs - and why you mods are collecting such names in the first place.
Everyone there has there own ideas. You can read my comment. I believe my suggestions were not only fair, but looking for actual solutions to real problems.
I didn't contribute to the list. You would have to ask the user that compiled it.
I'm asking you as a mod here, not an individual poster. Why are mods collecting such names to begin with? Why does it seem like the names collected all have a specific (and unpopular with the mods) political slant? What's going to happen to these "PNGs"? Why do you think it's okay to publicly complain about censorship and elite groups secretly controlling and ruling the population, while essentially doing your own version of censorship through just that?
I'd really like to know more about why I, among other members here, have been singled out as, essentially, needing to be banned for my beliefs - and why you mods are collecting such names in the first place.
A few of us only went to the TMOR post because we were pinged to inform us of the discussion regarding our tags elsewhere (the conclave post) that we could not see. I am not a part of any war or do I care to be in one.
As for being named (and accused of being another alt, which I am not btw) as a MSM shill is just crazy. I participate in political conspiracies because that is what I am passionate about. I read through just about everything posted in r/con but I refrain from commenting on those threads because I don't have enough information to feel comfortable adding to the discussions. If it has to do with flying or tech I may jump in as I was a military aviator and currently an program engineer that has worked developing consumer products for a long time.
I am left leaning for sure but not a democrat or republican at all. I am very concerned about corporate dominance and the loss of personal freedoms more than anything so that's what attracts my attention. And yes I am a firm believer that Trump is a part of that group and should be scrutinized to the fullest.
That's fair. My main concern right now is civility. There is no reason that conspiracy theorists of different leans can't coexist if they are civil.
I've spent days going through the reports and I'm amazed at how shitty people are to each other around here. They twist words, call names, act like every discussion is some debate to win with snark and technicalities. It is disheartening.
We just want the place to work and not be a battlefield, plain and simple.
I don't disagree the name calling happens form all sides and should be minimized. The extremes definitely make it difficult to want to participate, if you jump in you are likely to get slammed (from one or both sides) and that sucks.
I think timed mutes are better than bans. If someone is a repeat offender then maybe it goes to the next level. Everyone is guilty of getting heated and quick with the keyboard now and then. Banning folks should be a last resort and only if there is a real violation (threats, doxxing, etc.) - censorship is never the answer.
Does TMoR come here and vote on threads? Yes. How many do or to what extent is up for debate depending on who you talk to.
My view is they can be annoying and they can be disruptive. They also do target certain users over and over again. They aren't as innocent as they claim to be, but at the same time, they are not the biggest source of our problems.
I can definitely respect that opinion because I feel similarly as well. I know you can clearly see them targeting specific users such as AP.
Out of curiosity then, what do you consider to be one of the larger sources of problems? Or would it be the sort of thing that it's a general bad feeling about the direction of things rather than a more specific entity?
I think people being dicks to one another, labeling eachother shill/bot in RES, and just voting without discussing and actually talking about topics is a much bigger issue.
That falls on the individual user to try to be the better person and be what they want the community to be.
I would agree with that as well. I tend to lurk more than comment or post anything and I always see people going and just implying anyone they disagree with is a shill. Sorta like they chose to etch their opinion in stone rather than write in a mutable manner, and I think that leads to it feeling more like people are fighting to try and force others to see their opinion as correct.
I think you also need to consider the fact that r/conspiracy still has a modicum of free speech that being "a bunch of tinfoil hats on the lunatic fringe", as we are generally depicted to be elsewhere, would only give us even more attention and credibility if any serious efforts were ever made to try and limit or curtail that freedom of speech that still happens to exist here, but has been eliminated in increasingly more places throughout Reddit.
So we've become something of a catch-all for people with something they think is important to say with no other place to say it, simply for the sake and relief of getting some others to see and acknowledge it.
They may not be conspiracy related in any obvious or direct way but we can't say that some of them aren't important or that there isn't some value in us being made aware of them, all the same.
There was certainly some kind of a conspiracy to close down many of the subs some of those posters used to use or suffered changes to their rules that now prevent them from speaking openly about certain controversial topics they never had any trouble doing before and I think we need to understand that.
Personally I think this sub actually has gained far more credibility and opened more minds than anyone appreciates. The amount of organised trolling and brigading on certain topics is a testament to that and that someone certainly thinks or is worried that we're getting too close to the truth for their own with enough eyes on what gets posted about it for them to need to do that.
Have they discussed post flair/tags? I've said before that this sub might be better off with filter-able tags so users can direct themselves to what they want to see instead of being blasted constantly by stuff they don't like.
That's good to hear. There would likely need to be some kind of consensus reached regarding what tags to use and there might be disagreements over what topics fit in which tags, but it could be workable. Maybe if enough users start doing it on their own it will show whether or not it's effective.
I'm not opposed, but I could see it getting overly contentious to the point of unworkable. If the end result is people being able to see the content they want here, and therefore spending more time contributing to what they're knowledgeable and passionate about, then I'm all for ti.
But if the end result is just extra complaining about the wrong flair being added, and sliding away from the actual topic at hand, then I'm not for it. It's certainly worth exploring.
On a more general point, as a mod I have no problem with people criticizing me or the mod team for decisions we make. Sometimes we get things wrong, and we do bring our own biases to the table that can be hard to fully separate from our mod duties. My issue in general is that excessive criticism of the mod team or the sub in conversations about specific conspiracy theories does often have the effect, if not the intent, or sliding discussion.
I get that a private sub is private but a public sub should be public. Not only that it seems wrong for a group to just arbitrarily drop names accusing them of being shills without letting the person know what is up. At least let them defend themselves.
Beyond that I think that if a sub suppresses and bans posters that they do not agree with they just give Reddit more ammunition to do the same in kind with the various troublesome (from their pov) subs. If Reddit doesn't like r/con because they don't conform they can just ban the sub. Yes I know they do that under the T&Cs when they want to but I am advocating that that is just as big a violation of free speech as it is for a mod to ban a 'dissenter' and it's worth noting that a dissenting opinion is not bad and should be used to strengthen your argument if at all possible.
The same bad actors show up every time the mods try to do anything to better the community. That's why they set up the conclave, as a barrier between the insanity of constantly being brigaded by TMOR and other shit hole subs.
These bad actors like to pretend like they give a shit about what's best for Conspiracy when all they actually do is try to disrupt and destroy every attempt to improve the community. You might have noticed a few of them around, they show up in every mod announcement or community outreach post to complain, they are never happy with anything, they rarely discuss conspiracies and always obsessively debunk them... Except for one Conspiracy, the orangraged Cheeto monster Conspiracy being pushed by the MSM and deep state empire.
I got a PM from someone from TMOR telling me I was on a "purge list", that's the extent of my interactions with that sub that I can remember.
I'm sorry you think I'm some nefarious evil doer that can't be tolerated, but I'm just another conspiracy fan that apparently disagrees with you politically.
When I was unfairly banned from this sub, along with 12 other users during the same thread, I found out about it from a TMOR PM. So I hopped over there, for the first time ever, to discuss what happened, because obviously I couldn't post here.
When I messaged the mods to ask for a reversal of the unfair ban, I was blamed by the mods for being a part of TMOR.
Eventually the mod who banned me caught enough hell to unban all of us from that thread. So stupid.
It's just a discussion where a bunch of mods and non mods create a secret list of targets with the express purpose of creating unfair rules to silence posters of /r/conspiracy with different political opinions.
Submission statements and account age limits are two things that have been agreed upon to be implemented there. The ideas for that came earlier, but it was there where it was finally decided to take action and try to make this sub a more pleasant place again, where people can discuss any conspiracy without getting assaulted by people wanting to troll and harass them.
I think both measures were pretty successful, but still more should be done in order for this place to become a space where people respect each-other and all the varying opinions. That would be my vision of it, at least.
No I advocate censorship of people who don't want to discuss Conspiracy theories in a conspiracy sub. It's not my fault your political ideology happens to be the one that wants more government and access to everyone's money.
You've been playing these right wing games since you started. What was that sub, /r/NoShills where you and that other user NoLibs used to make posts targeting us lefties. I remember that crap.
So will that be part of the new rules that will be targeted at censoring the posters that get added to your private shill list? No one is allowed to be interested in just one conspiracy? Honestly I don't know how effective that would be with your planned stifling of all dissenting opinion. For instance, I also believe in aliens so you wouldn't be able to silence me with that rule. Maybe you guys should invite some of us posters you've already secretly labeled as shills to your little circlejerk for a focus group? We can help you create a solid set of rules that will help you ban us all.
Fuck that, your constant bitching and complaining is why that sub has to exist in the first place.
And if you believe in aliens then maybe have a constructive conversation about something you believe in, instead of constantly shitting on the stuff other people believe in.
The problem is not the particular conspiracy theory, the problem is people relentlessly shitting on anyone who dares to consider the alternative (i.e. non-mainstream) narratives. Considering alternative narratives is kind of what we do here so it's a problem when a disproportionate fraction of our users can't tolerate opposing viewpoints.
You think Fox and Breitbart and Daily Caller aren't MSM just as much as CNN and HuffPost and Vox? Please. The only people here that can't tolerate opposing views are the people on /r/conspiracy_conclave who want to ban anyone who doesn't believe in their chosen narrative.
Do they? I wasn't aware. I've been banned from tons of right wing subs. For nothing at all. Never been a troll. I've seen tons of right wing trolls in left wing subs and they're buried but not removed.
I understand that we'll never see eye to eye politically, especially on the Trump/Russia, but I guess I do want to try to explain how things feel around here as a lefty conspiracy junkie.
When I was younger, I wasted days on end reading all the 9/11 conspiracy stuff I could find. Everything from the Bush administration swapped the planes in air for drones/military aircraft and had all the passengers killed, to the lighter (and, imo far more plausible) Cheney and friends allowed it to happen for financial and geopolitical reasons. I remember doing a presentation in a high school AP class about how the Bush admin was drumming up war in Iraq on flimsy reasoning. I've re-read John Titor's claims about the left-right divide and WW3 more times than I should probably admit.
My personal experiences with conspiracies have always had a left leaning to them. I know that's not what everyone thinks, and that frankly I'm probably in the minority among the conspiracy community. But, the comparison I'd make for today (with what I and others feel is supression of talk about Trump/Russia on this sub) is like if it were 2002 and the sub didn't allow any discussion of 9/11 conspiracies.
Trump's the President and he's under Federal investigation for possible conspiracy against the United States! How can people not want to talk about that? I want to hear your side and I want to talk about my side! Why can't we?
I feel like must be ways to facilitate that kind of discussion without immediately devolving into shill accusations. More forceful moderation of shill accusations? Removing the downvote button so things don't get buried? I don't know, I'm not an expert on this shit, but I wish we could do better.
with what I and others feel is supression of talk about Trump/Russia on this sub
No offense but that is pure insanity! The problem is that the sub has been taken over with NOTHING BUT! Trump/Russia talk. That's why everyone is unhappy, that's why no other conspiracies can be talked about. And it's not your fault for being a lefty Conspiracy theorist, you sound legitimate. It's the anti-trump crowd who are lefties without being Conspiracy theorists, they shut everything else down and it's annoying as fuck. So if they have to go to get shit back to normal than I'm all for it.
I do get what you're saying, as when a big thing happens re: Trump/Russia, the sub does get pretty flooded with stories. Where I'm coming from is that (often, at least) the story that "wins" and reaches the top is often either deleted, thrown in contest mode, and sometimes the submitter is banned (as happened recently with the Channel 4/CA post). There's usually a half dozen near identical posts that remain, but the discussion gets diffused between them and is really hard to follow.
That's incredibly frustrating as someone who wants to talk about that stuff, and obviously that's frustrating for people that want to avoid that crap and talk about other things. I know I've seen opposition to it in threads here recently, but I really think a stickied mega-thread for big current events isn't a bad idea. It prevents flooding and concentrates discussion. There's obviously downsides as well, and it requires a lot more active moderation, but I wish it would be tried as a tactic.
That's because of the 800 resist network subs. They overwhelm every sub on Reddit. It's organized, obvious and annoying as hell. We don't need Conspiracy to just be a mirror of /politics, /news, /worldnews etc etc.
Well, sure, let's assume that is happening on the scale that people claim. Doesn't a megathread kind of solve that issue? Up/Downvotes don't matter, the sub doesn't get flooded, and if you avoid the comment section you're not going to get nuked with downvotes.
Although, removing downvotes would also solve that last part, and may convince people to be more willing to wade in with contrary opinions if they know they won't get auto-buried for being negative karma.
You have to consider that a lot of these users may be new to the idea of conspiracies and questioning the offical narrative. Like it or not, the Trump/Russia story is the biggest conspiracy out there today. It's bound to attract new users eager to talk about Trump/Russia, and some of the more fringe ideas may seem a bit outlandish to them. I'm just speculating here but it's certainly something to consider.
they do it in real life too. their chant is who shuts shit down we shut shit down. they are authoritarian bullies and carry that over to internet. they ruin everything for everyone instead of building something of their own. they are incapable of building things. easier to destroy than build.
My personal experiences with conspiracies have always had a left leaning to them.
I'd like to quote a comment I just wrote in worldnews:
Neglecting the fact that "liberal" and "conservative" have come to mean such very different things than 100 or even 50 years ago, especially in the US, I think if anything can be said about conspiracy theorists as a whole it's that they distrust authority and concentration of power, especially when that power and authority are exercised opaquely. I think they always would choose more Liberty over more Authority.
I think the change you see in conspiracy theorists today is more about the politicization and partisan-izing of conspiracy theories, and even more an influx of people using conspiracy theories for their partisan political purposes, rather than the people who were conspiracy theorists for decades now being more "conservative" (in the modern US meaning).
And if you just want to take the term "conspiracy theory" at face value, the Trump-Russia collusion story is a conspiracy theory, and it's being pushed mostly by "liberals." That's not to say it's untrue — that's not what conspiracy theory means — and when Mueller's investigation concludes and we can see the evidence, we'll be in a better place to judge that.
When it comes to left- or right-leaning conspiracy theorists, I want to work with them any time we can come together for the purpose of more transparency and more liberty, even if we may disagree on a host of other issues.
Just a few notes on some of your other suggestions:
More forceful moderation of shill accusations?
When I came on as a mod, I went hard against this, and still believe it has no place in civil discussion.
Removing the downvote button so things don't get buried?
This can't actually be done. If you've seen it on other subs, it's just a CSS trick that can be easily circumvented, and with all the bad actors here, I think would lead to a worse situation.
I don't know, I'm not an expert on this shit, but I wish we could do better.
Which is the purpose of the conclave sub to begin with. I get that the secrecy aspect can look bad, and it's not ideal to me either, yet I think it's better than nothing at this point. There've been two public leaks of it so far that I've seen, and I really think that's a misrepresentation of what goes on there. For the most part, it's a lot more dead than I'd like, but what I'm trying to use it for is to work out possible solutions that makes this place more conducive to civil discussion. I can't expect you to take my word for it, but I thought I'd at least give you my perspective.
has discussion happened recently related to default sort days? like, default to New on Tuesdays, default to Old on Wednesdays, default to Controversial on Thursdays -- then go back to whatever the default setting is for Friday through Monday. Trial for two weeks, see how those different options have different impacts on content and engagement, if any impacts.
I don't think so yet. How would that work, would that mean each thread would have it's default sort set for whatever that day's sort is? I could see that being interesting if nothing else. Mabye even randomize the day somehow so it couldn't be gamed as easily.
Just because someone doesn't have the same mindset as you, doesn't make them a shill. I doubt the shill problem is as big as some people here thing it is.
When rules aren't enforced equally the rules become nothing more than a way to discriminate. This is exactly what our government does in the drug war etc. Wtf is going on here?
Discrimination means to choose. Nothing wrong with discriminating against racists or bigots then? Your argument will be used to make conspiracy a platform for hate speech.
If the rules are clear and enforced equally I have no problem with the rules. When some people break them and get away with it, while others can't catch a break, I see that as underhanded, and harmful to any community.
Is it really necessary I explain this or were you making a point? I think I'm unsure of what you're getting at.
Real classy for /u/RMFN to be making a holocaust joke in reference to the "purge list." Which I'm apparently worthy of making (lol).
Time to start passing out gold stars
Good students in class get gold stars, do they not? Really trying to strech the interpretation of my words in a negative light. I suggest you read everything I said in that screen cap.
That's how I interpreted it, based on the general tone of the thread as a whole. That said, I clearly can't speak to what was in your mind when you wrote it, so I'll take you at your word. I apologize.
When mainstream, anti-conspiracy views predominate on a conspiracy sub, we have a problem. I think the time has come for /r/conspiracy to create a "persona non grata" rule, and issue bans for users who only parrot MSM narratives - we are getting swamped.
Translation: It's time to ban anyone who believes in the Trump/Russia collusion.
Also, just because Trump/Russia is reported on by MSM, doesn't mean it's 'anti-conspiracy'. Pretty sure Watergate was widely covered by the MSM. Was that not a huge conspiracy?
This seems like an excuse to ban any of the vocal Anti-Trump users here....
I agree, some sound so elitist about the conspiracies they believe in and trash other ones all while claiming to be "true conspiracy users" or whatever.
In another thread, a post denying the existence of the Deep State was upvoted. That tells you all you need to know about what a certain organisation has done to the credibility of this sub.
Maybe people just don't believe that? We need to stop gatekeeping and acting like just because someone doesn't buy into a theory means they don't belong here.
My old username that I had been posting in this sub with for 5 years got shit on and I got called a "forum hopper." I start er getting creepy pm from assholes, so now I use this admitted alt for my non-banned account because of the ridiculous gatekeeping by a 100 day old account. It's gotten out of hand here and become fascist. They're literally making lists? Holy shit. Someone is making some good off their influence in this sub.
Yeah, it's pretty disappointing, worries me that I'll be targeted even though I have talked about other conspiracies as well, just because I don't believe a few of the ones they consider so important.
Feel free to discuss Trump/Russia collusion but be aware that many people here don't accept the mainstream narrative and that's okay. When virtually all discussion of alternative narratives is downvoted to oblivion and dismissed without consideration, then we have a real problem.
This is not a community for solely surface-level analysis of whatever is being reported in mainstream news. There are a million places for that.
As someone who's in the secret club, do you know if anyone has proposed turning off down votes on a trial or anything? Or, if it's been tried already. My activity here is heavy for short periods and then months in between where I don't really drop in, so I'm unsure if they've tried that before and I wasn't paying attention.
Unfortunately that is not a feature moderators have control over. Even if we modify the CSS to remove the downvote button, this can be turned off at the user level in the site preferences. The manipulators would adapt to this seamlessly while some honest users would not.
I strongly advocate giving moderators more control over voting allowances within subreddits, but it simply isn't the case right now.
Ah, that's a good point. It might help a bit, though, as it would remove some of the "herding" ability of the manipulators. If the average user who doesn't turn it off in their settings can't downvote someone, you'd limit the downvotes to mostly the manipulators at least. It might also give a bit more transparency to just how much or little manipulation is happening.
Quite right. The ability to truly restrict voting based on age of account or length of subscription would seriously slow down vote manipulation. Unfortunately the admins won't give moderators such tools.
No clue why you got downvoted for that (well, I guess I do.)
The admins really don't give mods the tools to combat vote manipulation, which I think is at least in part because Reddit, Inc. benefits in multiple ways from said manipulation.
imo reddit is a sort of "petri dish" for the prototyping of various narratives/counterarguments... and the data provided by such "early adopters" as you dear sir proves the most delicious.
free service? you are the product they be sellin'...
reddit is a sort of "petri dish" for the prototyping of various narratives/counterarguments
For sure. From a data science perspective, I have to admit it there's a lot of really interesting insights that could be analyzed from this mass of communication hodgepodge. It would be fun to play around on their view of reddit for a day or two.
much love, sir.
Much love as well. I'm always delightfully surprised when you pop in.
There's many times when the extent of any differing opinion amounts to "muh russia", how is this in anyway meant to further three conversation?
The reason I like the discussion here more than other subs is because there aren't thousands of comments to sift through. That shouldn't make me or anyone like me a shill.
That's always a possibility but something has to be done. A lot of people do parrot the MSM narrative way too much here, they come in and downvote everything not on the MSM.
Add flairs for posts, stricter moderation in some areas and lighter in others, stop the private sub bs, less bias in moderation, more consistent moderation, etc. You could probably write a paper on what should be done to clean this sub up, it certainly isn't to target certain users because you don't like what they believe.
Seeing as we can't accurately identify them I'm not sure, outside of what I just mentioned that is. I'd start with blatant rule breakers, people who admit to trolling, etc as those really damage the discourse in this sub.
nah. "the others" are mostly people who were already here. conspiracy went mainstream with trump. and if you say so, your reddit birthday is nov 2017. the account i'm posting from goes all the way back, bud.
This is a conspiracy sub, if they believe the MSM narrative then why are they here in the first place if not to start trouble? They have the news sub to praise each other.
because they're human beings with fucking opinions that they have every right to have?! dude i've been in this sub for seven years you have no right to tell anyone what they can or cant believe or discuss or debate.
Dismissing things because they agree with popular consensus is not being a conspiracy theorist, it's being a contrarian. This place always loves showing polls of more people believing 9/11 or the JFK assassination were inside jobs, if that was the accepted view suddenly would you disagree because it was mainstream?
Trust me. Look at the subs I moderate I have years of practice identifing shills. They all share a pattern. You must study them to understand their cues.
How do you identify a shill? Do you believe shills exist?
It's simple. You engage the individual. If they show signs of using known provocateur tactics then they have a high likely hoof of notes being a legitimate member of the community.
Oh I've read it, and I see quite a few of those techniques used at some point by almost this entire sub.
Silence critics. If the above methods do not prevail, consider removing opponents from circulation by some definitive solution so that the need to address issues is removed entirely.
I think it’s more that there’s no reason for a lot of these users to be here given they discuss one thing and that’s trump Russia and they absolutely do not contemplate for one second that it’s contrived. There’s really no debate to be had anyways. If it was printed in an article it’s fact and that’s it.
This place also has markedly changed over the last year and it’s gotten progressively worse in terms of slowly morphing into a pseudo r/politics.
Most of these guys were here first and it’s their home. To say they can’t take offense at people coming in here and shitting on them is kind of silly.
Considering most of the arguments are crap and pretty quickly get to calling them shills, or just dismissing them because it's msm, I'm not surprised it's not swaying their opinions.
I also don't care who was here first, I was here before the majority of the userbase and you'll never see me use that to support my positions. Most of these people crying about shills got here in the last 4 or so years.
So why can’t the moderators sort this out? Reddit doesn’t give any special functions to people just because they have been here the longest? Why can’t your group include democrats and republicans?
You are now of the list. You now have to prove to someone who already thinks you belong on there that you shouldn't. You don't see that being a problem?
This is like how all those troglodytes think eugenics is a great idea, forgetting they will be forcibly sterilized because they are at best middle of the gene pool.
This is really fucked. These people are trying to kick anyone out they simply don't like without cause. Most of the posters in this thread frequently break the actual rules, and they want to ban people for nothing.
Isn't it a bit underhanded to make that offer only after a whole slate of new mods were approved? My understanding is that the sub was purely invite only up until the new mods were announced, though I'm curious if you know different.
Certainly, there are probably several groups of manipulative assholes targeting this community. Your implications are partisan in nature. I would stop all forms of disingenuous manipulation. Until then I can only speculate about what is happening and why.
In a post about a separate sub that is invite only where a different community discusses how to handle or cull members from r/conspiracy...and your use of the term vanguard party is in reference to?
So, are you saying your stance is that for the r/conspiracy sub to be working properly it needs to be steered by some covert but influential organization of users?
Just going by the subreddit age. It'd be hard for me to tell when it's active, since it was only announced after new mods were chosen about a week ago. So obviously it's been active for longer than that.
I answered this elsewhere, but there's two reasons for that. 1) Modmail in incredibly unwieldy for carrying on long conversations about ongoing issues. 2) We decided to bring in other members of the community to get more user input on things. Many of the members of the conclave have been on this sub for 5+ years, remember the sub before the craziness of 2016, and have valuable insight to offer.
So, are you saying your stance is that, for the r/conspiracy sub to be working properly, it needs to be steered by some covert but influential organization of users?
Be specific in what your asking, namely, do I think for r/conspiracy to work properly it needs mods? Because all the conclave is, in essence, is an advisory panel and discussion forum for mods and a select group of users. The conclave members have no power except to advise and persuade the mod team. And my answer would be yes, absolutely, and this is from someone who would identify as an anarchist if anything.
The first reason the sub needs mods is obvious and unavoidable. If we got rid of the mods, or the mods did not enforce site-wide rules, this sub would either be banned by the admins, or replaced by a mod team who would enforce their rules. Given that this sub would not exist but for Reddit, inc., at least a minimal mod team is necessary.
Yet I think your question also asks whether such a mod team should also implement and enforce their own rules, above and beyond what's required. To this, I would also say yes (given the platform of reddit as it exists). My reasoning for this is that without a mod team to limit the discussion to that of conspiracy theories, this sub would become a microcosm of the larger reddit demographic. Conspiracy theorists as such are a minority, and specifically a minority which other people and organizations do not want to have a voice. Without moderation that gives conspiracy theorists, and those skeptical of specific conspiracy theories, a place to voice their opinions and evidence, conspiracy theorists would not have any central place to congregate and exchange information on reddit.
As an anarchist and a voluntaryist, ultimately, I would like a place that looks nothing like reddit. I would much prefer a system of voluntary moderation, where users could subscribe to and even be their own moderators. Don't like a mod's decision? Don't subscribe to that mod. Want a more curated experience that censors vulgarity, opinions you don't like, topics you don't find interesting, etc.? Subscribe to mods that will give you that experience.
Reddit doesn't allow that structurally within a sub, but what reddit does do is gives you the free choice to go to any other sub, or to create your own, and run it as you see fit. r/worldpolitics is essentially unmoderated, other than site-wide rules. r/ConspiracyII and r/conspiracyundone have their own set of moderation practices. Or make your own and build it up if you don't like those. Besides site-wide rules, reddit essentially is anarchistic with the caveat of first come, first served for real estate (sub names). If you want to participate here, you have to abide by this mod team's decisions.
So, are you saying your stance is that, for the r/conspiracy sub to be working properly, it needs to be steered by some covert but influential organization of users?
I feel like you're missing the word "covert." Obviously mods are necessary for every subreddit. Most subreddits don't have separate private subreddits that invite users to influence moderation policy secretly.
And I feel like you're putting too much focus on that word. Let's say we didn't have the conclave, or we shut it down today. Do you really think users wouldn't message the mod team to tell us their ideas on how to fix the sub, or who they wanted to see banned? Do you think they wouldn't PM specific mods who they thought would be sympathetic to them? I can assure, both of these happened long before the conclave was a thing.
Regardless, our internal mod deliberations are also private — covert, if you will, just like every other sub on this site (barring maybe a few insignificant ones). Moreover, we do publish all our mod logs, and I'm not sure if any sub as large as ours does. In all our actions, we are completely transparent, even if the discussions leading up to them were not.
Most subreddits don't have separate private subreddits that invite users to influence moderation policy secretly.
Is your only objection that it's a separate sub, where the users can talk with each other "privately", as opposed to just being able to talk to one or more mods privately? I fail to see how that's substantively different than most other subs, or any other institution for that matter.
could the conclave be public, but only allow approved submitters to post, comment, and vote? then the transparency would be supported, but the brigading could be limited.
We considered that, and while reddit can restrict posting, and automod can restrict commenting, there's no mechanism to prevent voting from non-contributors. That would be a pretty cool feature for reddit, though.
I'm not completely opposed to something more transparent, or even a publicly listed and promoted "meta" sub, where people could complain about shills or mods or shill mods or whatever else they wanted to complain about, without sliding discussions on the main sub.
I mean, I'm here for honest debate (just see below with me and Flytape) and I'm on the list. Seems more like I'm being targeted for disagreeing politically with the in-group.
Then there should be no issue. The problem at hand is the lack of discourse, not really who supports what politics. When top comments are ones bashing the sub on thread after thread, you know you have a problem. Mods are getting downvoted non stop from these same toxic members. They're here for disruption. I have never seen a sub that eats it own in such a degree. It makes no sense unless outside influence is involved. This is straight up sabatoge.
Why is there no room for the possibility of some of that to be occurring naturally from people in the sub? I disagree with a lot of the ways the mods have handled politically explosive issues, and having a secret society to direct the sub from the shadows (and that, from the outside, appears to be pretty limited in membership to one political ideology) certainly doesn't help matters.
This sub is overran with blue dog D's, aka neoliberals. The most non conspiracy minded political block out there. Why would so many be interested to come here and shit over everything? When you go from a 20'ish average karma score on comments prior to the 2016 election to -20 to -40 now, and have the same political leanings, then obviously some drastic change occurred. The toxicity has become overwhelming and it's coming from these neoliberals.
I was banned for discourse. Also, listing "problem" users turns into a witch hunt. Which is a favorite past time for many in this sub, so I suppose I shouldn't be surprised.
But are all the people in the conclave there for honest debate. Below you can see flytape, who is a member of the conclave, responding to an attempt at discussion where he just calls the user a TMOR shill to avoid talking with them. I know he specifically tends to have a more abrasive personality, but seeing as the members of the community is hidden from those outside who knows who else could be there that also wishes to call opposing opinions TMOR shills
I cannot speak of the conclave. I know little of it. I do know drastic changes need to be made. They have tried having public discourse on attempting to make positive changes here, but it gets the same treatment as every other thread in this. Downvoted, insulted, and dismissed out of hand. I do not blame them for taking that route, they did try, but we have more dishonest users than honest ones.
That’s not what they were talking about in the screen caps you posted. I think you’re smart enough to know that and are being... intellectually disingenuous.
They’re talking about preventing was is essentially brigading by people who have no other involvement in this sub other than to push a particular view point. That view point is well represented by every other sub.
It’s like twoxchromosones banning people who go there to troll rape victims, or suggest that women loose the right to vote; it doesn’t add substantial value to the sub and just reduces actual valuable discussion of the issues the sub was created for in the first place.
They’re talking about preventing what is essentially brigading by people who have no other involvement in this sub other than to push a particular view point.
Where's the evidence that the people on their list of targets are brigading?
So then there isn't any evidence that any of those people have been brigading and they're being targeted unfairly.
if you claim they’re censoring certain view points
They're discussing it.
When mainstream, anti-conspiracy views predominate on a conspiracy sub, we have a problem. I think the time has come for /r/conspiracy to create a "persona non grata" rule, and issue bans for users who only parrot MSM narratives - we are getting swamped.
Get ready folks, soon talking about the Trump/Russia conspiracy will be a bannable offense.
I'm on the list and there's no way I'm a brigader - I basically am only on Reddit for this sub. I don't think I come to this sub to push one particular viewpoint, though I do admit that the current political conspiracies are very intriguing to me and I post/read about them a lot.
I came here to talk about conspiracy theories, both potentially ongoing political ones and more classic ones. How am I comparable to someone who goes on twoxchromosones to troll rape victims?
If ‘that viewpoint’ is a conspiracy don’t they still belong here? Just because you can talk about Russia on politics doesn’t mean it doesn’t belong here too. It is definitely a conspiracy worthy of discussion, even if you don’t believe it, no matter where it is reported.
What’s interesting is that indeed you’re the target of their action. This is he first time you’ve created a new thread in this forum, and it’s calling into question the credibility of the entire sub.
Vast majority of your posts have been from /politics.
Well, the biggest current event conspiracy theory of the day is heavily political. I don't think his profile (and that of many others around here) is that odd.
If you're referring to his actual posts I just looked through and see nothing posted to politics, I have no idea regarding comments. However, dropping a blanket statement suggesting where someone posts makes their opinions illegitimate is a slippery slope because it leads you to ignoring any valid points others could make.
It is better to be willing to judge the content of their post for what it entails rather than where they post.
yes i am and if i didn't want internet to know i wouldn't have said it. so what's your point? can only us citizens be conspiracy theorist or are you russophobic!?
reported for what? hurt feelings? ha ha ha. i'm not a mod alt. why do you see bogeyman behind every corner? you checks for monsters under your bed before sleep? ha ha ha.
Whatever you tell yourself, I know English isn't your first language so maybe you're too ignorant to understand how you break the rules. Or maybe you have 0 fear of being banned.
If I were you, instead of running a secret cabal of conspiracy theorists trying to purge people with other political ideologies from their "safe space," I'd go for a run. Might help that depression.
Conspiracy theory isn't about political ideology... We are mostly anti authoritarian. Neither left nor right. The political bs is pleb tier and needs to stay in the Normie subs.
He hasn't, I've made now of that personally. None of the users in that forum have called out that account or any of the other variations of the shill accounts. If they truly cared they would. In fact there are several users on the list who've documented those accounts.
Yes, the whole sub is about purging this sub of people you don't like. Again, your actions and your words are completely fucking separate. Just because I call myself a 7 foot tall black man doesn't change that I'm white and not 7 feet tall. But, if lying about being a black man helped my racist viewpoints (/r/asablackman), I might just do it on reddit. Just like a radical right winger might call themselves a "leftist" when solely attacking leftists.
But then again you think Nazi facists were left because they did this exact tactic so maybe you're just extremely ignorant. Sad you fall for such simple, simple, simple, propaganda tactics.
Yes, the whole sub is about purging this sub of people you don't like. Again, your actions and your words are completely fucking separate. Just because I call myself a 7 foot tall black man doesn't change that I'm white and not 7 feet tall. But, if lying about being a black man helped my racist viewpoints (/r/asablackman), I might just do it on reddit. Just like a radical right winger might call themselves a "leftist" when solely attacking leftists.
But then again you think Nazi facists were left because they did this exact tactic so maybe you're just extremely ignorant. Sad you fall for such simple, simple, simple, propaganda tactics.
Chill out... Anarcho monarchism is a liberty oriented left wing ideology. You are projecting so hard right now it's sad.
Oh I actually looked at the completely wrong user before, I thought the guy above me was replying to someone else. This guy does post in politics a lot
I can't help but think that with 20 mods that aren't bots (like publicmodlogs and rConBot), they should have enough varied opinions amongst themselves to be able to discuss what changes to make to this subreddit without having to involve the users. Making a private subreddit for only certain "chosen" users to be able to discuss this subreddit with the mods is basically asking for people to suspect that something nefarious is going on, even if it isn't.
When mainstream, anti-conspiracy views predominate on a conspiracy sub, we have a problem. I think the time has come for /r/conspiracy to create a "persona non grata" rule, and issue bans for users who only parrot MSM narratives - we are getting swamped.
Take note all, talking about the Trump / Russia conspiracy will soon be a bannable offense on /r/conspiracy.
From what I can gather from it, it sounds like they want to get rid of shills that are trying to shit all over /conspiracy and are brigading people and threads.
Half the time you can't even post actual conspirices without our fellow TopMinders coming in and brigading everything they can.
From what I can gather from it, it sounds like they want to get rid of shills that are trying to shit all over /conspiracy and are brigading people and threads.
Where's the evidence that these people on their secret hit list are shills who are brigading this sub?
Bingo. If one of the cabal members posts a name no one questions it. No criteria is being discussed, anyone that doesn't buy into the Fox News right-wing mainstream media narrative is added to the purge list and labeled a shill.
All the while talking about how any topics talked about in the MSM aren't valid. And by MSM they mean anything other than Fox news. Including actual outlets with real journalistic integrity that vet multiple sources for each story.
Funny how they point the finger at new accounts that have only been posting in here a few months as proof of brigading. They never make the connection that most of those accounts had their long time accounts here banned so had to use new ones to continue using the sub.
What an absolute joke and full on shit show this is. Thank you for making this post.
There's people in those shill lists that aren't doing anything other than disagreeing with their preferred conspiracies or submitting conspiracies that they don't like. That's all it is.
i have about 5 people in this op tagged as tmor and other meddlers. funny how one of them who is tagged also claims to be a member of the conspiracy_conclave. suspicious. i wonder if they are the one who leaks for op.
my boss has narrowed it down to three people for leaks. mentioned user is one my boss says probable. as for list! i agree with all and they should be banned for meddling. pay attention to who removes any of our comments about this if they do. light will shine!
Agreed.. Thank you for everything you do fellow shill for Putin. God bless Putin. He just sent me two more mail order brides this afternoon. I finally have enough to fill an entire kiddy pool with piss. I'm high on the hog since I started shilling for Putin!
When I worked for Obama all I got was a few coffee dates with traps..
unfair! i get a monthly ration of vodka and pickles and on the fifth month a cat. the cat i sell or eat. life is good in siberia. putin told me not to eat cat because he loves them but i get hungry! putin is the light and love and way!
you must be salary! i'm jealous! i'm just freelancing right now. i do strip shows in the day time and shill in night time to make meets end. vodka helps with both and pickles are food and props.
Yeah, I especially like the part where they want to create a rule that would ban anyone from talking about the Trump/Russia conspiracy. Nothing says fighting TPTB like censorship of dissenting opinions!
Nothing says hijacking a sub like flooding it with MSM narratives
The 'deep state' narrative is just as MSM as the Trump/Russia narrative. You can find it on Fox and Breitbart and all the other mainstream conservative news sources but that's okay, right? It's only left-wing MSM narratives that the censor nazis want to shut down.
The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings.
his father hated him. his father wanted older brother but he died in war. jfk was fine if playing ball. jfk didn't and got his head blown off. maybe he should've learned that secrecy is important?
Holy shit why the fuck am I getting brought up? I lurk and occasionally make lame jokes. Seriously? Does my post history look like a shill? Lmfao. This is insanity
Actually, I can't take some issue with your recent "joke" because it ended up a circle jerk about me suggesting we include calling people "Russian trolls" and "Comrade" in our Rule 10 scope, and I think that is crappy of you.
I see no difference, functionally, to call someone "Comrade" than "shill" or "troll" in a discussion and I don't think there is anything funny about it.
I've not seen you engage in anything insidious when I peruse this sub. I see you in many threads I frequent and find myself agreeing with you quite often. I'm curious what it is that you've engaged in that can be viewed as being against the core beliefs of this sub.
Thanks I appreciate it. I actually do try not to just be a conspiracy naysayer, and I try to be cool to people who are being hostile to me. And I apologize to people when I misquote something or mistake a fact etc.
A lot of the conspiracies I believe in aren't really discussed here. They're boring I guess, or dated, or aren't controversial enough anymore. And I'm admittedly pretty liberal.
And lurk in the posts I agree with, and comment on things when I see misinformation, which is most often in posts I don't agree with, which might make me seem more disagreeable than I actually am, but I'm polite about it.
That doesn't make me a shill. And having some inner-circle try to make me go away, or anyone like me, is troubling to me.
I'm 100% sure their are bad actors in this sub. And the moderators aren't wrong to be concerned and address the issues they see more visibly. But I think some of the wrong people are getting pulled into this, and some personal agendas are playing an unhealthy roll.
I agree with you completely and I pretty much have the same viewing, browsing, and commenting habits. That is what is most alarming to me. I see users on that list who've done nothing more than I've done and now they are labelled as conspiratorially undesirables.
What is most bothersome to me is that users like yourself now have to come into this thread to defend themselves in regards to how they fit in the r/conspiracy Mike. That is pretty fucked up.
I wasn't insinuating that you reviewed this user, just trying to move the convo along.
The entire existence of this thread is pretty fucking hilarious to me. There are many names on "the list" that I've never seen break rules. If the only rule they are breaking is commenting on the 2nd biggest conspiracy of our lifetime then er might as well close up shop on this sub.
I do have, but it is used in the same decisive way as "shill" or "troll" and should be treated as such. As long as we have Rule 10, it should be implemented fairly.
I'm not a robot and my sense if humor is not weighed down and tethered to an agenda like a "shill." If there are rules against acting like a natural human being then count me out. Go ahead and hold onto that cold, rigid, decisive humor of yours comrade.
Look man if you took my comment to be an attack on the sub or someone in particular you are wildly misinterpreting what I said. Perhaps I should have been less on the nose, but at the time it had been several hours since hard confessions by the puppet masters of hundreds of elections around the world, including in the U.S., had been posted to the sub and yet it was still not the top post. Suspicious? Maybe. Lots of possible explanations? Sure. Worthy of a joke about the fact that anyone who checks this sub on an even semi regular basis can tell there is a tug of war going on? Definitely.
Is that reality of the state of the sub enough to warrant a rule 10 warning? I don't know if I would agree, but I also wouldn't disagree if a mod attached a decent explanation. Is that joke worthy of being included on a god damn list of users suspected of downvoting new posts, shaping the rhetoric on the sub and qualifying for Pesona Non Grata status outright? Absolutely fucking not.
So again, my apologies for causing an inadvertent circle jerk, but the people in the secret club listing off PNGs because their feelings got hurt or they just didn't like what someone said can take their user lists an shove them up their asses.
I miss coming here and reading about ant people living in the grand canyon, all the suspicious shit about Antarctica and everything else. I'm just a regular dude. Fuck what this sub has become. Ban me. I'm done with /r/conspiracy.
You know what? I miss talking about Antarctica, too, but theories like that rarely get traction anymore because most of the users are too concerned about getting there version of the political clickbait of the day to the top so they can scrap and fight and call names.
That is exactly the problem we are trying to solve.
Then just add in a level headed explanation with a rule 10 warning. In the last 3 months I have made comments in this sub about the cover up of the pending disaster in Houston when the Barker and Addicks reservoir levies inevitably fail, Hillary mentioning UFO disclosure in her campaign, that weird lunar deal where we had a blue moon, new moon and something else all at the same time, and a little snark here and there. PNG status? Fuck you
You pissed off a mod, likely on one of their alts. Just means they are watching for you to do anything they can ban you for (which is better than before where they just banned regardless).
Nope, my username was derived from my days of playing Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter (when I was in the Army) on the XBOX 360 and my real name. I would troll kids by team killing and loved to hear them scream out "Miguel, NO!!!!" it's a name that's stuck for my online persona since then.
I was never stationed at Eglin AFB. I first went to basic at Fort Banning GA from June 2002 - August 2002, from there it was AIT at Fort Gordon from September 2002 - March 2003, then Camp Long South Korea until April 2004, after this I went to Camp Doha Kuwait until May 2005, then Back to Gordon until deployment to LSA Anaconda in October 2006 - January 2008, then I got the fuck out in April 2008 and burned up 2 months of leave time until I was finally done with the Military.
No, I'm a Veteran. As stated I ended my service in 2008. You can snoopsnoo my account all you want, you'll find that I pretty much post here. My highest rated comment is calling out HSBC for laundering money for drug cartels.
I didn't have to shoot anyone, nor was I directly involved in the killing of innocents. Due to being in a support role I was indirectly involved more likely than not in the death of innocent people, which I deal with in my own manner. I'm no drunk either but have had substance abuse issues which I don't attribute to the Army but more my own upbringing.
Why are you trying to attack me? I've done nothing but attempt to remain honest and open with you. If you're expecting a reaction out of me, it won't happen. I know that the entire point of your account is just to get a rise out of people, it's not going to happen with me.
i'm not. you attacked innocents though. shame. drink up toy soldier thinking us is great! lies! you need drink to drown your demons. pathetic. i hope you face your demons one day for what you did and were a part of. you make me sick!
I'm no alcoholic, I do drink in moderation occasionally. You're misconstruing everything I've said previously and I can only assume it's deliberate at this point in order to get a rise out of me. I do and have faced my demons, I work with children hoping to better their lives so they don't have to see the Military as a means to uplift themselves from their social predicament.
I can honestly say that I'm a good person. Can you? All you do is shitpost on reddit and probably 4chan as well. How many alts do you have to create to feel good about yourself? The more sockpuppets you create won't fill up the hole you have in your soul.
I know that user likes to waste the time of others and try to get them to break rules. I just have quite a bit of time in my hands right now and don't mind playing into that while thing. Thanks for the kudos.
That's because this user is an alt for one of the conclave users and they know and are okay with this. I assume that it's putin_loves_cats based on the way the user speaks, the hours that they are active, and that they weren't activated until shillsonacid received a 7 day ban.
The fact this user is allowed to operate in such a manner tells me that the mods who are most vocal of a shill problem only care about one type of "shill".
I don't think I should have to report this either, as you've said mods are all over thus thread and should interject without anyone needing to cry out for help.
til usernames define people. i guess shitfuckercuntdiddlyfucker shouldn't be taken seriously! i am in good faith. shame because i have you in green on res.
so can i. my username has many meanings to me and others. some i wish to not disclose some i will disclose. would actual shill for putin give username like mine? no. stupid! maybe i'm pointing out stupidity of both!? you wouldn't know because you never asked but just assumed.
Moderation =/= censorship. If they are here to disrupt they do not deserve a platform.
Plenty of Normie subs for you to have fun debunking everything and making fun of conspiracy theorists. This is a serious sub and we know discussion is very often detailed by unsavory individuals. Individuals who are not genuine members of the community.
Moderation =/= censorship.
Coming up with rules to specifically silence posters who believe in the Trump/Russia conspiracy is pure, unadulterated censorship. Creating a secret sub to target people who believe in the Trump/Russia conspiracy is even more vile than censorship. You are the very thing you claim to hate.
Coming up with rules to specifically silence posters who believe in the Trump/Russia conspiracy is pure, unadulterated censorship. Creating a secret sub to target people who believe in the Trump/Russia conspiracy is even more vile than censorship. You are the very thing you claim to hate.
No new rule have been proposed. That is a straw man. The conclave post in question sought to use the existing rule structure to purge known provocateurs.
Thank you for the correction. Allow me to amend my comment.
Modifying existing rules to specifically silence posters who believe in the Trump/Russia conspiracy is pure, unadulterated censorship. Creating a secret sub to target people who believe in the Trump/Russia conspiracy is even more vile than censorship. You are the very thing you claim to hate.
You think censorship is a bad thing? So anti Semitic comments shouldn't be censored? Attacks on the sub shouldn't be censored?
This is a conspiracy theory forum. Not a politics forum. Politics is pleb tier. Plenty of Normie subs for you to kvetch about Drumph and Putin. Please. What is the conspiracy? That high ranking political figures are corrupt? Give me a fucking break.
When that censorship is meant to silence the opinions of anyone that believes in conspiracies that are not approved by the /r/conspiracy_conclave cabal then yes, that's a bad thing.
You guys clearly don't want to protect anything, you just want to create another T_D-esque safe space where you can bask in your right-wing MSM talking points about the deep state without any pesky liberals bringing up that inconvenient Trump/Russia thing.
You guys clearly don't want to protect anything, you just want to create another T_D-esque safe space where you can bask in your right-wing MSM talking points about the deep state without any pesky liberals bringing up that inconvenient Trump/Russia thing.
What are you even talking about?
Very interesting straw man arguments strewn through out that paragraph.. You seriously belong in /r/rickandmorty if you think this is a right wing hug box. Conspiracy theory transcends the left right manufactured paradigm that the Hegelian overlords provide. Your trump/russia conspiracy, which you are yet to articulate, is pleb tier.
Dude, you can't be serious right now. Of course conspiracies are about hight ranking figures being corrupt. What should an r/conspiracy post be about? Your local coffe shop cheating on it's taxes?
Just read through some of the screenshot in the edit. Those guys are doing god's work. This sub needs to be cleaned the hell up. Couldn't agree with them meme.
So basically that sub is just a bunch of Trump supporters that want to kick anyone out that says stuff like "Trump tricked his voters and is doing deals with Saudi Arabia, wants to start shit with Iran, blah blah blah"
Fuck Trump. Trump is a known actor. If you think in 2018 the president of the United States has any power over the monied stricture I have a boat named Titan for sale.
The Federal Reserve supports Trump... He is not an outsider. He was selected. He is a reality "star" and has now turned the white house into a reality show.. Trump tries to use the media to his advantage
Yes, according to the proposed rule change any discussion of the Trump/Russia narrative or any criticism of the right-wing deep state narrative can get you banned. Swear allegiance to the Russian muppet or you're banished.
Trump opened 8 companies in Saudi Arabia like 1 month after he announced he was running for president. I think the Russia stuff is just a distraction from the real powers that be that got Trump elected.
And what does it hurt? If the other poster responds great, they are talking about a conspiracy, in a conspiracy forum (although slightly off topic), and if they don’t respond that’s fine too. Maybe that person isn’t confident enough in their conspiracy to make a whole post about it so chose to comment here.
Sure if I bring up Avatar in a Fast and Furious thread in the movies subreddit it may not be the most relevant thing to the topic. And sure, a couple of salty movies users may say, ‘Hey, Avatar is not relative in my thread about Dom and Family, please talk about that in an Avatar related thread’, but I’m not going to get told I’m being exhausting, find my name on a list of users who are Avatar fans (I didn’t make the list, but I do think the world design makes Avatar highly rewatchable) and have a private subreddit start talking about what do we do to get rid of these Avatar fans and their discussion of Avatar and it’s pending sequels, of which news and misinformation seems to come out daily from the producers and director.
(We may disagree here, but you have to admire my dedication to the metaphor)
Nonsense. Flytape and Sabremesh are clearly discussing creating rules they both agree are unfair simply to protect from any anti-Trump narrative and not a single person disagrees with them.
Dude, what do you want? Make a sub to talk about Trump/Russia all day if you want and you won't have to live under all this imaginary oppression. It was a brainstorm thread. Get over it.
Make a sub to talk about Trump/Russia all day if you want and you won't have to live under all this imaginary oppression.
What imaginary oppression? Are the people in the secret cabal not discussing rule changes that they admit are unfair purely to silence any anti-Trump sentiment here? Or did we all imagine reading that?
List them. Why are you trying to hide this information from the users of this sub? Do they not have a right to know what criteria you're using to purge people who are anti-Trump?
So that's the official criteria sanctioned by the secret cabal that's being used to create your personal purge list and modify rules in an admittedly unfair way to silence anti-Trump sentiment. Thanks for sharing!
So that's the official criteria sanctioned by the secret cabal that's being used to create your personal purge list and modify rules in an admittedly unfair way to silence anti-Trump sentiment. Thanks for sharing!
That screenshot from the conclave is an orchestrated leak. You were meant to have it and this post is all part of our plan. The conclave isn't our only place of discussion.
Can't it? Do other subs this size let all its members discuss and decide rules and moderation, or do they have smaller groups of vetted that discuss behind the scenes and then address the community? Because I think it is the latter.
It's not about moderation, the thread is literally calling on a chosen few to name users who should be declared persona non grata to restore the "conspiracy quotient".
Mods will mod as they see fit but this inaccessible community of papal conclave members is not that, it is a one sided attempt to control the narrative and its pretty transparent.
Its so obvious the new round of mods are complete power hungry shills. All you have to do is look at what they post and what they decide to sticky and its no wonder why CA was so successful in manipulating millions of online users during the election
Cambridge Analytica, Trumps election consulting firm that was paid 10s of millions of dollars for social media manipulation wasn't paid 10s of millions of dollars for nothing. They were good at what they did.
And what if you're not a shill, you're just some dude that gets up and goes to his lame ass job for 12 fucking hours a day just like anyone else? You just happen to believe a little bit differently than some people here. Do I really belong there? Is this really right? Do you really think this doesn't reach too far into authoritarian practice?
And no, my 12 hour a day job isn't shilling for whatever shitty group you're probably thinking of.
Although it shouldn't be secret, they are not wrong whith what they are saying at all. This place is overloaded with shills, ecspecially since the Florida shooting, trying to spread msm bullshit here.
I hope you guys have some backup sites in mind for the day when you wake up and this sub is banned. Should we get a "Contingent Community Migration Plan" together? We can list reddit alternatives and their relevant conspiracy related sections.
Can I say this seems fine? This sub is basically the only decent, consolidated source for non-mainstream views on things. I really don't have a problem if pointless pro-mainstream people get banned. The screenshots about there being a billion subs for the mainstream anti-Trump conspiracies but nowhere else for Nasa shit, etc bring up really good points.
As one of the mods who had perhaps the most to do with the formation of the conclave in its present form, I thought I'd give you my take on it.
I had two specific goals in pushing it to where it is: 1) to give the mods a better platform than the awful modmail tools we currently have to discuss ongoing issues and potential rules changes of the subs, and 2) to let more of our long time users take part in these discussions.
For any of your critiques of the conclave as it is now, I can guarantee you it would be just as easy if not easier for the mod team to do anything you'd find censorious or otherwise malign without ever creating the conclave. The conclave, if anything, brought more voices into that discussion.
As for it being private instead of public, I don't think that critique is without merit, yet I do think there are potential benefits given the nature of online forums such as they are. The conclave operates under Chatham House rules, which means anyone can discuss publicly what was said, but not who said it. This allows for more honest and frank discussion which otherwise might not be possible.
That it is private also means we're less susceptible to outside agitation and manipulation. The very nature of pseudonymous forums like reddit means that any sufficiently motivated party can very easily manipulate conversation, as the CA revelations have shown just a tip of that iceberg.
What is the criteria being used to add people to your purge list? Who is responsible for applying that criteria? Are people voted onto the purge list by the entire secret cabal community or just by the inner circle of the inner circle? Or can any random member add anyone they want for any reason they want without full review of the entire secret cabal community?
The list is complied using complex linguistic theory. You see the shills have a tendancy to write using specific linguistic cues that are known to be provocateur tactics. It's all very simple once you know what you're looking for.
What is the criteria being used to add people to your purge list?
As far as I understand it, it's meant to collect a list of users who regularly disrupt conversation rather than adding to it. Anyone can put anyone on this list, and only mods can ban people from it. Anyone banned is eligible for the same review process afforded to anyone banned by a mod for any other reason. (I'm not currently an active mod here, so I'm not sure if anyone from the list has been banned yet or not.)
As far as I understand it, it's meant to collect a list of users who regularly disrupt conversation rather than adding to it.
What proof is being provided that they're disrupting conversations? Based on that screenshot it seems clear that there is no evidence or debate happening whatsoever to determine who gets added to the purge list, someone simply adds a name and no one blinks an eye.
The way it seems to be working is that anyone can add a name, and the proof would be evident in the user's history, if indeed any given user is disruptive. I have no clue how old that screenshot is, but I've contested at least one name that I don't think should be banned, and others have contested others.
purge list
You keep calling this a purge list, and that's your right to characterize it as you see fit, but it's not really accurate. You appear on that list, and you haven't been purged. All it is a place for other users to add and discuss users they find to be disruptive to conversation. As has always been the case on this sub, the mod team has the final say in any bans or other actions. And just so you know, we regularly get modmails from all types of users asking for others to be banned, and we've always made those decisions based on our own investigations, not just because another user told us to.
The way it seems to be working is that anyone can add a name, and the proof would be evident in the user's history
If the only criteria for being labeled as a shill or a troll in that thread was being disruptive than the majority of people posting in that very thread should be added to the purge list.
You appear on that list, and you haven't been purged.
It's abundantly clear that plans are underway to modify the rules so posters like me who believe in the Trump/Russia conspiracy can be purged.
The way it seems to be working is that anyone can add a name, and the proof would be evident in the user's history
If the only criteria for being labeled as a shill or a troll in that thread was being disruptive than the majority of people posting in that very thread should be added to the purge list.
You appear on that list, and you haven't been purged.
It's abundantly clear that plans are underway to modify the rules so posters like me who believe in the Trump/Russia conspiracy can be purged.
Again can you clarify what you mean by the trunp/Russia conspiracy?
It's abundantly clear that plans are underway to modify the rules so posters like me who believe in the Trump/Russia conspiracy can be purged.
I'd say it's less about that and more about the extent to which that topic has taken over this board, and specifically users who have come into this sub who talk about seemingly nothing other than that here. The topic of conspiracy is much broader than this one specific set of allegations concerning Trump/Russia. I don't want to ban discussion of it here, but there are threads every day on nearly every other large and small political or news sub, in addition to dozens or more subs set up specifically to document, analyze, or meme the topic.
And it is specific users, not the topic itself, which correlate with drowning out other conversation. What should we make of a user who's had an account here for several years, posting mainly in r/politics, and then for a month and a half, decides to start posting here and makes 700 comments in this sub in that period?
And if someone wanted to propose another user for that list, but that user was on the conclave sub, would that be allowed? Out of curiosity, what about a mod? Would it be allowed to point out specific examples to bolster your case in either example?
I'm not actually sure what the current process is for letting people into the sub (I've been non-active as a mod on this sub, and don't have access to modmail or decision-making power here.) I'd suggest asking through the r/conspiracy_conclave modmail.
And if someone wanted to propose another user for that list, but that user was on the conclave sub, would that be allowed?
I don't see why not. It's not even a list so much as individual users and mods saying who they think are disruptive to conversation.
Out of curiosity, what about a mod?
Probably.
Would it be allowed to point out specific examples to bolster your case in either example?
In the context of the conclave, I'd say that would be encouraged.
I see my username there listed. I think I would know if I am a shill or not and i am certianly not. What have I done that would lead you to make this judgement? Dare to hold both sides to the same standard? Dare to be critical of astroturfing? Dare to be critical of Trump? I get shit on by either ShareBlue or the Trump people depending on what i post. They both hate me because i post things that counter their narrative. And they are both part of the establishment. And conversely some of my posts that are critical of one side are liked by the other and vice versa. I am about anti establishment as it gets. And if you think being critical of CA makes one suspect it's you that are the problem. Just like anybody that thinks ShareBlue is okay is the problem.
I don't know what's going on here but it goes against the spirit of this sub and maybe there isn't a place for people willing to criticize both sides here anymore. And maybe this isn't a place for me anymore. It damn sure feels that way.
I didn't put your name on any list. I don't think you're a shill, because I don't really recognize your username, but you are green in my RES so I must have upvoted you at least a few times.
I'm not sure how I even feel about that list in the first place, whether public or private. In general, I think there are users here which do more to distract and slide conversation, rather than seeing this as a sub to learn and share knowledge and ideas, but calling for names like that would inevitably lead to witch hunts and mischaracterizations. If a user's criteria for putting someone on that list was "often supports the MSM Trump/Russia narrative," then that's going to sweep up a lot of good users, too.
I do think the idea came from a good place, though. You even point out that you call out astroturfing, and it certainly exists on this sub and reddit more broadly. When it comes to calling out specific users as trolls and shills, it's going to get turned around as well, either by bad actors themselves, or by genuine users getting it wrong. Though I'm not sure how we can really identify shills, or even just disruptive users without listing usernames in some form or another. It truly is a wicked problem.
I would be careful of, and watch out for, people in this "conclave" trying to ban real dissent under the guise of shills. Like you said it could sweep up well intentioned users but it can also be abused if people have agendas you are not aware of. For the record I have never pushed the Trump/Russia narrative because I don't believe it. I actually argue against it. This is clearly just a hit job on me because I have the audacity to criticize Trump (who should be shown no allegiance on this sub) and CA and the methods they use on this sub. Keep an eye out.
I understood that. But it makes it even more telling that I got tagged and listed in the image linked because I don't fit that criteria and still get tagged as a shill. Why? Because I am critical of Trump and Cambridge? What kind of a sub do they want here then?
i made my reddit account in 2010. this was one of the first subs i subscribed to. fuck everything about this. this sub has changed so much over the past two years, and its because of the huge influx of trump die hard loyalists. period. it's so insane to blame the understandable pushback to that change and suggest banning people because they dont subscribe to the white house narrative.
Which is made up of the core members of this community. Are you sad you weren't invited? Are you wondering why we may not like you? It's because you clearly have an agenda. Over the past few days dozens of people have specifically mentioned your name when I went around asking who was a bad apple in conspiracy, why might people specifically name you?
For guys so vehemently against secret societies,and deep state shills you seem to use their tactics with joy.
I tend to be on the side of scepticism and voice my opinion accordingly.Your secret little club is a thinly veiled threat to this subs integrity.
You may justify it by saying it's "to tackle the shills and TmoR problem",but what stops you guys from taking it to far?
You have users in that group that were part of the attempted overthrow of this sub a couple of months ago,that tried to make it a right wing safe haven.
While this attempt was foiled,it now seems to have moved into the shadows with the same goal.
You seem to want to actively create a thought police.
What's wrong about mods and others discussing together in private how to make the subreddit better?
I looked at the screenshot, expecting to see/read something that would anger me but it didn't.
Banning accounts whose majority post history within this subreddit is just pushing mainstream media talking points and attacking free thinkers is actually a good thing.
If your post history within this subreddit is overly partisan for either political party and you are just here to sow political discord then you deserve a ban.
What's wrong with mods and others discussing together in private how to make the subreddit better?
What's with secret cabals where non-mods get to add anyone they want to purge lists and then invent new rules to censor them?
Banning accounts whose majority post history within this subreddit is just pushing mainstream media talking points and attacking free thinkers is actually a good thing.
So you support censorship of unpopular opinions, do you? How deliciously ironic.
What's wrong with mods and others discussing together in private how to make the subreddit better?
What's with secret cabals where non-mods get to add anyone they want to purge lists and then invent new rules to censor them?
Banning accounts whose majority post history within this subreddit is just pushing mainstream media talking points and attacking free thinkers is actually a good thing.
So you support censorship of unpopular opinions, do you? How deliciously ironic.
Note the subjects snarky demeanor when responding.
What's with secret cabals where non-mods get to add anyone they want to purge lists and then invent new rules to censor them?
Regular users who are not moderators of this subreddit are being allowed to add names of users they just so happen not to like to a "purge list", unchecked by moderators? Proof?
So you support censorship of unpopular opinions, do you? How deliciously ironic.
Let's just not ban any users, huh? Don't want to censor anyone.....please. Try again.
O, btw, I got your last line in your initial post. Top. Minds. Of. Reddit. 😉
If you were on that list you would have a problem with it, I guarantee it.
Good thing I'm not a troll, bot, or political partisan pushing mainstream media talking points while attacking conspiracy theorists, then. I was worried for a second.
And if you think banning people because they disagree with you
Quote me where I wrote that. You can't.
"Dur, you just want to ban anyone who disagrees with you." — Statement made by someone who obviously can't read or has an agenda. Take your pick.
Will the mods let us know the ratio of flat earth/moon landing posts we need to comment on in order to discuss the current administration?
The ultimate irony is, a massive amount of the sub is constantly attacking Trump conspiracies (and a large amount supporting) but then get upset when people attack, say, pizzagate or seth rich.
So a bunch of invite-only elite users and mods, including disgraced former mods, are in a secret sub Rule 10ing people they don't like in order to sanction and perhaps mass ban them. And this discussion is being led by the most enthusiastic deployer of permanent bans in r/conspiracy. Wow. That's... pretty fucked.
You reckon? I dunno. They've got mod power. They're pretty unified in purpose (and, let's face it, in political persuasion). They've begun identifying the undesirables. And they have veneers of reasons under which to enact their "reshaping" of the active subscriber base. So what's to stop them?
well there are certainly a few names in that list that i actually agree with. i don't usually bother to even read names but there are a few extreme examples that ive run in to that are named there that have stood out as shills, or just trolls trying to stir up shit.
I see my username there listed. I think I would know if I am a shill or not and i am certianly not. What have I done that would lead you to make this judgement? Dare to hold both sides to the same standard? Dare to be critical of astroturfing? I get shit on by either ShareBlue or the Trump people depending on what i post They bother hatell me because i post thinges that counter their narrative.. And conversely some of my posts that are critical of one side are liked by the other and vice versa. I am about anti establishment as it gets. And if you think being critical of CA makes one suspect it's you that are the problem.
I don't know what's going on here but it goes against the spirit of this sub and maybe there isn't a place for people willing to criticize both sides here anymore. And maybe this isn't a place for me anymore. It damn sure feels that way.
Holy shit I made their list! This is such a proud moment for me. Its ridiculous that conversations like this are being had by our mods in private subs. Its hilarious to me that they claim transparency yet do things like this to obfuscate their attempts at narrowing the user pool to only the people they deem acceptable.
This is essentially "ban the leftists and anyone that thinks trump is a scbag".
Yes I talk about trump on here an awful lot, but it brought up a lot in this sub (and not by me either). I've made some posts regarding trump, but not all of my posts have to do with trump. And yeah, I think he's guilty of some shitty things, but have any of you assholes in that sub taken the time to ask me exactly what I think of it all? Fuck no you haven't! Instead you retreat to your little safespace and try to scheme ways to ban people without making it obvious you're targeting people because they disagree with you.
It's cowardly.
It's outrageous.
It's disheartening.
If you're a mod that's too deep in that subs bullshit, you should be removed. If you're a mod who contributes to that sub, stop pretending that your concern is free speech, because it's not. You just don't want anyone to disagree with you. You're just as bad as those you pretend to hate. You hate them so much you emulate their behavior?
Look at yourselves. You've become what you hate. You can't be trusted in the position you're in. Do the right thing and remove yourselves from the mod team.
Looking good mods. Conspiracy elite! Would be shit if the admins nuke ya'll and there is no agreed upon place to reconnect. Thats what happens next if the corporations cant control the narrative. Food4thought.
I'm pretty sure anytime I hear someone say "left this, right that, democrat this, or republican that" they are newbies or on a pay roll. It's been common knowledge in the conspiracy community that this paradigm is designed to divide and control. It's one of the fist things I've learned. Every politician plays for the same team. Team fuck you.
I understand that we'll never see eye to eye politically, especially on the Trump/Russia, but I guess I do want to try to explain how things feel around here as a lefty conspiracy junkie.
When I was younger, I wasted days on end reading all the 9/11 conspiracy stuff I could find. Everything from the Bush administration swapped the planes in air for drones/military aircraft and had all the passengers killed, to the lighter (and, imo far more plausible) Cheney and friends allowed it to happen for financial and geopolitical reasons. I remember doing a presentation in a high school AP class about how the Bush admin was drumming up war in Iraq on flimsy reasoning. I've re-read John Titor's claims about the left-right divide and WW3 more times than I should probably admit.
My personal experiences with conspiracies have always had a left leaning to them. I know that's not what everyone thinks, and that frankly I'm probably in the minority among the conspiracy community. But, the comparison I'd make for today (with what I and others feel is supression of talk about Trump/Russia on this sub) is like if it were 2002 and the sub didn't allow any discussion of 9/11 conspiracies.
Trump's the President and he's under Federal investigation for possible conspiracy against the United States! How can people not want to talk about that? I want to hear your side and I want to talk about my side! Why can't we?
I feel like must be ways to facilitate that kind of discussion without immediately devolving into shill accusations. More forceful moderation of shill accusations? Removing the downvote button so things don't get buried? I don't know, I'm not an expert on this shit, but I wish we could do better.
That's because of the 800 resist network subs. They overwhelm every sub on Reddit. It's organized, obvious and annoying as hell. We don't need Conspiracy to just be a mirror of /politics, /news, /worldnews etc etc.
I don't disagree the name calling happens form all sides and should be minimized. The extremes definitely make it difficult to want to participate, if you jump in you are likely to get slammed (from one or both sides) and that sucks.
I think timed mutes are better than bans. If someone is a repeat offender then maybe it goes to the next level. Everyone is guilty of getting heated and quick with the keyboard now and then. Banning folks should be a last resort and only if there is a real violation (threats, doxxing, etc.) - censorship is never the answer.
Moderation =/= censorship.
Coming up with rules to specifically silence posters who believe in the Trump/Russia conspiracy is pure, unadulterated censorship. Creating a secret sub to target people who believe in the Trump/Russia conspiracy is even more vile than censorship. You are the very thing you claim to hate.
Trump opened 8 companies in Saudi Arabia like 1 month after he announced he was running for president. I think the Russia stuff is just a distraction from the real powers that be that got Trump elected.
Discrimination means to choose. Nothing wrong with discriminating against racists or bigots then? Your argument will be used to make conspiracy a platform for hate speech.
So, are you saying your stance is that, for the r/conspiracy sub to be working properly, it needs to be steered by some covert but influential organization of users?
I feel like you're missing the word "covert." Obviously mods are necessary for every subreddit. Most subreddits don't have separate private subreddits that invite users to influence moderation policy secretly.
What's wrong with mods and others discussing together in private how to make the subreddit better?
What's with secret cabals where non-mods get to add anyone they want to purge lists and then invent new rules to censor them?
Banning accounts whose majority post history within this subreddit is just pushing mainstream media talking points and attacking free thinkers is actually a good thing.
So you support censorship of unpopular opinions, do you? How deliciously ironic.
That's because this user is an alt for one of the conclave users and they know and are okay with this. I assume that it's putin_loves_cats based on the way the user speaks, the hours that they are active, and that they weren't activated until shillsonacid received a 7 day ban.
The fact this user is allowed to operate in such a manner tells me that the mods who are most vocal of a shill problem only care about one type of "shill".
I don't think I should have to report this either, as you've said mods are all over thus thread and should interject without anyone needing to cry out for help.
707 comments
1 WarSanchez 2018-03-21
I'm a member, you can ask me questions and I'll anwer with my view of things.
Keep it civil.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Thanks. Who is in control of that community and why was it created? What gets discussed there? Are moderation decisions being discussed there and are non moderators of /r/conspiracy participating in those discussions?
1 WarSanchez 2018-03-21
From my view, it's a community of core members invited in by the mod team (I have no idea how we were chosen) to try to find solutions to some of the problems facing the sub. There are discussions about things that can be done to try to bring it back to it's roots pre-2016 election hysteria.
I have lobbied for an open forum where any conspiracy can be discussed in a CIVIL manner.
1 cowbey 2018-03-21
Thank you for that.
1 billynlex 2018-03-21
Godspeed, you heroes. Please make it happen.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
If I described that subreddit as a secret cabal of /r/conspiracy posters that are actively targeting people on here with opposing political views and formulating rules specifically meant to silence those posters, would that be a fairly accurate description in your personal opinion?
1 Flytape 2018-03-21
You mean like the 800+ anti-trump subs that do just that? Or how about TMOR who just hates all Conspiracy talk in general and also happens to be anti-trump?
They get a free pass, no mention from you but you're worried about a small gathering of long time members from here being pulled aside to be able to discuss things without "all that noise".
It doesn't sound like you have the best interest of this sub in mind.
1 Kind_Of_A_Dick 2018-03-21
Are those subs private?
1 Flytape 2018-03-21
Oh I'm sure there are plenty of private ones.
1 Kind_Of_A_Dick 2018-03-21
I'd assume there's a greater likelihood of non-Reddit hangouts on Discord or IRC, among other places. Of course, this goes for all interested parties and not just the TMOR types because other groups have an interest in disrupting places like this to push their own agenda. During the 2016 election I would periodically watch accounts that caught my interest and look at their comments for a couple days. A few times I found people talking about heading to other sites to coordinate their memes and messages, and I'm guessing it didn't stop after November of that year.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
What does that have to do with creating a secret cabal to target posters who have a different political leaning or believe conspiracies you personally don't believe in? Censoring opposing viewpoints is pure intellectual cowardice.
Ditto.
1 Flytape 2018-03-21
Well the conclave isn't about political ideology, it's about Conspiracy theorists.
The 800 anti-trump subs ARE about political ideology, which is what it has to do with your comment.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
“Tell the truth, or someone will tell it for you.”
1 Flytape 2018-03-21
Your link just shows that people have noticed your bullshit. Not my problem, they made that list without my help so cry to someone else about it.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Just making sure people see the secret cabal you people created to try to kill any dissenting opinion on this sub. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
1 Flytape 2018-03-21
Maybe you should log out of your 700th account and go outside then.
1 Paraphen 2018-03-21
https://imgur.com/NHEsCMF
1 mwiegel2 2018-03-21
Didnt you try to make this place a right wing shit hole not too long ago? Didn't the admins have to get involved? Sorry if I don't trust you and your Ilk to pick who should be allowed on this sub...
1 StiffJohnson 2018-03-21
Is this a pro-trump sub now? I thought it was supposed to be neutral.
1 whacko_jacko 2018-03-21
Yes, exactly, and the concern is that a great number of users can't handle that. We don't want this place to become just like everywhere else. There are a number of conspiracy theories which vindicate Donald Trump and those are allowed to be discussed here just as much as Trump/Russian collusion.
1 StiffJohnson 2018-03-21
So can we get a list of approved conspiracies to question?
I don't see anyone whining about flat earth deniers.
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
That actually pisses me off, too. I'm not a FE person, but damn it if they can't even have a conversation in a post without being jumped with insults calling them LARP, moron, retard and downvoted to oblivion.
1 StiffJohnson 2018-03-21
Does it piss you off when people dismiss Trump's connections to Russia?
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
Sometimes, if they are shitty about it and aren't sharing facts or theories.
1 StiffJohnson 2018-03-21
https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/82p1zd/_/dvbou1h
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
Was that "pro-Russia"? What are you getting at?
I happen to believe that the Russia stuff is way overblown. I've been around awhile and I've seen a lot of "enemies" come and go and, in hindsight, it wasn't what the press led us to believe. I lean that way this time, too.
1 StiffJohnson 2018-03-21
So it's OK to dismiss the Russian connection, but not flat earthers?
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
Please don't twist my words. It seems like you are trying for some "gotcha" here for a "win" and that isn't honest discussion in my opinion.
Dismissing a theory of any kind is acceptable. The trouble lies when it becomes an absolute battle of insults and dishonest discourse. It isn't exchanging ideas, exploring a different point of view, looking at it from another angle like it should be. It is flinging shit until you feel like you won a battle of verbal trickery.
1 WarSanchez 2018-03-21
For the record, everything is allowed to be discussed there. Also for the record, there is nothing there that breaks site rules.
There are a couple users who have raised points about certain issues regarding some users. I do not agree with these points the same way I do not agree YouTube banning opposing view points if they are not breaking the rules.
1 whacko_jacko 2018-03-21
Not even close to accurate. Political leanings are irrelevant to discussion there. Sorry, but you are seriously barking up the wrong tree. Believe me or not, I really don't care.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
You sure about that?
1 GiannisHasNoJumpshot 2018-03-21
boom
1 Samurai_Jesus 2018-03-21
That seemed to me like a pretty apolitical and respectful discussion. Kinda made me long for the pre-2015 CTR reddit.
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
I think they're targeting users that support the trump-russia theories, as far as I can tell all of those users do.
I'd be more inclined to believe politics aren't involved if any of the users who support Trump and violate rules or whatever else had made it on the list as well. But as far as I can tell that's not the case.
1 ChipperyDoo 2018-03-21
Exactly, why aren’t users like ShillForPutin on that list? He literally admits to being a fucking Russian and a shill.
1 whacko_jacko 2018-03-21
Precisely.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Who would have thought that when you get a bunch of like minded people together in a private sub to plot ways to silence posters with different political beliefs that things would be civil?
1 Samurai_Jesus 2018-03-21
Do you have an issue with civility?
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Nope, just pointing out that it's not surprising that circlejerks being conducted in private echo chambers with internet pals would remain civil.
Can you point to the criteria being used in that thread to label people shills?
1 Samurai_Jesus 2018-03-21
I can and will once you've answered my question with an answer instead of another question
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
No, because it's impossible to even address your question without a firm definition of what a shill is. If you don't want to give one that's fine but without a definition it's a meaningless discussion.
1 whacko_jacko 2018-03-21
Yes, I'm absolutely positive about that. It's entirely apolitical and 100% about civility, ingenuousness, and combating manipulation.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Odd, reads to me like a bunch of /r/conspiracy mods and their internet buddies creating a secret group to figure out ways to ban posters who have a different political background. One of the posters even says he's not interested in fairness, he just wants to kill any opposing views.
1 whacko_jacko 2018-03-21
I just searched and didn't find the word "kill" anywhere there, so surely you must be paraphrasing. Mind giving me an exact quote so I can determine if you characterization is even partly accurate?
Again, it's not about political views. You can discuss anything you want here. But there are apolitical aspects of behavior which are abhorrent to this community.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
The comment was made in regards to these rules that are being created to ban posters with opposing views.
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
Then why is it only people who support a certain theory who made it on the list? If it was apolitical don't you think at least one person who is a Trump supporter or doesn't believe in the theory would make it on that list?
1 GiannisHasNoJumpshot 2018-03-21
exactly.
there are zero pro trump users on their purge list.
seriously? not even that guy with 30 accounts?
1 GiannisHasNoJumpshot 2018-03-21
exactly.
there are zero pro trump users on their purge list.
seriously? not even that guy with 30 accounts?
1 whacko_jacko 2018-03-21
It's not about the theory they support, it's about their inability to tolerate alternatives to the theory they support.
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
At least some of those users don't fall into that category, and I've seen people who do fall into that category considered good members by users who are contributing there.
1 Jac0b777 2018-03-21
Definitely not the case. I was invited and have access to the sub and it's really no big conspiracy. It's simply a place where users discuss how to deal with the overarching problems that plague this sub.
Politically, there are plenty of people on both sides. I can absolutely assure you that it's not filled with "Trunp-supporters", as I feel many are trying to imply. I myself am not a Trump supporter in the least, but to be fair I'm not a supporter of either main political party.
There is definitely nohing sinister going on there, but I do agree that the name "conclave" may have an ominous ring to it. But nope, I haven't seen anything there that could be dubbed as a "conspiracy" against this main sub, the opposite really, it's more like a place to help make the sub better and not more filled with crappy partisan politics.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
If only you could say the same about their purge list.
1 Jac0b777 2018-03-21
I would definitely not say the purge list is related to any political leanings. Heck, even the screenshot you posted implies that Trump is not the issue here.
It is simply the case that this sub has been overhwelmed with users that are parroting MSM talking points. Whether these points are left or right leaning. This sub should be a place to discuss alternative views to mainstream events, thus I see no point in having threads here that actively support mainstream views. Whether the alternative theories are true or not (depends on the case of course), this sub should be the place to discuss them.
I don't supoort a "purge list" personally, but something should be done about the influx of users that are unable to entertain any thought that is not part of the mainstream narrative. We have plenty of other subs for that, conspiracy should remain a place for discussions on alternative viewpoints, both those that appear less and those that appear more fringe.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
The 'deep state is out to get Trump' is a MSM talking point, it's just it's a right-wing MSM talking point.
You're pretty much advocating for thought police, you understand that right? It's okay if people disagree, in fact disagreements are healthy provided they don't turn personal. Hiding from them or worse setting up a secret sub to create lists of people who don't subscribe to your chosen MSM narrative is pure intellectual cowardice.
1 Jac0b777 2018-03-21
Did I ever say the deep state is out to get Trump? The deep state is its own law and is behind any president that is in charge. One way or another, the deep-state calls (or at least tries to) call the shots, regardless of who is president. It is up the people to wake up and see this, the change must fundamentally come from the bottom up, not the top down. Thus politics is not the answer in my opinion. That is my perspective on the issue.
No, I am not advocating thought police whatsoever. I think all viewpoints and opinions should be respected. That is why I said that a purge list is not the answer, if you re-read my post. However, I said that this sub has been swamped with people that parrot MSM talking points, whether they are related to Trump or not (I don't see why insistance on bringing up Trump anyway, he doesn't really have any power, a president is always mainly a figurehead). I don't think this actually helps discussion and I think that people with any viewpoint should be able to explain themselves better and listen to each-other's viewpoints in a well-mannered fashion, without ad-hominem attacks and sliding the conversation off topic, making a non political topic political....etc. all of which often happens on this sub.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
What are you implying? You don't think people who shill for authoritarian power structures should be banned?
Have you ever made a post on gmos or vaccines?
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Let me know when you're ready to release the criteria for adding people to your personal purge list.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Ever read the gentle person's guide to forum spies?
1 Blergblarg2 2018-03-21
The purge list is based on behavior.
Party affiliation being simikar only show that people from a certain political affiliation cannot behave.
1 TheGreatOni19 2018-03-21
Nothing sinister going on?!?!
Do you even read the content of this post?!?!?!?!
If there is nothing sinister going on, then why in the fuck is my name on a list simply for speaking out?! I say what's on my mind and I get put on a list?! How the fuck is that not sinister?!?!
1 Jac0b777 2018-03-21
That was one user from that sub (that created a list) and is not representative of that sub as a whole. I have created and endorsed no lists and the majority there hasn't as well. It's not a group with any unified "agenda", it's simply users discussing how to make this sub better. And one user thought the way to do this is to expose those who he thinks are being provocative. But that doesn't mean everyone there or even the majority feels that way. I myself don't even know half the users on those supposed "shill-lists". As said, it's just one user's perspective.
1 TheGreatOni19 2018-03-21
It's a place where users can discuss an agenda bit it's a closed group. So the only way to discuss anything is to get an invite. Yet I'm supposed to believe it's not sinister. Yeah.......my common sense is tingling.
1 Jac0b777 2018-03-21
The reason the group is closed is in order to prevent brigading from anyone wishing to subvert this sub and that one as well. Shills, provocateurs, trolls....abound on Reddit these days, that is why the sub is closed.
But believe what you wish.
1 Iceboundend 2018-03-21
Have ya'll tried asking r/politics to blacklist CTR(and i should say CA aswell) No matter how you divy it up, left shills, right shills, all shilling is gross.
I dont even check the r/politics subreddit anymore, fucking decepticons did a damn takeover. There is no autobot in this fight. Only corporations have enough money to do this shit.
Basically, sorry for hopping this ship after the dnc nomination. But i like abit of egypt and esoteric knowledge too.
1 banjowashisnameo 2018-03-21
Ah, the old CTR boogeyman. A website whcih was out in the open, with every cent accounted for and which was never about secret online accounts. You know how I know someone in gullible? When despite all evidence to the contrary, they spout ctr bullshit.
And it takes a special kind of mind to think that a pac of a candidate who lost the election and is just a private citizen id still being funded and active for some reason. At this point this has to be some kind of mental disease right?
1 Iceboundend 2018-03-21
Either CA masquerade as CTR
Or CTR themselves did it, but they burnt that subreddit
But either way its goddamn apalling. thats all you had to say? CTR represent the donors not hillary, the global agenda must go on. Btw, saw jimmyD breakdown of HRC in india, if shes over why tf is she campaigning in india?
1 garyp714 2018-03-21
Do you agree with blanket bans for people like me (I'm on their list in that thread)?
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
https://ibb.co/fApBcx
Image for those interested
1 Kind_Of_A_Dick 2018-03-21
Interesting thread. Hopefully every post from there ends up making it out, for transparency of course.
1 canitbe73 2018-03-21
Well that's pretty fucked up. I'm almost proud to be on the list of dissenters, tbh.
The irony here is just... I feel like we're fucking swimming in it at this point.
1 shunned_one 2018-03-21
Hello fellow PNG. When do we get issued our Pesona Non Grata flairs?
1 TheGreatOni19 2018-03-21
Oh shit son!! You know, I'd almost be ok with it all as long as I didn't get banned for some stupid bullshit and I got personal non gratis flare!!
I demand reparations in the form of flair!!!!
1 WarSanchez 2018-03-21
I do not agree with banning anyone because of an opposing view point.
I agree with banning abusive users and those here not contributing to discussions in a civil manner. I'm a centrist both "sides" annoy me, but I wouldn't say ban them.
1 kittypryde123 2018-03-21
I was pretty surprised to see people like me and fkagn on there, tbh. I think I've been civil and, I thought, helpful w/r/t the sockpuppets problem here.
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
I appreciate your work on sockpuppet accounts and you have always been civil in my experience.
1 kittypryde123 2018-03-21
Thanks you guys (/u/warsanchez)
I mean, I’m sure I’ve been a bit sassy at times, but I’m def not into the whole “you’re a shill!” “Nothingburger” culture that’s been spreading. I’m more into evidence sharing and clearly stating my opinions as opinions, rather than facts.
1 WarSanchez 2018-03-21
I agree with RGrace. I've never seen you be a problem in this sub. Quite the opposite from my interactions with you.
1 kit8642 2018-03-21
I've never seen an issue with you and have no problem standing up for you as a user. With that said, TMOR are using a user's comment to build the idea that the mods endorse that list and are going to ban those users. I personally don't agree with banning people unless they brake the rules, even if I don't agree with them (Shit I could even be wrong with my point of view and have been at times). With that said, I wouldn't be to concerned and please feel free to hit me up if you ever have a issue and would love to help.
1 kittypryde123 2018-03-21
My biggest question was who tf was that person making lists, since I don’t recognize their name. Some regular seemed to agree with them, but obviously the screens don’t show much discussion about each individual, and of course don’t allow for us to respond or defend ourselves there.
My personal belief is that paid shills obviously exist, but that we have no way of knowing for sure or proving any one user is one. The best we can do, IMO, is raise the standards of discourse and track alts based on writing style and some other patterns. Thanks yo!
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
SUPER helpful with the sockpuppets! Yeah, I can't say I agree with all of that list, and I think only glanced over it, but you definitely don't deserve to be on there, nor fkagn.
1 trjb 2018-03-21
Yeah that was surprising to me as well, you bring an analytical approach to sockpuppets and spammers. Seeing the original nomination thread I was surprised you weren't nominated, to be honest.
1 kittypryde123 2018-03-21
Maybe bc I wasn’t around for a bit. Also i think some people were under the impression I was creating sockpuppet... false flags, I guess? But you couldn’t pay me to do what some of these crazies do. Tens of alts, obsessed with reddit 24/7.
1 Sabremesh 2018-03-21
It's not an official list, just a user comment. You can have a better look for yourself.
1 kittypryde123 2018-03-21
Thanks for the invite!
1 KarmicEnigma 2018-03-21
As someone who was banned - not for being abusive or lack of contributions but because I had an opposing view from a mod and dared to speak up about it - that list irritated me significantly.
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
Can we get a screenshot of the current new and hot threads?
1 WarSanchez 2018-03-21
I agreed to some rules regarding privacy that most all members have upheld so I will not break them.
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
Understandable, yet disappointing (on the moderators, not you).
1 forgivenfreeonfire 2018-03-21
Check the screenshot posted above.
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
The one I posted?
1 thctuesday 2018-03-21
What's your opinion on the scope of the TMOR problem? I know often times I'll see the mods talking about them crosslinking and brigading when the posts have very few upvotes. Regardless of the low amount of upvotes, it seems that it is treated like they're influence is massive and I know it worries me that they could be used as a scapegoat to block out dissenting discussions.
Even in this thread I can see flytape responding to another user asking about the sub and saying they're not entitled to the happenings of the sub, and then telling them to go back to TMOR.
I just know from my perspective seeing TMOR being blamed for everything and suddenly having a secret group of conspiracy users to fight it and help change the direction of the sub just feels fishy. Especially when as I said above, we can see members of the community, flytape in particular, gatekeeping and talking down to those that are questioning the decision
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
You can check their sub right now and see their "declaration of war". The number of comments in an X-post there is not necessarily evidence that their alts are not here. In fact it stands to reason- If they busy here with an alt shitting up a post, they are too busy to be there commenting, right?
1 thctuesday 2018-03-21
Where do you see a declaration of war? I just took a look over there and don't see anything regarding that. My concern is just that it looks like scapegoating that is leading to a community deciding how they want things to change in a non-transparent way. I know I hadn't heard of the conclave until the new mod announcements were made, and it seems that was the case for many others in here as well.
I just know from my perspective a conspiracy community should not have a shadow group working behind the scenes to think of how to push the community in the way they want. It may seem useful for countering shilling, but shouldn't one of the goals of this community be to act transparently?
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
"Battle" is in the title. I'm not linking.
As for the Conclave sub, I feel it is necessary to discuss what is working here and what isn't in a constructive manner without a bunch of arguments. We've tried it here before and it was a disaster.
People have a really hard time being civil here. It is a shame, but it the facts.
1 canitbe73 2018-03-21
Is this the only comment you feel like replying to, in this entire post? As someone who's listed as one of those - what is it you and your friends called them? Persona non grata? As a "PNG", I'd really like to know more about why I, among other members here, have been singled out as, essentially, needing to be banned for my beliefs - and why you mods are collecting such names in the first place.
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
Sorry. I've been busy moderating posts.
Everyone there has there own ideas. You can read my comment. I believe my suggestions were not only fair, but looking for actual solutions to real problems.
I didn't contribute to the list. You would have to ask the user that compiled it.
1 canitbe73 2018-03-21
I'm asking you as a mod here, not an individual poster. Why are mods collecting such names to begin with? Why does it seem like the names collected all have a specific (and unpopular with the mods) political slant? What's going to happen to these "PNGs"? Why do you think it's okay to publicly complain about censorship and elite groups secretly controlling and ruling the population, while essentially doing your own version of censorship through just that?
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
I can't speak for anyone else's intentions, only my own and you saw what I had to say.
1 KarmicEnigma 2018-03-21
I was wondering the same thing.
1 gandalfsbastard 2018-03-21
A few of us only went to the TMOR post because we were pinged to inform us of the discussion regarding our tags elsewhere (the conclave post) that we could not see. I am not a part of any war or do I care to be in one.
As for being named (and accused of being another alt, which I am not btw) as a MSM shill is just crazy. I participate in political conspiracies because that is what I am passionate about. I read through just about everything posted in r/con but I refrain from commenting on those threads because I don't have enough information to feel comfortable adding to the discussions. If it has to do with flying or tech I may jump in as I was a military aviator and currently an program engineer that has worked developing consumer products for a long time.
I am left leaning for sure but not a democrat or republican at all. I am very concerned about corporate dominance and the loss of personal freedoms more than anything so that's what attracts my attention. And yes I am a firm believer that Trump is a part of that group and should be scrutinized to the fullest.
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
That's fair. My main concern right now is civility. There is no reason that conspiracy theorists of different leans can't coexist if they are civil.
I've spent days going through the reports and I'm amazed at how shitty people are to each other around here. They twist words, call names, act like every discussion is some debate to win with snark and technicalities. It is disheartening.
We just want the place to work and not be a battlefield, plain and simple.
1 gandalfsbastard 2018-03-21
I don't disagree the name calling happens form all sides and should be minimized. The extremes definitely make it difficult to want to participate, if you jump in you are likely to get slammed (from one or both sides) and that sucks.
I think timed mutes are better than bans. If someone is a repeat offender then maybe it goes to the next level. Everyone is guilty of getting heated and quick with the keyboard now and then. Banning folks should be a last resort and only if there is a real violation (threats, doxxing, etc.) - censorship is never the answer.
1 mwiegel2 2018-03-21
Shouldn't there be some trump supporters on that list if it's about civility? I see way more trump supporters being dicks then anyone else.
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
One of your recent comments:
1 mwiegel2 2018-03-21
The guy was ragging on someone elses post history so I ragged on his. Granted I could have used better language.
1 mwiegel2 2018-03-21
The guy was ragging on someone elses post history so I ragged on his. Granted I could have used better language.
1 WarSanchez 2018-03-21
I think the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
Does TMoR come here and vote on threads? Yes. How many do or to what extent is up for debate depending on who you talk to.
My view is they can be annoying and they can be disruptive. They also do target certain users over and over again. They aren't as innocent as they claim to be, but at the same time, they are not the biggest source of our problems.
1 thctuesday 2018-03-21
I can definitely respect that opinion because I feel similarly as well. I know you can clearly see them targeting specific users such as AP.
Out of curiosity then, what do you consider to be one of the larger sources of problems? Or would it be the sort of thing that it's a general bad feeling about the direction of things rather than a more specific entity?
1 WarSanchez 2018-03-21
I think people being dicks to one another, labeling eachother shill/bot in RES, and just voting without discussing and actually talking about topics is a much bigger issue.
That falls on the individual user to try to be the better person and be what they want the community to be.
1 thctuesday 2018-03-21
I would agree with that as well. I tend to lurk more than comment or post anything and I always see people going and just implying anyone they disagree with is a shill. Sorta like they chose to etch their opinion in stone rather than write in a mutable manner, and I think that leads to it feeling more like people are fighting to try and force others to see their opinion as correct.
1 Loose-ends 2018-03-21
I think you also need to consider the fact that r/conspiracy still has a modicum of free speech that being "a bunch of tinfoil hats on the lunatic fringe", as we are generally depicted to be elsewhere, would only give us even more attention and credibility if any serious efforts were ever made to try and limit or curtail that freedom of speech that still happens to exist here, but has been eliminated in increasingly more places throughout Reddit.
So we've become something of a catch-all for people with something they think is important to say with no other place to say it, simply for the sake and relief of getting some others to see and acknowledge it.
They may not be conspiracy related in any obvious or direct way but we can't say that some of them aren't important or that there isn't some value in us being made aware of them, all the same.
There was certainly some kind of a conspiracy to close down many of the subs some of those posters used to use or suffered changes to their rules that now prevent them from speaking openly about certain controversial topics they never had any trouble doing before and I think we need to understand that.
Personally I think this sub actually has gained far more credibility and opened more minds than anyone appreciates. The amount of organised trolling and brigading on certain topics is a testament to that and that someone certainly thinks or is worried that we're getting too close to the truth for their own with enough eyes on what gets posted about it for them to need to do that.
1 WarSanchez 2018-03-21
I think you might have replied to the wrong comment?
I would love r/con to be in the top 10 subs and for everyone to be aware of the shit that goes on around them.
1 Kind_Of_A_Dick 2018-03-21
Have they discussed post flair/tags? I've said before that this sub might be better off with filter-able tags so users can direct themselves to what they want to see instead of being blasted constantly by stuff they don't like.
1 WarSanchez 2018-03-21
I have been asking for that pre-conclave. Do not know where that stands.
I am not alone in this I'll tell you that. It is a pretty popular opinion.
1 Kind_Of_A_Dick 2018-03-21
That's good to hear. There would likely need to be some kind of consensus reached regarding what tags to use and there might be disagreements over what topics fit in which tags, but it could be workable. Maybe if enough users start doing it on their own it will show whether or not it's effective.
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
I'm not opposed, but I could see it getting overly contentious to the point of unworkable. If the end result is people being able to see the content they want here, and therefore spending more time contributing to what they're knowledgeable and passionate about, then I'm all for ti.
But if the end result is just extra complaining about the wrong flair being added, and sliding away from the actual topic at hand, then I'm not for it. It's certainly worth exploring.
On a more general point, as a mod I have no problem with people criticizing me or the mod team for decisions we make. Sometimes we get things wrong, and we do bring our own biases to the table that can be hard to fully separate from our mod duties. My issue in general is that excessive criticism of the mod team or the sub in conversations about specific conspiracy theories does often have the effect, if not the intent, or sliding discussion.
1 gandalfsbastard 2018-03-21
I get that a private sub is private but a public sub should be public. Not only that it seems wrong for a group to just arbitrarily drop names accusing them of being shills without letting the person know what is up. At least let them defend themselves.
Beyond that I think that if a sub suppresses and bans posters that they do not agree with they just give Reddit more ammunition to do the same in kind with the various troublesome (from their pov) subs. If Reddit doesn't like r/con because they don't conform they can just ban the sub. Yes I know they do that under the T&Cs when they want to but I am advocating that that is just as big a violation of free speech as it is for a mod to ban a 'dissenter' and it's worth noting that a dissenting opinion is not bad and should be used to strengthen your argument if at all possible.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Second. I am open to any inquiry to my actions as a conclave member.
Yes, we do all have matching t-shirts. Thank you /u/celinehagbard.
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
Thirded. Also open for any inquiry.
Why haven't I gotten my shirt in the mail yet?
1 Thinkingfellersunion 2018-03-21
Can I get an invite? Who do I need to msg?
1 WarSanchez 2018-03-21
Message the mods.
1 SpinPHD480 2018-03-21
Is this a different sub than the one created for accounts under 2 months?
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
That is /r/conspiracy_commons
1 Flytape 2018-03-21
The same bad actors show up every time the mods try to do anything to better the community. That's why they set up the conclave, as a barrier between the insanity of constantly being brigaded by TMOR and other shit hole subs.
These bad actors like to pretend like they give a shit about what's best for Conspiracy when all they actually do is try to disrupt and destroy every attempt to improve the community. You might have noticed a few of them around, they show up in every mod announcement or community outreach post to complain, they are never happy with anything, they rarely discuss conspiracies and always obsessively debunk them... Except for one Conspiracy, the orangraged Cheeto monster Conspiracy being pushed by the MSM and deep state empire.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Can you detail for us all the active measures that /r/conspiracy_conclave is carrying out to make /r/conspiracy great again?
1 Flytape 2018-03-21
Nope. I am a member there but you aren't so I don't see how it's your business.
1 bulletbait 2018-03-21
Do you really see no irony at all in a secretive side community to steer control of the /r/conspiracy subreddit?
1 Flytape 2018-03-21
Do you not see the irony in an anti-conspiracy side sub steering the community?
1 bulletbait 2018-03-21
Way to side step that question so deftly.
1 Flytape 2018-03-21
Tell TMOR I said hi.
1 bulletbait 2018-03-21
I got a PM from someone from TMOR telling me I was on a "purge list", that's the extent of my interactions with that sub that I can remember.
I'm sorry you think I'm some nefarious evil doer that can't be tolerated, but I'm just another conspiracy fan that apparently disagrees with you politically.
1 Flytape 2018-03-21
They are the ones obsessed with everything being ironic. Sorry you sound like them.
1 FlooferzMcPooferz 2018-03-21
This comic reminds me of you
1 Flytape 2018-03-21
Nice repost.
This one is you
1 t4intedl0ve 2018-03-21
This podcast reminds me of you.
1 Flytape 2018-03-21
And you've probably jerked off to it.
Rent free in your head.
1 KarmicEnigma 2018-03-21
When I was unfairly banned from this sub, along with 12 other users during the same thread, I found out about it from a TMOR PM. So I hopped over there, for the first time ever, to discuss what happened, because obviously I couldn't post here.
When I messaged the mods to ask for a reversal of the unfair ban, I was blamed by the mods for being a part of TMOR.
Eventually the mod who banned me caught enough hell to unban all of us from that thread. So stupid.
1 mwiegel2 2018-03-21
Quick question, do you guys all don bird masks and vape while you try to figure out how to silence the people on the left?
1 whacko_jacko 2018-03-21
It's just a discussion. Any action which results from the discussion would be entirely public.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
Where did anyone say a thing about "unfair" rules?
1 stealyourideas 2018-03-21
calling user PNGs over certain opinions and banning them is hardly fair.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
You think creating a secret list of posters with no criteria whatsoever to target with rules that are meant to ban them is fair?
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
[cue crickets]
1 Tookmyprawns 2018-03-21
You're right. This isn't about rules. This about people the chosen few simply don't like.
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
For some, maybe. My comment was about the rules and how to make them work better. But, go ahead and twist what I said.
This thread has been very informative.
1 Jac0b777 2018-03-21
Submission statements and account age limits are two things that have been agreed upon to be implemented there. The ideas for that came earlier, but it was there where it was finally decided to take action and try to make this sub a more pleasant place again, where people can discuss any conspiracy without getting assaulted by people wanting to troll and harass them.
I think both measures were pretty successful, but still more should be done in order for this place to become a space where people respect each-other and all the varying opinions. That would be my vision of it, at least.
1 garyp714 2018-03-21
You are a sad human being. Cries about censorship then advocates for censorship based on political ideology.
Shame on you. Talk the talk but can't walk the walk.
1 Flytape 2018-03-21
No I advocate censorship of people who don't want to discuss Conspiracy theories in a conspiracy sub. It's not my fault your political ideology happens to be the one that wants more government and access to everyone's money.
1 garyp714 2018-03-21
Can't even face a lefty without trying to ban them, Empty suit.
1 Flytape 2018-03-21
Bullshit. Now go link this to TMOR to flip the votes.
1 garyp714 2018-03-21
You've been playing these right wing games since you started. What was that sub, /r/NoShills where you and that other user NoLibs used to make posts targeting us lefties. I remember that crap.
All talk no real beliefs besides team red.
1 Flytape 2018-03-21
Nope I didn't have anything to do with it.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
So you just want to censor people who believe in the Trump/Russia conspiracy. I see.
1 Flytape 2018-03-21
No I said there is a specific group of users here who shit on everything Conspiracy except that one.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
So will that be part of the new rules that will be targeted at censoring the posters that get added to your private shill list? No one is allowed to be interested in just one conspiracy? Honestly I don't know how effective that would be with your planned stifling of all dissenting opinion. For instance, I also believe in aliens so you wouldn't be able to silence me with that rule. Maybe you guys should invite some of us posters you've already secretly labeled as shills to your little circlejerk for a focus group? We can help you create a solid set of rules that will help you ban us all.
1 Flytape 2018-03-21
Fuck that, your constant bitching and complaining is why that sub has to exist in the first place.
And if you believe in aliens then maybe have a constructive conversation about something you believe in, instead of constantly shitting on the stuff other people believe in.
Peace.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
If it wasn't for power tripping ideologues that believe in censorship people like me wouldn't be here.
1 Flytape 2018-03-21
So you admit that your not here for Conspiracy theories, just to bitch about your perception of fairness.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Nyet, comrade.
1 canitbe73 2018-03-21
Whoosh
1 whacko_jacko 2018-03-21
The problem is not the particular conspiracy theory, the problem is people relentlessly shitting on anyone who dares to consider the alternative (i.e. non-mainstream) narratives. Considering alternative narratives is kind of what we do here so it's a problem when a disproportionate fraction of our users can't tolerate opposing viewpoints.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
You think Fox and Breitbart and Daily Caller aren't MSM just as much as CNN and HuffPost and Vox? Please. The only people here that can't tolerate opposing views are the people on /r/conspiracy_conclave who want to ban anyone who doesn't believe in their chosen narrative.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Moderation =/= censorship. If they are here to disrupt they do not deserve a platform.
1 billynlex 2018-03-21
There are subs devoted to political ideologies.
1 garyp714 2018-03-21
Oh another one advocating censorship. Not everything has to be your little safe space you know?
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
go to politics and circle jerk pee pee tapes all you want!
1 Tookmyprawns 2018-03-21
They don't ban you for having an opinion. Why should we do that here?
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
ha ha ha. okay. they dont!
1 Tookmyprawns 2018-03-21
Do they? I wasn't aware. I've been banned from tons of right wing subs. For nothing at all. Never been a troll. I've seen tons of right wing trolls in left wing subs and they're buried but not removed.
But maybe i am wrong, and that is ok.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
ha ha ha. majority of reddit is all left. conspiracy is not left or right. stop trying to push it in left direction. we are neutral.
1 joelberg 2018-03-21
1 bulletbait 2018-03-21
I understand that we'll never see eye to eye politically, especially on the Trump/Russia, but I guess I do want to try to explain how things feel around here as a lefty conspiracy junkie.
When I was younger, I wasted days on end reading all the 9/11 conspiracy stuff I could find. Everything from the Bush administration swapped the planes in air for drones/military aircraft and had all the passengers killed, to the lighter (and, imo far more plausible) Cheney and friends allowed it to happen for financial and geopolitical reasons. I remember doing a presentation in a high school AP class about how the Bush admin was drumming up war in Iraq on flimsy reasoning. I've re-read John Titor's claims about the left-right divide and WW3 more times than I should probably admit.
My personal experiences with conspiracies have always had a left leaning to them. I know that's not what everyone thinks, and that frankly I'm probably in the minority among the conspiracy community. But, the comparison I'd make for today (with what I and others feel is supression of talk about Trump/Russia on this sub) is like if it were 2002 and the sub didn't allow any discussion of 9/11 conspiracies.
Trump's the President and he's under Federal investigation for possible conspiracy against the United States! How can people not want to talk about that? I want to hear your side and I want to talk about my side! Why can't we?
I feel like must be ways to facilitate that kind of discussion without immediately devolving into shill accusations. More forceful moderation of shill accusations? Removing the downvote button so things don't get buried? I don't know, I'm not an expert on this shit, but I wish we could do better.
1 Flytape 2018-03-21
No offense but that is pure insanity! The problem is that the sub has been taken over with NOTHING BUT! Trump/Russia talk. That's why everyone is unhappy, that's why no other conspiracies can be talked about. And it's not your fault for being a lefty Conspiracy theorist, you sound legitimate. It's the anti-trump crowd who are lefties without being Conspiracy theorists, they shut everything else down and it's annoying as fuck. So if they have to go to get shit back to normal than I'm all for it.
1 bulletbait 2018-03-21
I do get what you're saying, as when a big thing happens re: Trump/Russia, the sub does get pretty flooded with stories. Where I'm coming from is that (often, at least) the story that "wins" and reaches the top is often either deleted, thrown in contest mode, and sometimes the submitter is banned (as happened recently with the Channel 4/CA post). There's usually a half dozen near identical posts that remain, but the discussion gets diffused between them and is really hard to follow.
That's incredibly frustrating as someone who wants to talk about that stuff, and obviously that's frustrating for people that want to avoid that crap and talk about other things. I know I've seen opposition to it in threads here recently, but I really think a stickied mega-thread for big current events isn't a bad idea. It prevents flooding and concentrates discussion. There's obviously downsides as well, and it requires a lot more active moderation, but I wish it would be tried as a tactic.
1 Flytape 2018-03-21
That's because of the 800 resist network subs. They overwhelm every sub on Reddit. It's organized, obvious and annoying as hell. We don't need Conspiracy to just be a mirror of /politics, /news, /worldnews etc etc.
1 bulletbait 2018-03-21
Well, sure, let's assume that is happening on the scale that people claim. Doesn't a megathread kind of solve that issue? Up/Downvotes don't matter, the sub doesn't get flooded, and if you avoid the comment section you're not going to get nuked with downvotes.
Although, removing downvotes would also solve that last part, and may convince people to be more willing to wade in with contrary opinions if they know they won't get auto-buried for being negative karma.
1 thefinalaccountdown 2018-03-21
/u/bulletbait for mod 2018
1 MerchantOfSargoth 2018-03-21
You have to consider that a lot of these users may be new to the idea of conspiracies and questioning the offical narrative. Like it or not, the Trump/Russia story is the biggest conspiracy out there today. It's bound to attract new users eager to talk about Trump/Russia, and some of the more fringe ideas may seem a bit outlandish to them. I'm just speculating here but it's certainly something to consider.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
they do it in real life too. their chant is who shuts shit down we shut shit down. they are authoritarian bullies and carry that over to internet. they ruin everything for everyone instead of building something of their own. they are incapable of building things. easier to destroy than build.
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
I'd like to quote a comment I just wrote in worldnews:
When it comes to left- or right-leaning conspiracy theorists, I want to work with them any time we can come together for the purpose of more transparency and more liberty, even if we may disagree on a host of other issues.
Just a few notes on some of your other suggestions:
When I came on as a mod, I went hard against this, and still believe it has no place in civil discussion.
This can't actually be done. If you've seen it on other subs, it's just a CSS trick that can be easily circumvented, and with all the bad actors here, I think would lead to a worse situation.
Which is the purpose of the conclave sub to begin with. I get that the secrecy aspect can look bad, and it's not ideal to me either, yet I think it's better than nothing at this point. There've been two public leaks of it so far that I've seen, and I really think that's a misrepresentation of what goes on there. For the most part, it's a lot more dead than I'd like, but what I'm trying to use it for is to work out possible solutions that makes this place more conducive to civil discussion. I can't expect you to take my word for it, but I thought I'd at least give you my perspective.
1 martini-meow 2018-03-21
has discussion happened recently related to default sort days? like, default to New on Tuesdays, default to Old on Wednesdays, default to Controversial on Thursdays -- then go back to whatever the default setting is for Friday through Monday. Trial for two weeks, see how those different options have different impacts on content and engagement, if any impacts.
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
I don't think so yet. How would that work, would that mean each thread would have it's default sort set for whatever that day's sort is? I could see that being interesting if nothing else. Mabye even randomize the day somehow so it couldn't be gamed as easily.
1 martini-meow 2018-03-21
/u/fthumb has dug into these tech aspects for /r/wayofthebern - I think he can explain it better than I!
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
Yeah, if u/fthumb want to contact me about any of this, feel free to PM or respond here.
1 FThumb 2018-03-21
Set default comment sorting to New.
This has made comment brigades much less effective at WotB.
1 FUCK_the_Clintons__ 2018-03-21
Well done, most controversial post in this thread, that is normally my job.
1 DonnaGail 2018-03-21
I heard they have cake and cookies there too!
1 Kind_Of_A_Dick 2018-03-21
The cake is a lie.
1 DonnaGail 2018-03-21
So they have cookies? I knew it!
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
https://ibb.co/fApBcx
It appears they make lists of users who they think are shills, this is worrying to me.
Oh, there's at least 1 more sub ran by /u/flytape I believe, the_inside? Something like that
1 Flytape 2018-03-21
Looks like a pretty decent list, except I would disagree with the the rockran being on it.
1 mwiegel2 2018-03-21
This seems like a pretty shitty thing to do. Great way to make an echo chamber of stupidity though
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
You deny that shills exist?
1 mwiegel2 2018-03-21
Just because someone doesn't have the same mindset as you, doesn't make them a shill. I doubt the shill problem is as big as some people here thing it is.
1 Tlingit_Raven 2018-03-21
Point to where he said that please.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Why's that?
1 Tlingit_Raven 2018-03-21
This is how you know it's an awful idea then.
1 bulletbait 2018-03-21
Real classy for /u/RMFN to be making a holocaust joke in reference to the "purge list." Which I'm apparently worthy of making (lol).
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
Not surprising coming from a user who admitted to trolling and breaking rules in this sub on purpose.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Rule ten is cancer. Yes I admit to breaking it.
1 amdzealot 2018-03-21
Hear hear!
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
Yeah a rule against personal attacks is cancerous lmao
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
A rule against calling a duck a duck is fascist.
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
You weren't doing that, you were making baseless accusations.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Where?
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
Maybe the comments you admitted to having made that broke rules? Can you link me the times you've "called a duck a duck"?
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
I'd love you to find an example of me breaking the rules, chuck.
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
You admitted to it already bruh, what? I'm not going through your history to back up your own statements for you.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
I lie often.
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
You were rule 10'd in this thread like 1 minute ago.
1 Tookmyprawns 2018-03-21
When rules aren't enforced equally the rules become nothing more than a way to discriminate. This is exactly what our government does in the drug war etc. Wtf is going on here?
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Discrimination means to choose. Nothing wrong with discriminating against racists or bigots then? Your argument will be used to make conspiracy a platform for hate speech.
1 Tookmyprawns 2018-03-21
If the rules are clear and enforced equally I have no problem with the rules. When some people break them and get away with it, while others can't catch a break, I see that as underhanded, and harmful to any community.
Is it really necessary I explain this or were you making a point? I think I'm unsure of what you're getting at.
1 Tlingit_Raven 2018-03-21
When you're a mod alt, they let you do it. You can do anything.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Good students in class get gold stars, do they not? Really trying to strech the interpretation of my words in a negative light. I suggest you read everything I said in that screen cap.
1 bulletbait 2018-03-21
That's how I interpreted it, based on the general tone of the thread as a whole. That said, I clearly can't speak to what was in your mind when you wrote it, so I'll take you at your word. I apologize.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
are you jewish by any chance? i hear jews have trauma passed down in dna. must be hard living a life were you think everyone is out to get you.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Literally everything is anti Semitic...
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
til learned blonde hair blue eyed white people coming from europe who live in sandbox are semitic people 😂
1 bulletbait 2018-03-21
No, I'm not. Sweet anti-semitism though.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
just a question. how was my question anti-semitic?
1 bulletbait 2018-03-21
Serious man? I mean, you posted a derogatory statement specifically about Jews.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
no i didn't. look here https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/aug/21/study-of-holocaust-survivors-finds-trauma-passed-on-to-childrens-genes. i asked if you were jewish. that's all because you assumed gold star meant start of david patch in nazi germany. quite the leap in logic and based on preconceived notions.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Yuge leap... Almost a leap someone with a culturally inflicted persecution complex would make...
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
my thoughts as well!
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
And then apparently he deleted it to cover up. Interesting.
1 bulletbait 2018-03-21
It got nuked by mods
1 EccentricRichAndSexy 2018-03-21
And these are the chosen few who represent the core of conspiracy? Disgusting.
1 GiannisHasNoJumpshot 2018-03-21
Translation: It's time to ban anyone who believes in the Trump/Russia collusion.
Also, just because Trump/Russia is reported on by MSM, doesn't mean it's 'anti-conspiracy'. Pretty sure Watergate was widely covered by the MSM. Was that not a huge conspiracy?
This seems like an excuse to ban any of the vocal Anti-Trump users here....
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
I agree, some sound so elitist about the conspiracies they believe in and trash other ones all while claiming to be "true conspiracy users" or whatever.
1 MarkCollins90 2018-03-21
In another thread, a post denying the existence of the Deep State was upvoted. That tells you all you need to know about what a certain organisation has done to the credibility of this sub.
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
Maybe people just don't believe that? We need to stop gatekeeping and acting like just because someone doesn't buy into a theory means they don't belong here.
1 MyConspiracyAlt 2018-03-21
My old username that I had been posting in this sub with for 5 years got shit on and I got called a "forum hopper." I start er getting creepy pm from assholes, so now I use this admitted alt for my non-banned account because of the ridiculous gatekeeping by a 100 day old account. It's gotten out of hand here and become fascist. They're literally making lists? Holy shit. Someone is making some good off their influence in this sub.
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
Yeah, it's pretty disappointing, worries me that I'll be targeted even though I have talked about other conspiracies as well, just because I don't believe a few of the ones they consider so important.
1 thedeadlyrhythm 2018-03-21
just go play in t_d if you need that safe of a space
1 stealyourideas 2018-03-21
I'm on that list, and that's my crime!
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Pleanty of pleb subs for you to talk about the known actor Trump and Russia.
The wool has been pulled over your eyes so think it's pathetic.. What are you even doing in a conspiracy forum talking like that?
1 GiannisHasNoJumpshot 2018-03-21
Oh anyone who believes in Trump/Russia is just a 'normie'. I get it. Sorry for trespassing in the 'non-normie' club. My bad.
1 whacko_jacko 2018-03-21
Feel free to discuss Trump/Russia collusion but be aware that many people here don't accept the mainstream narrative and that's okay. When virtually all discussion of alternative narratives is downvoted to oblivion and dismissed without consideration, then we have a real problem.
This is not a community for solely surface-level analysis of whatever is being reported in mainstream news. There are a million places for that.
1 bulletbait 2018-03-21
As someone who's in the secret club, do you know if anyone has proposed turning off down votes on a trial or anything? Or, if it's been tried already. My activity here is heavy for short periods and then months in between where I don't really drop in, so I'm unsure if they've tried that before and I wasn't paying attention.
1 whacko_jacko 2018-03-21
Unfortunately that is not a feature moderators have control over. Even if we modify the CSS to remove the downvote button, this can be turned off at the user level in the site preferences. The manipulators would adapt to this seamlessly while some honest users would not.
I strongly advocate giving moderators more control over voting allowances within subreddits, but it simply isn't the case right now.
1 bulletbait 2018-03-21
Ah, that's a good point. It might help a bit, though, as it would remove some of the "herding" ability of the manipulators. If the average user who doesn't turn it off in their settings can't downvote someone, you'd limit the downvotes to mostly the manipulators at least. It might also give a bit more transparency to just how much or little manipulation is happening.
1 whacko_jacko 2018-03-21
I think the net effect would only amplify the intended effect of the vote manipulation.
1 martini-meow 2018-03-21
The no-downvote-css doesn't work on mobile users.
1 whacko_jacko 2018-03-21
Quite right. The ability to truly restrict voting based on age of account or length of subscription would seriously slow down vote manipulation. Unfortunately the admins won't give moderators such tools.
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
No clue why you got downvoted for that (well, I guess I do.)
The admins really don't give mods the tools to combat vote manipulation, which I think is at least in part because Reddit, Inc. benefits in multiple ways from said manipulation.
1 omenofdread 2018-03-21
imo reddit is a sort of "petri dish" for the prototyping of various narratives/counterarguments... and the data provided by such "early adopters" as you dear sir proves the most delicious.
free service? you are the product they be sellin'...
much love, sir.
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
For sure. From a data science perspective, I have to admit it there's a lot of really interesting insights that could be analyzed from this mass of communication hodgepodge. It would be fun to play around on their view of reddit for a day or two.
Much love as well. I'm always delightfully surprised when you pop in.
1 martini-meow 2018-03-21
I'd love to see a day of the week as "sort by old" as the default, and another day of "sort by controversial", just to keep the bots on their toes.
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
There's many times when the extent of any differing opinion amounts to "muh russia", how is this in anyway meant to further three conversation?
The reason I like the discussion here more than other subs is because there aren't thousands of comments to sift through. That shouldn't make me or anyone like me a shill.
1 jcash21 2018-03-21
It's one thing to be vocally anti-trump. It's a different beast when. all. you. do. is. regurgitate (see:parrot). anti-trump and. russian-collusion DNC textbook talking points. Oh, and call everyone else out on shilling. Almost as if one's projecting.
Here's one of my favorite quotes:
1 JigabooFriday 2018-03-21
Great, the sub is so infected we have our very own conspiracy to deal with. It’s finally come full circle!
1 Tlingit_Raven 2018-03-21
Nothing strange about a group in power making a list of dissidents they want to monitor for removal. Right?
1 freesp33chisstilldea 2018-03-21
I agree with them on most things. What's wrong with creating a shill list?
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
They have no possible way of knowing who shills are, and they let their biases get in the way when creating them.
1 freesp33chisstilldea 2018-03-21
That's always a possibility but something has to be done. A lot of people do parrot the MSM narrative way too much here, they come in and downvote everything not on the MSM.
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
This isn't what should be done though, and often times things are demonized just for being on msm which is bullshit as well.
1 freesp33chisstilldea 2018-03-21
They turned this place into a battleground. What do you recommend be done?
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
The users listed there didn't though.
Add flairs for posts, stricter moderation in some areas and lighter in others, stop the private sub bs, less bias in moderation, more consistent moderation, etc. You could probably write a paper on what should be done to clean this sub up, it certainly isn't to target certain users because you don't like what they believe.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
What do you think should be done about the shills;
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
Seeing as we can't accurately identify them I'm not sure, outside of what I just mentioned that is. I'd start with blatant rule breakers, people who admit to trolling, etc as those really damage the discourse in this sub.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
For example?
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
Oh I'm sure you can think of some, might get a rule violation for saying who, although I have a feeling you know that.
1 Tlingit_Raven 2018-03-21
This user seems to revel in breaking rules and admitting it, seems a good place to start.
1 thedeadlyrhythm 2018-03-21
no, they didn't. if anything, the huge trump die-hard influx of the past two years made it a battleground. i've been here six years.
1 freesp33chisstilldea 2018-03-21
Yeah, them and the others. I've been here probably about the same.
1 thedeadlyrhythm 2018-03-21
nah. "the others" are mostly people who were already here. conspiracy went mainstream with trump. and if you say so, your reddit birthday is nov 2017. the account i'm posting from goes all the way back, bud.
1 Tlingit_Raven 2018-03-21
Account age only matters to them on the accounts they attack. When it's their own getting called out it's just smart use of alts.
Gotta keep up with the talking points man. Make a game out of it to spot the people pushing stuff here.
1 thedeadlyrhythm 2018-03-21
you dont get to fucking control what people believe, dude.
1 freesp33chisstilldea 2018-03-21
This is a conspiracy sub, if they believe the MSM narrative then why are they here in the first place if not to start trouble? They have the news sub to praise each other.
1 thedeadlyrhythm 2018-03-21
because they're human beings with fucking opinions that they have every right to have?! dude i've been in this sub for seven years you have no right to tell anyone what they can or cant believe or discuss or debate.
1 Tlingit_Raven 2018-03-21
Dismissing things because they agree with popular consensus is not being a conspiracy theorist, it's being a contrarian. This place always loves showing polls of more people believing 9/11 or the JFK assassination were inside jobs, if that was the accepted view suddenly would you disagree because it was mainstream?
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
The shills have linguistic tells. If you deny that you haven't been around long..
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
I don't think you can accurately identify them, if you do feel free to detail how.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Trust me. Look at the subs I moderate I have years of practice identifing shills. They all share a pattern. You must study them to understand their cues.
How do you identify a shill? Do you believe shills exist?
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
Waiting on you to detail how, not wasting any more time with you until then.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
It's simple. You engage the individual. If they show signs of using known provocateur tactics then they have a high likely hoof of notes being a legitimate member of the community.
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
What are these known provocateur tactics?
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
The gentle person's guide to forum spies is in the sidebar. I suggest you read it. That's our guide book for finding the shills.
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
Oh I've read it, and I see quite a few of those techniques used at some point by almost this entire sub.
Sounds like what some people want to do.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
You finally get it.
1 Fritz721 2018-03-21
I think it’s more that there’s no reason for a lot of these users to be here given they discuss one thing and that’s trump Russia and they absolutely do not contemplate for one second that it’s contrived. There’s really no debate to be had anyways. If it was printed in an article it’s fact and that’s it.
This place also has markedly changed over the last year and it’s gotten progressively worse in terms of slowly morphing into a pseudo r/politics.
Most of these guys were here first and it’s their home. To say they can’t take offense at people coming in here and shitting on them is kind of silly.
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
Considering most of the arguments are crap and pretty quickly get to calling them shills, or just dismissing them because it's msm, I'm not surprised it's not swaying their opinions.
I also don't care who was here first, I was here before the majority of the userbase and you'll never see me use that to support my positions. Most of these people crying about shills got here in the last 4 or so years.
1 rtjl86 2018-03-21
So why can’t the moderators sort this out? Reddit doesn’t give any special functions to people just because they have been here the longest? Why can’t your group include democrats and republicans?
1 Tlingit_Raven 2018-03-21
You are now of the list. You now have to prove to someone who already thinks you belong on there that you shouldn't. You don't see that being a problem?
This is like how all those troglodytes think eugenics is a great idea, forgetting they will be forcibly sterilized because they are at best middle of the gene pool.
1 Tookmyprawns 2018-03-21
This is really fucked. These people are trying to kick anyone out they simply don't like without cause. Most of the posters in this thread frequently break the actual rules, and they want to ban people for nothing.
This is some Orwellian inner-party BS.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
You want in to the conclave? If you think you can do better you can have my spot.
1 Tookmyprawns 2018-03-21
They won't let me in. I'm not worthy.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Yeah, I could see that.
1 Tookmyprawns 2018-03-21
What can you see? Want to help me understand why I shouldn't be welcome here? Maybe I am unaware of something in doing that's toxic. Let me know.
1 NoOneMakesItOutAlive 2018-03-21
Isn’t that what r/politics does in their sub? You get banned straight away if you have a view they don’t like.
1 Tookmyprawns 2018-03-21
Prove it. People post all kinds of right wing articles there, and make pro-trump comments. Over and over. Same people. Never seen them get banned.
1 NoOneMakesItOutAlive 2018-03-21
That’s a laugh. I’ve literally never seen a right wing article make it on r/all from r/politics since he became president.
1 infinight888 2018-03-21
That's because they get downvoted to oblivion by the community, which is substantially different than the posters being banned by the moderators.
1 NoOneMakesItOutAlive 2018-03-21
But right wing posters constantly get banned on r/politics. So it is the same.
1 epium 2018-03-21
First I had heard of the conclave was this sticky post 7 days ago:
https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/841qs8/announcing_the_newest_members_of_the_rconspiracy/?utm_content=title&utm_medium=user&utm_source=reddit&utm_name=frontpage
1 bulletbait 2018-03-21
Yeah, same. Seemed pretty sketch, but there's not really anything normal users can do about it.
1 whacko_jacko 2018-03-21
Actually, normal users who don't act like manipulative assholes can request access and join the conversation.
1 bulletbait 2018-03-21
Isn't it a bit underhanded to make that offer only after a whole slate of new mods were approved? My understanding is that the sub was purely invite only up until the new mods were announced, though I'm curious if you know different.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
How long have you personally been posting in /r/Conspiracy?
1 bulletbait 2018-03-21
Several years I'd bet, but mostly lurking for the past 8 since I joined Reddit.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
And how long have you commented here?
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
you'd bet? meaning what? the user you bought your name from did at one time?
1 TempestCatalyst 2018-03-21
Jesus christ, have you never heard of a colloquialism?
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
several years means at least two. you said you lurked for 8. your account is only 9 years old. do you math?
1 TempestCatalyst 2018-03-21
I didn't say shit, learn how to read usernames friendo.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
apologies. why come to bat for someone you have no idea about? did you forget to switch usernames? caught!?
1 TempestCatalyst 2018-03-21
No, I just can't help but come to bat when someone is being stupid and taking common colloquialisms as logical errors and a basis for attack.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
so you forgot to switch usernames? thanks!
1 TempestCatalyst 2018-03-21
Believe whatever you want friendo.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
so nothing? gots it! i'm not your friend.
1 Tookmyprawns 2018-03-21
It's seems like you must think a certain group of people are "manipulative assholes."
1 whacko_jacko 2018-03-21
Certainly, there are probably several groups of manipulative assholes targeting this community. Your implications are partisan in nature. I would stop all forms of disingenuous manipulation. Until then I can only speculate about what is happening and why.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
We are the vanguard party of conspiracy theory.
1 Justplainandy 2018-03-21
I think the most troubling part of this statement and the above post is the assumption and feeling that mods/chosen vanguard party own this subreddit.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
The community owns the sub.
1 Justplainandy 2018-03-21
In a post about a separate sub that is invite only where a different community discusses how to handle or cull members from r/conspiracy...and your use of the term vanguard party is in reference to?
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
The masses must be molded by the vanguard... Haven't you read Marx?
1 Likmylovepump 2018-03-21
So, are you saying your stance is that for the r/conspiracy sub to be working properly it needs to be steered by some covert but influential organization of users?
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Yes. Every sub has moderators, no? Every sub has ideological leaders. Who chooses them? They choose themselves through participation.
1 StiffJohnson 2018-03-21
So what's wrong with mod chat? Why do you need a private subreddit that includes people who aren't mods?
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
It includes mostly genuine vetted members of the community.
1 StiffJohnson 2018-03-21
So they don't choose themselves. The moderators choose them.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
... Yes. Active users who are vetted are chosen to help the MOD team. It sounds pretty nefarious to me..
1 StiffJohnson 2018-03-21
If you don't think it sounds nefarious, why was it a secret for a year?
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
For a year? It's just been an active thing for a short time.
1 StiffJohnson 2018-03-21
Just going by the subreddit age. It'd be hard for me to tell when it's active, since it was only announced after new mods were chosen about a week ago. So obviously it's been active for longer than that.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Well I can only tell you what I know. I was added just a few weeks ago.
1 Tlingit_Raven 2018-03-21
Ah, so friends and alts. Also people who try to take over the sub like u/Flytape. Makes perfect sense.
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
I answered this elsewhere, but there's two reasons for that. 1) Modmail in incredibly unwieldy for carrying on long conversations about ongoing issues. 2) We decided to bring in other members of the community to get more user input on things. Many of the members of the conclave have been on this sub for 5+ years, remember the sub before the craziness of 2016, and have valuable insight to offer.
1 StiffJohnson 2018-03-21
So to quote /u/Likmylovepump
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
Be specific in what your asking, namely, do I think for r/conspiracy to work properly it needs mods? Because all the conclave is, in essence, is an advisory panel and discussion forum for mods and a select group of users. The conclave members have no power except to advise and persuade the mod team. And my answer would be yes, absolutely, and this is from someone who would identify as an anarchist if anything.
The first reason the sub needs mods is obvious and unavoidable. If we got rid of the mods, or the mods did not enforce site-wide rules, this sub would either be banned by the admins, or replaced by a mod team who would enforce their rules. Given that this sub would not exist but for Reddit, inc., at least a minimal mod team is necessary.
Yet I think your question also asks whether such a mod team should also implement and enforce their own rules, above and beyond what's required. To this, I would also say yes (given the platform of reddit as it exists). My reasoning for this is that without a mod team to limit the discussion to that of conspiracy theories, this sub would become a microcosm of the larger reddit demographic. Conspiracy theorists as such are a minority, and specifically a minority which other people and organizations do not want to have a voice. Without moderation that gives conspiracy theorists, and those skeptical of specific conspiracy theories, a place to voice their opinions and evidence, conspiracy theorists would not have any central place to congregate and exchange information on reddit.
As an anarchist and a voluntaryist, ultimately, I would like a place that looks nothing like reddit. I would much prefer a system of voluntary moderation, where users could subscribe to and even be their own moderators. Don't like a mod's decision? Don't subscribe to that mod. Want a more curated experience that censors vulgarity, opinions you don't like, topics you don't find interesting, etc.? Subscribe to mods that will give you that experience.
Reddit doesn't allow that structurally within a sub, but what reddit does do is gives you the free choice to go to any other sub, or to create your own, and run it as you see fit. r/worldpolitics is essentially unmoderated, other than site-wide rules. r/ConspiracyII and r/conspiracyundone have their own set of moderation practices. Or make your own and build it up if you don't like those. Besides site-wide rules, reddit essentially is anarchistic with the caveat of first come, first served for real estate (sub names). If you want to participate here, you have to abide by this mod team's decisions.
1 StiffJohnson 2018-03-21
I feel like you're missing the word "covert." Obviously mods are necessary for every subreddit. Most subreddits don't have separate private subreddits that invite users to influence moderation policy secretly.
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
And I feel like you're putting too much focus on that word. Let's say we didn't have the conclave, or we shut it down today. Do you really think users wouldn't message the mod team to tell us their ideas on how to fix the sub, or who they wanted to see banned? Do you think they wouldn't PM specific mods who they thought would be sympathetic to them? I can assure, both of these happened long before the conclave was a thing.
Regardless, our internal mod deliberations are also private — covert, if you will, just like every other sub on this site (barring maybe a few insignificant ones). Moreover, we do publish all our mod logs, and I'm not sure if any sub as large as ours does. In all our actions, we are completely transparent, even if the discussions leading up to them were not.
Is your only objection that it's a separate sub, where the users can talk with each other "privately", as opposed to just being able to talk to one or more mods privately? I fail to see how that's substantively different than most other subs, or any other institution for that matter.
1 martini-meow 2018-03-21
could the conclave be public, but only allow approved submitters to post, comment, and vote? then the transparency would be supported, but the brigading could be limited.
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
We considered that, and while reddit can restrict posting, and automod can restrict commenting, there's no mechanism to prevent voting from non-contributors. That would be a pretty cool feature for reddit, though.
I'm not completely opposed to something more transparent, or even a publicly listed and promoted "meta" sub, where people could complain about shills or mods or shill mods or whatever else they wanted to complain about, without sliding discussions on the main sub.
1 Tlingit_Raven 2018-03-21
Good joke mate.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
I'm sure they're all sitting in their little secret McCarthy circlejerk right now discussing this post. Hi guys! /wave
1 Zenyx_ 2018-03-21
They literally asked us, as a community, to message them if you want to join. Delete this post nephew. The top post solves your question.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
I'll message them and see if they let me in.
1 Xaviermgk 2018-03-21
I'm sure with that attitude you will be a shoo-in to be invited.
1 seeking101 2018-03-21
I missed that post, who do I ask to become a member?
1 Zenyx_ 2018-03-21
A mod. Click the link in the top reply.
1 seeking101 2018-03-21
im on mobile, but will do thanks!
1 coxlodge 2018-03-21
You can keep your shady clique.
1 rockyrainy 2018-03-21
Conclave is a sinister sounding word.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Especially so when you read what's going on there.
1 bigdog659 2018-03-21
Dunno, after reading that it seems like they’re workin for the betterment of this sub.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
If you think censoring people with different political opinions will make /r/conspiracy better sure.
1 Simplicity3245 2018-03-21
When these people are not here for honest debate. Absolutely.
1 bulletbait 2018-03-21
I mean, I'm here for honest debate (just see below with me and Flytape) and I'm on the list. Seems more like I'm being targeted for disagreeing politically with the in-group.
1 Simplicity3245 2018-03-21
Then there should be no issue. The problem at hand is the lack of discourse, not really who supports what politics. When top comments are ones bashing the sub on thread after thread, you know you have a problem. Mods are getting downvoted non stop from these same toxic members. They're here for disruption. I have never seen a sub that eats it own in such a degree. It makes no sense unless outside influence is involved. This is straight up sabatoge.
1 bulletbait 2018-03-21
Why is there no room for the possibility of some of that to be occurring naturally from people in the sub? I disagree with a lot of the ways the mods have handled politically explosive issues, and having a secret society to direct the sub from the shadows (and that, from the outside, appears to be pretty limited in membership to one political ideology) certainly doesn't help matters.
1 Simplicity3245 2018-03-21
This sub is overran with blue dog D's, aka neoliberals. The most non conspiracy minded political block out there. Why would so many be interested to come here and shit over everything? When you go from a 20'ish average karma score on comments prior to the 2016 election to -20 to -40 now, and have the same political leanings, then obviously some drastic change occurred. The toxicity has become overwhelming and it's coming from these neoliberals.
1 KarmicEnigma 2018-03-21
I was banned for discourse. Also, listing "problem" users turns into a witch hunt. Which is a favorite past time for many in this sub, so I suppose I shouldn't be surprised.
1 Simplicity3245 2018-03-21
They just have to enforce the rules. Bash the sub get banned, bash the users get banned, bash the mods get banned. Done and done.
1 thctuesday 2018-03-21
But are all the people in the conclave there for honest debate. Below you can see flytape, who is a member of the conclave, responding to an attempt at discussion where he just calls the user a TMOR shill to avoid talking with them. I know he specifically tends to have a more abrasive personality, but seeing as the members of the community is hidden from those outside who knows who else could be there that also wishes to call opposing opinions TMOR shills
1 Simplicity3245 2018-03-21
I cannot speak of the conclave. I know little of it. I do know drastic changes need to be made. They have tried having public discourse on attempting to make positive changes here, but it gets the same treatment as every other thread in this. Downvoted, insulted, and dismissed out of hand. I do not blame them for taking that route, they did try, but we have more dishonest users than honest ones.
1 StiffJohnson 2018-03-21
So since public discourse isn't working out how you'd like, it's time for censorship?
1 Simplicity3245 2018-03-21
This sub already is censored, like the rest of Reddit. The goal is to fix that.
1 StiffJohnson 2018-03-21
So you want to fix censorship with more censorship?
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Moderation =/= censorship.
1 StiffJohnson 2018-03-21
Moderation typically doesn't involve drawing up lists of users who aren't even breaking the rules.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Attacking the sub is breaking the rules.
1 StiffJohnson 2018-03-21
Typically when people break the rules they get warnings and/or bans instead of being added to secret lists.
And are you saying every person on that list has attacked this sub? Can you define what you mean when you say "attack?"
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
How is this sub censored?
1 bigdog659 2018-03-21
That’s not what they were talking about in the screen caps you posted. I think you’re smart enough to know that and are being... intellectually disingenuous.
They’re talking about preventing was is essentially brigading by people who have no other involvement in this sub other than to push a particular view point. That view point is well represented by every other sub.
It’s like twoxchromosones banning people who go there to troll rape victims, or suggest that women loose the right to vote; it doesn’t add substantial value to the sub and just reduces actual valuable discussion of the issues the sub was created for in the first place.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Where's the evidence that the people on their list of targets are brigading?
1 bigdog659 2018-03-21
The burden rests you, if you claim they’re censoring certain view points, where’s the evidence?
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
So then there isn't any evidence that any of those people have been brigading and they're being targeted unfairly.
They're discussing it.
Get ready folks, soon talking about the Trump/Russia conspiracy will be a bannable offense.
1 seeking101 2018-03-21
one of the mods recently deleted their account due to harrasment and stalking
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
That's not evidence that the people on their list are brigading.
1 seeking101 2018-03-21
its evidence that it happens. They also have a bot that alerts when a thread is linked to TMOR (a brigading sub)
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
So there is no evidence that the people on their list are brigading and those people are being unfairly targeted.
1 Tlingit_Raven 2018-03-21
Protip: in a debate you can't get by with just spouting stuff and hoping no one notices how irrelevant it is.
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
Are you referencing polkadotgirl? That user wasn't a mod here.
1 martini-meow 2018-03-21
polkadotgirl was a mod on a related sub, after TMOR drove her off this sub.
1 stealyourideas 2018-03-21
I'm not brigading a fucking thing.
1 canitbe73 2018-03-21
I'm on the list and there's no way I'm a brigader - I basically am only on Reddit for this sub. I don't think I come to this sub to push one particular viewpoint, though I do admit that the current political conspiracies are very intriguing to me and I post/read about them a lot.
I came here to talk about conspiracy theories, both potentially ongoing political ones and more classic ones. How am I comparable to someone who goes on twoxchromosones to troll rape victims?
1 CloudyMN1979 2018-03-21
My RES tag says differently.
1 canitbe73 2018-03-21
What does it say?
1 Tlingit_Raven 2018-03-21
If only that mattered.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
ha ha ha. name two conspiracies you talk about other than pee pee tapes and big meanie cheeto in chief!
1 ChipperyDoo 2018-03-21
Says ShillForPutin
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
very original!
1 Go_Spurs_Go 2018-03-21
If ‘that viewpoint’ is a conspiracy don’t they still belong here? Just because you can talk about Russia on politics doesn’t mean it doesn’t belong here too. It is definitely a conspiracy worthy of discussion, even if you don’t believe it, no matter where it is reported.
1 bigdog659 2018-03-21
What’s interesting is that indeed you’re the target of their action. This is he first time you’ve created a new thread in this forum, and it’s calling into question the credibility of the entire sub.
Vast majority of your posts have been from /politics.
Interesting.
1 bulletbait 2018-03-21
Well, the biggest current event conspiracy theory of the day is heavily political. I don't think his profile (and that of many others around here) is that odd.
1 thctuesday 2018-03-21
If you're referring to his actual posts I just looked through and see nothing posted to politics, I have no idea regarding comments. However, dropping a blanket statement suggesting where someone posts makes their opinions illegitimate is a slippery slope because it leads you to ignoring any valid points others could make.
It is better to be willing to judge the content of their post for what it entails rather than where they post.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
https://snoopsnoo.com/u/99PercentTruth. have adventure!
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
https://snoopsnoo.com/u/ShillForPutin
LMAO!!!
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
yes i am and if i didn't want internet to know i wouldn't have said it. so what's your point? can only us citizens be conspiracy theorist or are you russophobic!?
1 ChipperyDoo 2018-03-21
Your name is literally saying you’re a shill, it’s pretty obvious you’re here to stir shit up. But you’re probably also just a mods alt, so who knows.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
if you take world so literally you would chop off numb foot. what does your name mean? you doo chip? who is chip? your homosexual love toy?
1 ChipperyDoo 2018-03-21
Reported. But I know it’s pointless since you’re just an alt of a mod anyway.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
reported for what? hurt feelings? ha ha ha. i'm not a mod alt. why do you see bogeyman behind every corner? you checks for monsters under your bed before sleep? ha ha ha.
1 ChipperyDoo 2018-03-21
Whatever you tell yourself, I know English isn't your first language so maybe you're too ignorant to understand how you break the rules. Or maybe you have 0 fear of being banned.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
tell me how i broke rules?
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
/r/rickandmorty is leaking again..
1 ChipperyDoo 2018-03-21
I don't think I've ever been to /r/rickandmorty or seen the show, I'm sure you're insulting me (and breaking the rules in the process). Oh well.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Correction. You might want to read the sidebar.
1 ChipperyDoo 2018-03-21
I would say the same to you, but I'm not sure you're capable.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
You are not a kind person. Maybe take a break from the internet for a few hours? Just until you can play nice.
1 ChipperyDoo 2018-03-21
Says the person who threw the first insult.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Did I? Looks like you were insulting people long before I engaged your toxic ass.
1 ChipperyDoo 2018-03-21
When?
1 ChipperyDoo 2018-03-21
If I were you, instead of running a secret cabal of conspiracy theorists trying to purge people with other political ideologies from their "safe space," I'd go for a run. Might help that depression.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Conspiracy theory isn't about political ideology... We are mostly anti authoritarian. Neither left nor right. The political bs is pleb tier and needs to stay in the Normie subs.
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
I respect you RMFN, but this screams /pol/ with how you've replied. Why engage this user if you're above all this ie want an honest and open forum?
1 ChipperyDoo 2018-03-21
Because he doesn't. He wants an echo chamber and knows it.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
What is my political ideology? You should know if you know me. I've made many posts on it.
1 ChipperyDoo 2018-03-21
No need for me to remind you of your own political ideology, is your memory okay?
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Oh, typical snarky bs response... Really sad.
I bet you don't even know what anarcho monarchism is..
1 ChipperyDoo 2018-03-21
LOL
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
He hasn't, I've made now of that personally. None of the users in that forum have called out that account or any of the other variations of the shill accounts. If they truly cared they would. In fact there are several users on the list who've documented those accounts.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Plenty of pleb subs for pleb topics. Just saying.
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
There's also plenty of ways to remain above what is essentially name calling and just commenting in good faith.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Aye, you trying to censor me mate?
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
Not at all man, just a suggestion to refrain in what can be viewed as lowering yourself. I think you're above it, that's all.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Speaking freely is not "lowering myself".
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
Agreed, I just think you're above it. That's all.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
I will say what I please within the rules of the sub, that's for your advice though.
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
Do you homie, I'm not trying to police your behavior. I just think you're better than that.
1 ChipperyDoo 2018-03-21
Yet you only don't have a single Trump supporter (someone who loves facists) on your secret list... Hmmmmmm.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
You know I'm a anarcho monarchist right? I'm left wing you knob...
1 ChipperyDoo 2018-03-21
Sure sure.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
So now it's okay for you to label me?
1 ChipperyDoo 2018-03-21
Like you label whoever you don't like a shill? Hmmmmmmmmm
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Did I call anyone anywhere a shill? Did you even read my comments in the screen cap?
1 ChipperyDoo 2018-03-21
Yes, the whole sub is about purging this sub of people you don't like. Again, your actions and your words are completely fucking separate. Just because I call myself a 7 foot tall black man doesn't change that I'm white and not 7 feet tall. But, if lying about being a black man helped my racist viewpoints (/r/asablackman), I might just do it on reddit. Just like a radical right winger might call themselves a "leftist" when solely attacking leftists.
But then again you think Nazi facists were left because they did this exact tactic so maybe you're just extremely ignorant. Sad you fall for such simple, simple, simple, propaganda tactics.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Chill out... Anarcho monarchism is a liberty oriented left wing ideology. You are projecting so hard right now it's sad.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
When confronted the subject reverts to underhanded comments and insults.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
National socialist German workers party. Sounds pretty left wing to me..
1 ChipperyDoo 2018-03-21
Great, now I know where your head is at when you call things left or right.
1 thctuesday 2018-03-21
Oh I actually looked at the completely wrong user before, I thought the guy above me was replying to someone else. This guy does post in politics a lot
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
;) let the light shine!
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKkbIZtqhyQ
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
You don't think this is a worthy topic of discussion for /r/conspiracy?
1 the-red-wheelbarrow 2018-03-21
Quick, Robin! To the conclave!
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
I think hagbro picked a sexy name.
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
I didn't name it; I think it's been around since before I was a mod.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Ohh. I had no idea..
1 omenofdread 2018-03-21
it's from the illuminatus... but you probably know that lol
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
Is it, the name specifically? I don't remember that, but it's been a while since I read it.
1 omenofdread 2018-03-21
hagbard celine is a central protagonist, yes...
its a surreal read, especiall after the "transition" we've been experiencing for the last year.
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
Oh! Yeah, of course, I definitely knew that. See my little apple flair?
I thought you meant the name "conspiracy conclave" was from Illuminatus!, which I could absolutely see being the case.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Buckle up. The shift is just beginning.
1 U_CAN_TRUST_HILLARY 2018-03-21
Sweet can I get an invite?
1 Tookmyprawns 2018-03-21
Probably.
1 Fooomanchu 2018-03-21
So far they've been doing a great job. Keep it up, and thank you!
1 iAmMitten1 2018-03-21
I can't help but think that with 20 mods that aren't bots (like publicmodlogs and rConBot), they should have enough varied opinions amongst themselves to be able to discuss what changes to make to this subreddit without having to involve the users. Making a private subreddit for only certain "chosen" users to be able to discuss this subreddit with the mods is basically asking for people to suspect that something nefarious is going on, even if it isn't.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
mods come from user base. mods also come and go for many reasons. how to pick new mods? people are making steel beam out of a lego here.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Jet fuel can't melt AR15's.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
ak47 can melt jet fuel!
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Take note all, talking about the Trump / Russia conspiracy will soon be a bannable offense on /r/conspiracy.
1 helpivebeenbanned 2018-03-21
From what I can gather from it, it sounds like they want to get rid of shills that are trying to shit all over /conspiracy and are brigading people and threads.
Half the time you can't even post actual conspirices without our fellow TopMinders coming in and brigading everything they can.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Where's the evidence that these people on their secret hit list are shills who are brigading this sub?
1 Tookmyprawns 2018-03-21
The list is the evidence for them. They aren't documenting anything but agreement on the names they don't like.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Bingo. If one of the cabal members posts a name no one questions it. No criteria is being discussed, anyone that doesn't buy into the Fox News right-wing mainstream media narrative is added to the purge list and labeled a shill.
1 GasStationTransient 2018-03-21
All the while talking about how any topics talked about in the MSM aren't valid. And by MSM they mean anything other than Fox news. Including actual outlets with real journalistic integrity that vet multiple sources for each story.
Funny how they point the finger at new accounts that have only been posting in here a few months as proof of brigading. They never make the connection that most of those accounts had their long time accounts here banned so had to use new ones to continue using the sub.
What an absolute joke and full on shit show this is. Thank you for making this post.
1 Tookmyprawns 2018-03-21
There's people in those shill lists that aren't doing anything other than disagreeing with their preferred conspiracies or submitting conspiracies that they don't like. That's all it is.
1 Tlingit_Raven 2018-03-21
You trust them to be able to demonstrably point out someone who is a shill versus someone who disagrees with them?
1 EccentricRichAndSexy 2018-03-21
I called it the other day
https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/85g5mp/z/dvxmnfv
1 coxlodge 2018-03-21
Next thing you know they’ll be banning jokes.
1 dotlinefever3 2018-03-21
When mainstream, anti-conspiracy views predominate on a conspiracy
You would think they would be happy that an actual conspiracy theory has made it into the mainstream news. Instead,they call in anto conspiracy. smh.
1 Dr_Cog_Science 2018-03-21
Who would have thought that discussing real conspiracies, with actual evidence that allows you to theorize, would be banned from r/conspiracy...
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
i'm fine with long time real users brainstorming how to make sub better! only shills wouldn't like this!
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Really telling who posted this too.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
i have about 5 people in this op tagged as tmor and other meddlers. funny how one of them who is tagged also claims to be a member of the conspiracy_conclave. suspicious. i wonder if they are the one who leaks for op.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
I have no idea who the leaker is. But I'm honestly glad they leaked. The real community seems to approve of our preliminary list.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
my boss has narrowed it down to three people for leaks. mentioned user is one my boss says probable. as for list! i agree with all and they should be banned for meddling. pay attention to who removes any of our comments about this if they do. light will shine!
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Agreed.. Thank you for everything you do fellow shill for Putin. God bless Putin. He just sent me two more mail order brides this afternoon. I finally have enough to fill an entire kiddy pool with piss. I'm high on the hog since I started shilling for Putin!
When I worked for Obama all I got was a few coffee dates with traps..
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
unfair! i get a monthly ration of vodka and pickles and on the fifth month a cat. the cat i sell or eat. life is good in siberia. putin told me not to eat cat because he loves them but i get hungry! putin is the light and love and way!
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Oh I remember the pickle days.. Not long until you'll be on my level.
Hold on, Putin's calling.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
you must be salary! i'm jealous! i'm just freelancing right now. i do strip shows in the day time and shill in night time to make meets end. vodka helps with both and pickles are food and props.
1 Tookmyprawns 2018-03-21
We don't like leaks in a conspiracy sub anymore? Wtf is going on here?
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
jfk leaks got him a leaky head.
1 seeking101 2018-03-21
that screenshot is actually really promising. everything said was spot on
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Yeah, I especially like the part where they want to create a rule that would ban anyone from talking about the Trump/Russia conspiracy. Nothing says fighting TPTB like censorship of dissenting opinions!
1 seeking101 2018-03-21
Me too. Personally Id like all political conspiracies banned
Nothing says hijacking a sub like flooding it with MSM narratives
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
The 'deep state' narrative is just as MSM as the Trump/Russia narrative. You can find it on Fox and Breitbart and all the other mainstream conservative news sources but that's okay, right? It's only left-wing MSM narratives that the censor nazis want to shut down.
1 seeking101 2018-03-21
are you not paying attention? I said i think all political conspiracies should be banned
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
That's not going to happen, so they seem to be moving towards option B which is only right-wing MSM narratives will be allowed on /r/conspiracy.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
What is right wing to you, because I am an anarcho monarchist, which is as far as you can get from right wing..
1 martini-meow 2018-03-21
hrrrr? I've heard of anarcho capitalist, but how does monarchy mix with anarchy in a coherent concept?
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
... There is plenty of literature on the subject if you just search the term.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Politics is a false paradigm of control anyway. Money is above the political. Any respectable conspiracy theorist knows that.
1 Slpr86 2018-03-21
Well to them I quote:
The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings.
—JFK
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
how did that work out for jfk?
1 IAmSumOne 2018-03-21
He gained the respect of the majority of the world. With nothing more then a noble ideology, and the courage to speak. A success, and a tragedy.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
pretty sure he got his head blown off. maybe he should've been more secret about intentions to go after fed and mafia and cia and other meddlers.
1 conacct 2018-03-21
JFK went against the CIA, he was resoundingly supported by the mafia via connections with his father.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
his father hated him. his father wanted older brother but he died in war. jfk was fine if playing ball. jfk didn't and got his head blown off. maybe he should've learned that secrecy is important?
1 shunned_one 2018-03-21
Holy shit why the fuck am I getting brought up? I lurk and occasionally make lame jokes. Seriously? Does my post history look like a shill? Lmfao. This is insanity
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
Actually, I can't take some issue with your recent "joke" because it ended up a circle jerk about me suggesting we include calling people "Russian trolls" and "Comrade" in our Rule 10 scope, and I think that is crappy of you.
I see no difference, functionally, to call someone "Comrade" than "shill" or "troll" in a discussion and I don't think there is anything funny about it.
1 Tookmyprawns 2018-03-21
My turn. I'm ready for my review.
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
Your turn for what?
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
To be reviewed?
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
Eh, I didn't "review" the other guy. I remember the report.
1 Tookmyprawns 2018-03-21
Makes sense. I misunderstood.
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
I've not seen you engage in anything insidious when I peruse this sub. I see you in many threads I frequent and find myself agreeing with you quite often. I'm curious what it is that you've engaged in that can be viewed as being against the core beliefs of this sub.
1 Tookmyprawns 2018-03-21
Thanks I appreciate it. I actually do try not to just be a conspiracy naysayer, and I try to be cool to people who are being hostile to me. And I apologize to people when I misquote something or mistake a fact etc.
A lot of the conspiracies I believe in aren't really discussed here. They're boring I guess, or dated, or aren't controversial enough anymore. And I'm admittedly pretty liberal.
And lurk in the posts I agree with, and comment on things when I see misinformation, which is most often in posts I don't agree with, which might make me seem more disagreeable than I actually am, but I'm polite about it.
That doesn't make me a shill. And having some inner-circle try to make me go away, or anyone like me, is troubling to me.
I'm 100% sure their are bad actors in this sub. And the moderators aren't wrong to be concerned and address the issues they see more visibly. But I think some of the wrong people are getting pulled into this, and some personal agendas are playing an unhealthy roll.
This is a awful path to tread down, imo.
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
I agree with you completely and I pretty much have the same viewing, browsing, and commenting habits. That is what is most alarming to me. I see users on that list who've done nothing more than I've done and now they are labelled as conspiratorially undesirables.
What is most bothersome to me is that users like yourself now have to come into this thread to defend themselves in regards to how they fit in the r/conspiracy Mike. That is pretty fucked up.
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
I wasn't insinuating that you reviewed this user, just trying to move the convo along.
The entire existence of this thread is pretty fucking hilarious to me. There are many names on "the list" that I've never seen break rules. If the only rule they are breaking is commenting on the 2nd biggest conspiracy of our lifetime then er might as well close up shop on this sub.
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
Silly spammer ;)
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
They caught me!
1 jason_brody13 2018-03-21
Get a sense of humor comrade.
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
I do have, but it is used in the same decisive way as "shill" or "troll" and should be treated as such. As long as we have Rule 10, it should be implemented fairly.
1 jason_brody13 2018-03-21
I'm not a robot and my sense if humor is not weighed down and tethered to an agenda like a "shill." If there are rules against acting like a natural human being then count me out. Go ahead and hold onto that cold, rigid, decisive humor of yours comrade.
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
That's fine. Some people think "shill" is funny, too, but it is against the rules of the community.
1 shunned_one 2018-03-21
Look man if you took my comment to be an attack on the sub or someone in particular you are wildly misinterpreting what I said. Perhaps I should have been less on the nose, but at the time it had been several hours since hard confessions by the puppet masters of hundreds of elections around the world, including in the U.S., had been posted to the sub and yet it was still not the top post. Suspicious? Maybe. Lots of possible explanations? Sure. Worthy of a joke about the fact that anyone who checks this sub on an even semi regular basis can tell there is a tug of war going on? Definitely.
Is that reality of the state of the sub enough to warrant a rule 10 warning? I don't know if I would agree, but I also wouldn't disagree if a mod attached a decent explanation. Is that joke worthy of being included on a god damn list of users suspected of downvoting new posts, shaping the rhetoric on the sub and qualifying for Pesona Non Grata status outright? Absolutely fucking not.
So again, my apologies for causing an inadvertent circle jerk, but the people in the secret club listing off PNGs because their feelings got hurt or they just didn't like what someone said can take their user lists an shove them up their asses.
I miss coming here and reading about ant people living in the grand canyon, all the suspicious shit about Antarctica and everything else. I'm just a regular dude. Fuck what this sub has become. Ban me. I'm done with /r/conspiracy.
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
You know what? I miss talking about Antarctica, too, but theories like that rarely get traction anymore because most of the users are too concerned about getting there version of the political clickbait of the day to the top so they can scrap and fight and call names.
That is exactly the problem we are trying to solve.
1 shunned_one 2018-03-21
Then just add in a level headed explanation with a rule 10 warning. In the last 3 months I have made comments in this sub about the cover up of the pending disaster in Houston when the Barker and Addicks reservoir levies inevitably fail, Hillary mentioning UFO disclosure in her campaign, that weird lunar deal where we had a blue moon, new moon and something else all at the same time, and a little snark here and there. PNG status? Fuck you
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
Whoa! I don't deserve that. Did you even read my comment in that post? But, whatever.
1 shunned_one 2018-03-21
Sorry man that wasn't really directed at you per se as much as the idea of being /u/Ilsaluna 's shill list
1 conacct 2018-03-21
I think its possible to separate the issue of brigades by TMOR from people wanting to discuss conspiracies not everyone agrees with.
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
Indeed. Did I conflate them? Did you respond the the right comment?
1 conacct 2018-03-21
Yeah not the germane to the topic at hand in this thread, it was just the first post I saw from a mod.
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
No problem. It's late and this thread has been wearing to say the least.
1 -covfefe 2018-03-21
Someone has tagged you for having a disagreeable opinion.
Now you are marked. How many more of us will be branded?
1 Tlingit_Raven 2018-03-21
You pissed off a mod, likely on one of their alts. Just means they are watching for you to do anything they can ban you for (which is better than before where they just banned regardless).
1 KarmicEnigma 2018-03-21
Ya know, I'm just never going to be okay with lists of people/users that are considered "persona non grata".
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
do you even know what persona non grata means?
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
An unacceptable or unwelcome person.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
yes a person who has proven they are unwelcomed. they have no immunity status under roman law. banned. forbidden.
A person who is rejected by those whose acceptance is required in a scenario.
https://thelawdictionary.org/persona-non-grata/
1 conacct 2018-03-21
Dude your name is ShillforPutin and you pretend to be on the forum in good faith?
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
It's best bit to engage with this account.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
are you mexican?
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
Nope, my username was derived from my days of playing Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter (when I was in the Army) on the XBOX 360 and my real name. I would troll kids by team killing and loved to hear them scream out "Miguel, NO!!!!" it's a name that's stuck for my online persona since then.
Anymore questions?
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
are you still at eglin?
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
I was never stationed at Eglin AFB. I first went to basic at Fort Banning GA from June 2002 - August 2002, from there it was AIT at Fort Gordon from September 2002 - March 2003, then Camp Long South Korea until April 2004, after this I went to Camp Doha Kuwait until May 2005, then Back to Gordon until deployment to LSA Anaconda in October 2006 - January 2008, then I got the fuck out in April 2008 and burned up 2 months of leave time until I was finally done with the Military.
Anymore questions?
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
so you are military? very interesting https://snoopsnoo.com/u/MiguelJones
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
No, I'm a Veteran. As stated I ended my service in 2008. You can snoopsnoo my account all you want, you'll find that I pretty much post here. My highest rated comment is calling out HSBC for laundering money for drug cartels.
Any other questions or accusations I can address?
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
snoop snoo will do. no thanks for your service in killing innocents. hope you no have ptsd and end as drunk on corner!
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
I didn't have to shoot anyone, nor was I directly involved in the killing of innocents. Due to being in a support role I was indirectly involved more likely than not in the death of innocent people, which I deal with in my own manner. I'm no drunk either but have had substance abuse issues which I don't attribute to the Army but more my own upbringing.
Any other questions?
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
would ever helps you sleep at night! drink up toy soldier!
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
Why are you trying to attack me? I've done nothing but attempt to remain honest and open with you. If you're expecting a reaction out of me, it won't happen. I know that the entire point of your account is just to get a rise out of people, it's not going to happen with me.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
i'm not. you attacked innocents though. shame. drink up toy soldier thinking us is great! lies! you need drink to drown your demons. pathetic. i hope you face your demons one day for what you did and were a part of. you make me sick!
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
I'm no alcoholic, I do drink in moderation occasionally. You're misconstruing everything I've said previously and I can only assume it's deliberate at this point in order to get a rise out of me. I do and have faced my demons, I work with children hoping to better their lives so they don't have to see the Military as a means to uplift themselves from their social predicament.
I can honestly say that I'm a good person. Can you? All you do is shitpost on reddit and probably 4chan as well. How many alts do you have to create to feel good about yourself? The more sockpuppets you create won't fill up the hole you have in your soul.
I wish you the best.
1 -covfefe 2018-03-21
Well done man.
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
I know that user likes to waste the time of others and try to get them to break rules. I just have quite a bit of time in my hands right now and don't mind playing into that while thing. Thanks for the kudos.
1 -covfefe 2018-03-21
It's interesting how there are mod comments up and down this thread yet this user seemingly has a free pass too.
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
That's because this user is an alt for one of the conclave users and they know and are okay with this. I assume that it's putin_loves_cats based on the way the user speaks, the hours that they are active, and that they weren't activated until shillsonacid received a 7 day ban.
The fact this user is allowed to operate in such a manner tells me that the mods who are most vocal of a shill problem only care about one type of "shill".
I don't think I should have to report this either, as you've said mods are all over thus thread and should interject without anyone needing to cry out for help.
1 -covfefe 2018-03-21
Makes a whole lot of sense.
1 ShellOilNigeria 2018-03-21
Removed. Rule 10.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
til usernames define people. i guess shitfuckercuntdiddlyfucker shouldn't be taken seriously! i am in good faith. shame because i have you in green on res.
1 conacct 2018-03-21
Well I'm able to keep two thoughts in my head at once, and disagree with censorship. Feel free to take your upvotes back by all means.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
so can i. my username has many meanings to me and others. some i wish to not disclose some i will disclose. would actual shill for putin give username like mine? no. stupid! maybe i'm pointing out stupidity of both!? you wouldn't know because you never asked but just assumed.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Moderation =/= censorship. If they are here to disrupt they do not deserve a platform.
Plenty of Normie subs for you to have fun debunking everything and making fun of conspiracy theorists. This is a serious sub and we know discussion is very often detailed by unsavory individuals. Individuals who are not genuine members of the community.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
What exactly is the "trump/russia conspiracy? In your own words.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
No new rule have been proposed. That is a straw man. The conclave post in question sought to use the existing rule structure to purge known provocateurs.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Thank you for the correction. Allow me to amend my comment.
Modifying existing rules to specifically silence posters who believe in the Trump/Russia conspiracy is pure, unadulterated censorship. Creating a secret sub to target people who believe in the Trump/Russia conspiracy is even more vile than censorship. You are the very thing you claim to hate.
Okay, now it's 100% accurate.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
You think censorship is a bad thing? So anti Semitic comments shouldn't be censored? Attacks on the sub shouldn't be censored?
This is a conspiracy theory forum. Not a politics forum. Politics is pleb tier. Plenty of Normie subs for you to kvetch about Drumph and Putin. Please. What is the conspiracy? That high ranking political figures are corrupt? Give me a fucking break.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
When that censorship is meant to silence the opinions of anyone that believes in conspiracies that are not approved by the /r/conspiracy_conclave cabal then yes, that's a bad thing.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
What conspiracy is banned?
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
I don't know, we haven't seen the master list of approved conspiracies from the cabal yet. Hopefully that will come out in the next leak.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
It's a conclave. Stop trying to smear people who want to protect the sub. Why wouldn't you want people protecting the sub?
Do shills exist?
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
You guys clearly don't want to protect anything, you just want to create another T_D-esque safe space where you can bask in your right-wing MSM talking points about the deep state without any pesky liberals bringing up that inconvenient Trump/Russia thing.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
What are you even talking about?
Very interesting straw man arguments strewn through out that paragraph.. You seriously belong in /r/rickandmorty if you think this is a right wing hug box. Conspiracy theory transcends the left right manufactured paradigm that the Hegelian overlords provide. Your trump/russia conspiracy, which you are yet to articulate, is pleb tier.
1 MerchantOfSargoth 2018-03-21
"You think censorship is a bad thing? So anti Semitic comments shouldn't be censored? Attacks on the sub shouldn't be censored?"
I guess it takes a strawman to know one.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Go straw man yourself.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Do shills exist yes or no?
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
List the official cabal-approved criteria for adding people you don't like to the purge list.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
I already clearly outlined and explained the process.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Do shills exist yes or no?
1 MerchantOfSargoth 2018-03-21
Dude, you can't be serious right now. Of course conspiracies are about hight ranking figures being corrupt. What should an r/conspiracy post be about? Your local coffe shop cheating on it's taxes?
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
The conspiracyconclave is proof that benevolent conspiracies exist!
1 douguncensored 2018-03-21
Just read through some of the screenshot in the edit. Those guys are doing god's work. This sub needs to be cleaned the hell up. Couldn't agree with them meme.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Feel free to add any names to the list by informing you local conclave member.
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
You can tell us by the t-shirts.
1 jt2424 2018-03-21
So basically that sub is just a bunch of Trump supporters that want to kick anyone out that says stuff like "Trump tricked his voters and is doing deals with Saudi Arabia, wants to start shit with Iran, blah blah blah"
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Fuck Trump. Trump is a known actor. If you think in 2018 the president of the United States has any power over the monied stricture I have a boat named Titan for sale.
1 jt2424 2018-03-21
The Federal Reserve supports Trump... He is not an outsider. He was selected. He is a reality "star" and has now turned the white house into a reality show.. Trump tries to use the media to his advantage
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Yes, according to the proposed rule change any discussion of the Trump/Russia narrative or any criticism of the right-wing deep state narrative can get you banned. Swear allegiance to the Russian muppet or you're banished.
1 jt2424 2018-03-21
Trump opened 8 companies in Saudi Arabia like 1 month after he announced he was running for president. I think the Russia stuff is just a distraction from the real powers that be that got Trump elected.
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
Omg, see what we're talking about? We are talking about the community and you have to talk Trump/Russia. It is exhausting.
1 Go_Spurs_Go 2018-03-21
Christ man he was just giving his opinion on a conspiracy. Calm down. Would you have said the same thing had he brought up Pizzagate?
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
Actually, yes. That wouldn't belong here, either.
1 Go_Spurs_Go 2018-03-21
Would you have called it exhausting?
And what does it hurt? If the other poster responds great, they are talking about a conspiracy, in a conspiracy forum (although slightly off topic), and if they don’t respond that’s fine too. Maybe that person isn’t confident enough in their conspiracy to make a whole post about it so chose to comment here.
Sure if I bring up Avatar in a Fast and Furious thread in the movies subreddit it may not be the most relevant thing to the topic. And sure, a couple of salty movies users may say, ‘Hey, Avatar is not relative in my thread about Dom and Family, please talk about that in an Avatar related thread’, but I’m not going to get told I’m being exhausting, find my name on a list of users who are Avatar fans (I didn’t make the list, but I do think the world design makes Avatar highly rewatchable) and have a private subreddit start talking about what do we do to get rid of these Avatar fans and their discussion of Avatar and it’s pending sequels, of which news and misinformation seems to come out daily from the producers and director.
(We may disagree here, but you have to admire my dedication to the metaphor)
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
Oh, come on. Do you have any idea what would've resulted from me bringing up Pizzagate in this thread?
1 Go_Spurs_Go 2018-03-21
Well no one would’ve created a private group to discuss banning you.
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
If I interjected Pizzagate in every thread I would have been on the list, I assure you.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Don't worry, once you implement the new rule you won't have to see anymore of that pesky Trump/Russia talk will you?
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
Oh, brother.
You are doing a very good job of demonstrating what many people here are frustrated with, that is for sure.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Are you guys not trying to ban left-wing MSM narratives from this sub like Trump/Russia?
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
No one wants to ban any subject.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Nonsense. Flytape and Sabremesh are clearly discussing creating rules they both agree are unfair simply to protect from any anti-Trump narrative and not a single person disagrees with them.
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
Dude, what do you want? Make a sub to talk about Trump/Russia all day if you want and you won't have to live under all this imaginary oppression. It was a brainstorm thread. Get over it.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
What imaginary oppression? Are the people in the secret cabal not discussing rule changes that they admit are unfair purely to silence any anti-Trump sentiment here? Or did we all imagine reading that?
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
Are you oppressed by people talking about ideas that haven't been implemented?
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Are you telling us that the rules changes being discussed in that thread will not be implemented?
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
Nope.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Nope they won't be implemented or nope you won't tell us that?
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Clarify what you mean. What is the conspiracy you're talking about?
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
What is the criteria for adding posters you don't like to your secret purge list?
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Using known provocateur tactics.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
List them. Why are you trying to hide this information from the users of this sub? Do they not have a right to know what criteria you're using to purge people who are anti-Trump?
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
They are all listed in the link in the sidebar as I previously stated.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
I broke no rules listed in the sidebar, I was still added to your personal purge list. Try again?
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/22/1112509/-The-Gentleperson-s-Guide-to-Forum-Spies
This is what I mean.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
So that's the official criteria sanctioned by the secret cabal that's being used to create your personal purge list and modify rules in an admittedly unfair way to silence anti-Trump sentiment. Thanks for sharing!
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Is that what I said?
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
So that's not the official criteria being used by the secret cabal to silence anti-Trump sentiment using rules the cabal admits are unfair?
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
It's definitely not official.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Do shills exist?
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Apparently I am the only member of the conclave?
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
No, you're just the person using the secret cabal to add people to your purge list with absolutely no criteria whatsoever.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
....
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/22/1112509/-The-Gentleperson-s-Guide-to-Forum-Spies
What is this document? Criteria or no?
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
I didn't see that link posted anywhere in that thread.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
That screenshot from the conclave is an orchestrated leak. You were meant to have it and this post is all part of our plan. The conclave isn't our only place of discussion.
1 -covfefe 2018-03-21
Aka many people on an exclusive subreddit with a few dozen(?) invited users.
There are 600,000 subs here, the scope of discussion cannot be defined by your self appointed few.
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
Can't it? Do other subs this size let all its members discuss and decide rules and moderation, or do they have smaller groups of vetted that discuss behind the scenes and then address the community? Because I think it is the latter.
1 -covfefe 2018-03-21
It's not about moderation, the thread is literally calling on a chosen few to name users who should be declared persona non grata to restore the "conspiracy quotient".
Mods will mod as they see fit but this inaccessible community of papal conclave members is not that, it is a one sided attempt to control the narrative and its pretty transparent.
1 jt2424 2018-03-21
Your kidding right? I said nothing about Russia.
1 aznscourge 2018-03-21
Its so obvious the new round of mods are complete power hungry shills. All you have to do is look at what they post and what they decide to sticky and its no wonder why CA was so successful in manipulating millions of online users during the election
1 jt2424 2018-03-21
"its no wonder why CA was so successful in manipulating millions of online users during the election"
Explain?
1 Tookmyprawns 2018-03-21
Cambridge Analytica, Trumps election consulting firm that was paid 10s of millions of dollars for social media manipulation wasn't paid 10s of millions of dollars for nothing. They were good at what they did.
1 freesp33chisstilldea 2018-03-21
I agree with them on most things. I don't see an issue with the sub. Creating a shill list is a smart idea.
1 TheGreatOni19 2018-03-21
And what if you're not a shill, you're just some dude that gets up and goes to his lame ass job for 12 fucking hours a day just like anyone else? You just happen to believe a little bit differently than some people here. Do I really belong there? Is this really right? Do you really think this doesn't reach too far into authoritarian practice?
And no, my 12 hour a day job isn't shilling for whatever shitty group you're probably thinking of.
1 Upupabove 2018-03-21
Although it shouldn't be secret, they are not wrong whith what they are saying at all. This place is overloaded with shills, ecspecially since the Florida shooting, trying to spread msm bullshit here.
1 d3rr 2018-03-21
I hope you guys have some backup sites in mind for the day when you wake up and this sub is banned. Should we get a "Contingent Community Migration Plan" together? We can list reddit alternatives and their relevant conspiracy related sections.
1 hotpizzaday 2018-03-21
Can I say this seems fine? This sub is basically the only decent, consolidated source for non-mainstream views on things. I really don't have a problem if pointless pro-mainstream people get banned. The screenshots about there being a billion subs for the mainstream anti-Trump conspiracies but nowhere else for Nasa shit, etc bring up really good points.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Does that include the people pushing the deep state Fox News right-wing mainstream media narrative too? Or no?
1 hotpizzaday 2018-03-21
If it gets downvoted and banned from the rest of reddit, it belongs here
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
Jailbait belongs here? Downtown belongs here?
1 carhold 2018-03-21
Conspiracy in a conspiracy. Inception level 100
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
*Recursion is the word your looking for.
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
As one of the mods who had perhaps the most to do with the formation of the conclave in its present form, I thought I'd give you my take on it.
I had two specific goals in pushing it to where it is: 1) to give the mods a better platform than the awful modmail tools we currently have to discuss ongoing issues and potential rules changes of the subs, and 2) to let more of our long time users take part in these discussions.
For any of your critiques of the conclave as it is now, I can guarantee you it would be just as easy if not easier for the mod team to do anything you'd find censorious or otherwise malign without ever creating the conclave. The conclave, if anything, brought more voices into that discussion.
As for it being private instead of public, I don't think that critique is without merit, yet I do think there are potential benefits given the nature of online forums such as they are. The conclave operates under Chatham House rules, which means anyone can discuss publicly what was said, but not who said it. This allows for more honest and frank discussion which otherwise might not be possible.
That it is private also means we're less susceptible to outside agitation and manipulation. The very nature of pseudonymous forums like reddit means that any sufficiently motivated party can very easily manipulate conversation, as the CA revelations have shown just a tip of that iceberg.
I'll try to answer any other questions I can.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
What is the criteria being used to add people to your purge list? Who is responsible for applying that criteria? Are people voted onto the purge list by the entire secret cabal community or just by the inner circle of the inner circle? Or can any random member add anyone they want for any reason they want without full review of the entire secret cabal community?
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
The list is complied using complex linguistic theory. You see the shills have a tendancy to write using specific linguistic cues that are known to be provocateur tactics. It's all very simple once you know what you're looking for.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Provide it here for review. I'm sure the users of this sub and reddit as a whole would love to see this theory of yours.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
I would love to but it's proprietary and trademarked by the Russian government. Putin won't let us publish it.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
The screenshot makes it obvious that there is no criteria being applied, a member of the cabal adds a name and no one blinks an eye.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Really?
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Really.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
No seriously, really?
1 Dr_Cog_Science 2018-03-21
Ha. Tell me more about your linguistic theory.
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
As far as I understand it, it's meant to collect a list of users who regularly disrupt conversation rather than adding to it. Anyone can put anyone on this list, and only mods can ban people from it. Anyone banned is eligible for the same review process afforded to anyone banned by a mod for any other reason. (I'm not currently an active mod here, so I'm not sure if anyone from the list has been banned yet or not.)
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
What proof is being provided that they're disrupting conversations? Based on that screenshot it seems clear that there is no evidence or debate happening whatsoever to determine who gets added to the purge list, someone simply adds a name and no one blinks an eye.
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
The way it seems to be working is that anyone can add a name, and the proof would be evident in the user's history, if indeed any given user is disruptive. I have no clue how old that screenshot is, but I've contested at least one name that I don't think should be banned, and others have contested others.
You keep calling this a purge list, and that's your right to characterize it as you see fit, but it's not really accurate. You appear on that list, and you haven't been purged. All it is a place for other users to add and discuss users they find to be disruptive to conversation. As has always been the case on this sub, the mod team has the final say in any bans or other actions. And just so you know, we regularly get modmails from all types of users asking for others to be banned, and we've always made those decisions based on our own investigations, not just because another user told us to.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
If the only criteria for being labeled as a shill or a troll in that thread was being disruptive than the majority of people posting in that very thread should be added to the purge list.
It's abundantly clear that plans are underway to modify the rules so posters like me who believe in the Trump/Russia conspiracy can be purged.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Again can you clarify what you mean by the trunp/Russia conspiracy?
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
I'd say it's less about that and more about the extent to which that topic has taken over this board, and specifically users who have come into this sub who talk about seemingly nothing other than that here. The topic of conspiracy is much broader than this one specific set of allegations concerning Trump/Russia. I don't want to ban discussion of it here, but there are threads every day on nearly every other large and small political or news sub, in addition to dozens or more subs set up specifically to document, analyze, or meme the topic.
And it is specific users, not the topic itself, which correlate with drowning out other conversation. What should we make of a user who's had an account here for several years, posting mainly in r/politics, and then for a month and a half, decides to start posting here and makes 700 comments in this sub in that period?
1 omenofdread 2018-03-21
can i get an invite? ;)
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Gaaa! Where have you been!
1 omenofdread 2018-03-21
slavery, sir.
if i hit the lotto this week expect a call from my attorney regarding a new position ;)
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Damn! Well Putin still has the cheques flowing in so I'm still here.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Oh how I've missed you!
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
Can I get an invite?
And if someone wanted to propose another user for that list, but that user was on the conclave sub, would that be allowed? Out of curiosity, what about a mod? Would it be allowed to point out specific examples to bolster your case in either example?
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
I'm not actually sure what the current process is for letting people into the sub (I've been non-active as a mod on this sub, and don't have access to modmail or decision-making power here.) I'd suggest asking through the r/conspiracy_conclave modmail.
I don't see why not. It's not even a list so much as individual users and mods saying who they think are disruptive to conversation.
Probably.
In the context of the conclave, I'd say that would be encouraged.
1 LetsSmashStacks 2018-03-21
Sounds good, thanks!
1 joelberg 2018-03-21
I'd like to be added to this sub to try to make r/conspiracy better for all users. Can you add me? If not why not?
1 Rightfull9 2018-03-21
I see my username there listed. I think I would know if I am a shill or not and i am certianly not. What have I done that would lead you to make this judgement? Dare to hold both sides to the same standard? Dare to be critical of astroturfing? Dare to be critical of Trump? I get shit on by either ShareBlue or the Trump people depending on what i post. They both hate me because i post things that counter their narrative. And they are both part of the establishment. And conversely some of my posts that are critical of one side are liked by the other and vice versa. I am about anti establishment as it gets. And if you think being critical of CA makes one suspect it's you that are the problem. Just like anybody that thinks ShareBlue is okay is the problem.
I don't know what's going on here but it goes against the spirit of this sub and maybe there isn't a place for people willing to criticize both sides here anymore. And maybe this isn't a place for me anymore. It damn sure feels that way.
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
I didn't put your name on any list. I don't think you're a shill, because I don't really recognize your username, but you are green in my RES so I must have upvoted you at least a few times.
I'm not sure how I even feel about that list in the first place, whether public or private. In general, I think there are users here which do more to distract and slide conversation, rather than seeing this as a sub to learn and share knowledge and ideas, but calling for names like that would inevitably lead to witch hunts and mischaracterizations. If a user's criteria for putting someone on that list was "often supports the MSM Trump/Russia narrative," then that's going to sweep up a lot of good users, too.
I do think the idea came from a good place, though. You even point out that you call out astroturfing, and it certainly exists on this sub and reddit more broadly. When it comes to calling out specific users as trolls and shills, it's going to get turned around as well, either by bad actors themselves, or by genuine users getting it wrong. Though I'm not sure how we can really identify shills, or even just disruptive users without listing usernames in some form or another. It truly is a wicked problem.
1 Rightfull9 2018-03-21
I would be careful of, and watch out for, people in this "conclave" trying to ban real dissent under the guise of shills. Like you said it could sweep up well intentioned users but it can also be abused if people have agendas you are not aware of. For the record I have never pushed the Trump/Russia narrative because I don't believe it. I actually argue against it. This is clearly just a hit job on me because I have the audacity to criticize Trump (who should be shown no allegiance on this sub) and CA and the methods they use on this sub. Keep an eye out.
1 CelineHagbard 2018-03-21
I am. I don't want that any more than you.
For sure. I should have put that I didn't mean you specifically, but someone in general (which is a criterion some people were using).
1 Rightfull9 2018-03-21
I understood that. But it makes it even more telling that I got tagged and listed in the image linked because I don't fit that criteria and still get tagged as a shill. Why? Because I am critical of Trump and Cambridge? What kind of a sub do they want here then?
1 ExOblivion 2018-03-21
Wow.... This sub and it's mods are fucked...
This is disgusting.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Why's that? Please explain? We should let the shills have /r/conspiracy?
1 ExOblivion 2018-03-21
You should handle in the open, you coward.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
I wish I could. I have no power. Just suggestions.
1 ExOblivion 2018-03-21
Sure, shillman, sure...
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Nice argument.
1 ExOblivion 2018-03-21
Works for you, right?
1 Sabremesh 2018-03-21
Rule 10
1 petergibbons12 2018-03-21
This kind of garbage is inevitable given the way Reddit is structured. FB groups are way better imo
1 thedeadlyrhythm 2018-03-21
i made my reddit account in 2010. this was one of the first subs i subscribed to. fuck everything about this. this sub has changed so much over the past two years, and its because of the huge influx of trump die hard loyalists. period. it's so insane to blame the understandable pushback to that change and suggest banning people because they dont subscribe to the white house narrative.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Anyone who thinks protecting the sub from shills is a bad thing might as well be banned for attacking the sub and members herein.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
This post is clearly an attack on the sub. Did you read the sidebar op?
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
No, this post is clearly an attack on /r/conspiracy_conclave.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Which is made up of the core members of this community. Are you sad you weren't invited? Are you wondering why we may not like you? It's because you clearly have an agenda. Over the past few days dozens of people have specifically mentioned your name when I went around asking who was a bad apple in conspiracy, why might people specifically name you?
1 LitBastard 2018-03-21
For guys so vehemently against secret societies,and deep state shills you seem to use their tactics with joy.
I tend to be on the side of scepticism and voice my opinion accordingly.Your secret little club is a thinly veiled threat to this subs integrity. You may justify it by saying it's "to tackle the shills and TmoR problem",but what stops you guys from taking it to far?
You have users in that group that were part of the attempted overthrow of this sub a couple of months ago,that tried to make it a right wing safe haven. While this attempt was foiled,it now seems to have moved into the shadows with the same goal.
You seem to want to actively create a thought police.
1 Nightlight64 2018-03-21
What's wrong about mods and others discussing together in private how to make the subreddit better?
I looked at the screenshot, expecting to see/read something that would anger me but it didn't.
Banning accounts whose majority post history within this subreddit is just pushing mainstream media talking points and attacking free thinkers is actually a good thing.
If your post history within this subreddit is overly partisan for either political party and you are just here to sow political discord then you deserve a ban.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
What's with secret cabals where non-mods get to add anyone they want to purge lists and then invent new rules to censor them?
So you support censorship of unpopular opinions, do you? How deliciously ironic.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Note the subjects snarky demeanor when responding.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Maybe your secret cabal can add a NO SNARKY DEMEANOR rule after you're done purging all the liberals here?
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Mother fucker I am a liberal.
1 Nightlight64 2018-03-21
Regular users who are not moderators of this subreddit are being allowed to add names of users they just so happen not to like to a "purge list", unchecked by moderators? Proof?
Let's just not ban any users, huh? Don't want to censor anyone.....please. Try again.
O, btw, I got your last line in your initial post. Top. Minds. Of. Reddit. 😉
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
https://ibb.co/fApBcx
Maybe you're too young to remember but it's the tag line from the old enquirer commercials.
1 Nightlight64 2018-03-21
Which isn't proof of what I asked for.
I'm likely older than you and yes, I do understand in English "inquiring minds" is an often used phrase. You know why you used it the way you did. 😉
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
That's exactly proof of what you asked for.
Doubt it because you obviously don't know where that expression comes from.
1 cubeyescube 2018-03-21
I like to read /r/conspiracy and conspiracies in general. It's good fun. It's a new age pass-time. I don't take it too seriously.
It's all very obvious you are here to fuck with the whole show - and I don't like that. What the hell are you doing with your life? Is this your life?
This sub reddit was so much, much more enjoyable before you and your mob showed up.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Amen!
1 Rightfull9 2018-03-21
What if it's not and they still tagged and listed your username because I am adamantly opposed to astroturfing no matter who is doing it.
1 Nightlight64 2018-03-21
Are we playing fictional "What If?" games now? Nope.
1 TheGreatOni19 2018-03-21
If you were on that list you would have a problem with it, I guarantee it.
And if you think banning people because they disagree with you is ok, the problems is them, it's DEFINITELY you.
1 Nightlight64 2018-03-21
Good thing I'm not a troll, bot, or political partisan pushing mainstream media talking points while attacking conspiracy theorists, then. I was worried for a second.
Quote me where I wrote that. You can't.
"Dur, you just want to ban anyone who disagrees with you." — Statement made by someone who obviously can't read or has an agenda. Take your pick.
1 conacct 2018-03-21
Will the mods let us know the ratio of flat earth/moon landing posts we need to comment on in order to discuss the current administration?
The ultimate irony is, a massive amount of the sub is constantly attacking Trump conspiracies (and a large amount supporting) but then get upset when people attack, say, pizzagate or seth rich.
1 of_mendez 2018-03-21
I still love this subreddits, one of the only places where you can pizzagateinpeace
1 Horrid_Proboscis 2018-03-21
So a bunch of invite-only elite users and mods, including disgraced former mods, are in a secret sub Rule 10ing people they don't like in order to sanction and perhaps mass ban them. And this discussion is being led by the most enthusiastic deployer of permanent bans in r/conspiracy. Wow. That's... pretty fucked.
1 TheGreatOni19 2018-03-21
And yet nothing will be done.
1 Horrid_Proboscis 2018-03-21
You reckon? I dunno. They've got mod power. They're pretty unified in purpose (and, let's face it, in political persuasion). They've begun identifying the undesirables. And they have veneers of reasons under which to enact their "reshaping" of the active subscriber base. So what's to stop them?
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/07/22/1112509/-The-Gentleperson-s-Guide-to-Forum-Spies
Mandatory reading.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Op, do shills exist?
1 Bongstradamus 2018-03-21
That's so meta. That's like all the mods of r/conspiracy involved in an actual conspiracy.
1 Nogrim6 2018-03-21
there are a bunch of these spin off conspiracy subs, frankly i put them all on par with TMOR
1 lzrdsk 2018-03-21
So meta
1 FilmNoirOdy 2018-03-21
Off course ft /u/FlyTape
1 Tlingit_Raven 2018-03-21
It's telling his removal as a mod was just to appease people here rightfully outraged and nothing changed as far as his influence.
1 Nogrim6 2018-03-21
well there are certainly a few names in that list that i actually agree with. i don't usually bother to even read names but there are a few extreme examples that ive run in to that are named there that have stood out as shills, or just trolls trying to stir up shit.
1 Rightfull9 2018-03-21
I see my username there listed. I think I would know if I am a shill or not and i am certianly not. What have I done that would lead you to make this judgement? Dare to hold both sides to the same standard? Dare to be critical of astroturfing? I get shit on by either ShareBlue or the Trump people depending on what i post They bother hatell me because i post thinges that counter their narrative.. And conversely some of my posts that are critical of one side are liked by the other and vice versa. I am about anti establishment as it gets. And if you think being critical of CA makes one suspect it's you that are the problem.
I don't know what's going on here but it goes against the spirit of this sub and maybe there isn't a place for people willing to criticize both sides here anymore. And maybe this isn't a place for me anymore. It damn sure feels that way.
1 TheGreatOni19 2018-03-21
Yessssss!! I made the list!!
1 cadhoit_ban 2018-03-21
Holy shit I made their list! This is such a proud moment for me. Its ridiculous that conversations like this are being had by our mods in private subs. Its hilarious to me that they claim transparency yet do things like this to obfuscate their attempts at narrowing the user pool to only the people they deem acceptable.
1 TheGreatOni19 2018-03-21
This is essentially "ban the leftists and anyone that thinks trump is a scbag".
Yes I talk about trump on here an awful lot, but it brought up a lot in this sub (and not by me either). I've made some posts regarding trump, but not all of my posts have to do with trump. And yeah, I think he's guilty of some shitty things, but have any of you assholes in that sub taken the time to ask me exactly what I think of it all? Fuck no you haven't! Instead you retreat to your little safespace and try to scheme ways to ban people without making it obvious you're targeting people because they disagree with you.
It's cowardly.
It's outrageous.
It's disheartening.
If you're a mod that's too deep in that subs bullshit, you should be removed. If you're a mod who contributes to that sub, stop pretending that your concern is free speech, because it's not. You just don't want anyone to disagree with you. You're just as bad as those you pretend to hate. You hate them so much you emulate their behavior?
Look at yourselves. You've become what you hate. You can't be trusted in the position you're in. Do the right thing and remove yourselves from the mod team.
1 -covfefe 2018-03-21
Oh well I look forward to being declared a person not welcome!
This is like watching a car crash in slow motion.
1 Iceboundend 2018-03-21
Looking good mods. Conspiracy elite! Would be shit if the admins nuke ya'll and there is no agreed upon place to reconnect. Thats what happens next if the corporations cant control the narrative. Food4thought.
1 Kracus 2018-03-21
Banning someone you disagree with is a lot like the attitude president oompaloompa seems to exhibit.
1 CosmicOwly 2018-03-21
Wow, look at them crying that they can't ban people who go against the narrative here.
1 danjo_kandui 2018-03-21
I'm pretty sure anytime I hear someone say "left this, right that, democrat this, or republican that" they are newbies or on a pay roll. It's been common knowledge in the conspiracy community that this paradigm is designed to divide and control. It's one of the fist things I've learned. Every politician plays for the same team. Team fuck you.
1 Blergblarg2 2018-03-21
Would you say that top minds want to know? Because there's a couple of sub I know of that are colluding to invade this sub.
1 LordBlackmore 2018-03-21
A year ago and the sub is only getting worse.
1 notanideologue 2018-03-21
Fly tape
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
Can you detail for us all the active measures that /r/conspiracy_conclave is carrying out to make /r/conspiracy great again?
1 garyp714 2018-03-21
You are a sad human being. Cries about censorship then advocates for censorship based on political ideology.
Shame on you. Talk the talk but can't walk the walk.
1 WarSanchez 2018-03-21
I agreed to some rules regarding privacy that most all members have upheld so I will not break them.
1 forgivenfreeonfire 2018-03-21
Check the screenshot posted above.
1 Flytape 2018-03-21
Nope I didn't have anything to do with it.
1 Kind_Of_A_Dick 2018-03-21
Interesting thread. Hopefully every post from there ends up making it out, for transparency of course.
1 bulletbait 2018-03-21
I understand that we'll never see eye to eye politically, especially on the Trump/Russia, but I guess I do want to try to explain how things feel around here as a lefty conspiracy junkie.
When I was younger, I wasted days on end reading all the 9/11 conspiracy stuff I could find. Everything from the Bush administration swapped the planes in air for drones/military aircraft and had all the passengers killed, to the lighter (and, imo far more plausible) Cheney and friends allowed it to happen for financial and geopolitical reasons. I remember doing a presentation in a high school AP class about how the Bush admin was drumming up war in Iraq on flimsy reasoning. I've re-read John Titor's claims about the left-right divide and WW3 more times than I should probably admit.
My personal experiences with conspiracies have always had a left leaning to them. I know that's not what everyone thinks, and that frankly I'm probably in the minority among the conspiracy community. But, the comparison I'd make for today (with what I and others feel is supression of talk about Trump/Russia on this sub) is like if it were 2002 and the sub didn't allow any discussion of 9/11 conspiracies.
Trump's the President and he's under Federal investigation for possible conspiracy against the United States! How can people not want to talk about that? I want to hear your side and I want to talk about my side! Why can't we?
I feel like must be ways to facilitate that kind of discussion without immediately devolving into shill accusations. More forceful moderation of shill accusations? Removing the downvote button so things don't get buried? I don't know, I'm not an expert on this shit, but I wish we could do better.
1 canitbe73 2018-03-21
Well that's pretty fucked up. I'm almost proud to be on the list of dissenters, tbh.
The irony here is just... I feel like we're fucking swimming in it at this point.
1 Flytape 2018-03-21
That's because of the 800 resist network subs. They overwhelm every sub on Reddit. It's organized, obvious and annoying as hell. We don't need Conspiracy to just be a mirror of /politics, /news, /worldnews etc etc.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
go to politics and circle jerk pee pee tapes all you want!
1 gandalfsbastard 2018-03-21
I don't disagree the name calling happens form all sides and should be minimized. The extremes definitely make it difficult to want to participate, if you jump in you are likely to get slammed (from one or both sides) and that sucks.
I think timed mutes are better than bans. If someone is a repeat offender then maybe it goes to the next level. Everyone is guilty of getting heated and quick with the keyboard now and then. Banning folks should be a last resort and only if there is a real violation (threats, doxxing, etc.) - censorship is never the answer.
1 seeking101 2018-03-21
are you not paying attention? I said i think all political conspiracies should be banned
1 IAmSumOne 2018-03-21
He gained the respect of the majority of the world. With nothing more then a noble ideology, and the courage to speak. A success, and a tragedy.
1 mwiegel2 2018-03-21
Shouldn't there be some trump supporters on that list if it's about civility? I see way more trump supporters being dicks then anyone else.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
1 StiffJohnson 2018-03-21
Typically when people break the rules they get warnings and/or bans instead of being added to secret lists.
And are you saying every person on that list has attacked this sub? Can you define what you mean when you say "attack?"
1 freesp33chisstilldea 2018-03-21
They turned this place into a battleground. What do you recommend be done?
1 jt2424 2018-03-21
Trump opened 8 companies in Saudi Arabia like 1 month after he announced he was running for president. I think the Russia stuff is just a distraction from the real powers that be that got Trump elected.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
What conspiracy is banned?
1 RecoveringGrace 2018-03-21
They caught me!
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Discrimination means to choose. Nothing wrong with discriminating against racists or bigots then? Your argument will be used to make conspiracy a platform for hate speech.
1 ExOblivion 2018-03-21
You should handle in the open, you coward.
1 StiffJohnson 2018-03-21
I feel like you're missing the word "covert." Obviously mods are necessary for every subreddit. Most subreddits don't have separate private subreddits that invite users to influence moderation policy secretly.
1 99PercentTruth 2018-03-21
What's with secret cabals where non-mods get to add anyone they want to purge lists and then invent new rules to censor them?
So you support censorship of unpopular opinions, do you? How deliciously ironic.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
You finally get it.
1 RMFN 2018-03-21
Amen!
1 MerchantOfSargoth 2018-03-21
"You think censorship is a bad thing? So anti Semitic comments shouldn't be censored? Attacks on the sub shouldn't be censored?"
I guess it takes a strawman to know one.
1 ShillForPutin 2018-03-21
so you forgot to switch usernames? thanks!
1 ChipperyDoo 2018-03-21
No need for me to remind you of your own political ideology, is your memory okay?
1 Rightfull9 2018-03-21
What if it's not and they still tagged and listed your username because I am adamantly opposed to astroturfing no matter who is doing it.
1 TheGreatOni19 2018-03-21
If you were on that list you would have a problem with it, I guarantee it.
And if you think banning people because they disagree with you is ok, the problems is them, it's DEFINITELY you.
1 -covfefe 2018-03-21
Well done man.
1 Go_Spurs_Go 2018-03-21
Well no one would’ve created a private group to discuss banning you.
1 MiguelJones 2018-03-21
That's because this user is an alt for one of the conclave users and they know and are okay with this. I assume that it's putin_loves_cats based on the way the user speaks, the hours that they are active, and that they weren't activated until shillsonacid received a 7 day ban.
The fact this user is allowed to operate in such a manner tells me that the mods who are most vocal of a shill problem only care about one type of "shill".
I don't think I should have to report this either, as you've said mods are all over thus thread and should interject without anyone needing to cry out for help.
1 FUCK_the_Clintons__ 2018-03-21
Well done, most controversial post in this thread, that is normally my job.