Comments containing "CrowdStrike" are automatically shadowbanned on /r/politics
1 2018-08-18 by whacko_jacko
I was trying to understand why one of my comments was shadowbanned from /r/politics. After some testing, I realized they are automatically filtering out any mention of CrowdStrike, the cybersecurity company which produced the famous report about Russian hacking of the DNC. Considering the fact that their analysis is the primary supporting evidence which is referenced by the IC to support the allegation that the DNC e-mails came from a Russian hacking effort, I find it extremely curious that /r/politics doesn't want any discussion about them.
40 comments
1 ichoosejif 2018-08-18
We don't care how they do it on that sub.
1 Master_Order 2018-08-18
I care because of the reach their campaign has. Pointing out their standards can certainly give us some perspective, can it not?
1 ichoosejif 2018-08-18
Us? That's nr a thing.
1 Master_Order 2018-08-18
You individually?
1 ichoosejif 2018-08-18
r/conspiracy isn't a we, us - independent thinkers. I don't affiliate myself with a group. I have homes I ride for here, but not because we think alike. I'm just glad people think.
1 Master_Order 2018-08-18
We can argue semantics, but I think it is reasonable to infer that when someone uses the language I did, the individuality you expressed is supposed.
1 dsk123 2018-08-18
Wait, you say “/r/conspiracy isn’t a we” but your first comment says “We don’t care how they do it on that sub.”
1 TimDaPlatMan 2018-08-18
I wonder if that's new or if certain comments are approved, here is a comment containing it from a month ago:
https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/8zf5vn/trumps_stupid_where_is_the_dnc_server_conspiracy
1 AutoModerator 2018-08-18
While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1 russianbot01 2018-08-18
Well, its in a quote (if that makes a difference I don't know), and the only other comment with it only has 1 point.
1 TimDaPlatMan 2018-08-18
Auto-mod would still auto-remove it in both cases if the rule was active then.
1 HerMileHighness 2018-08-18
I think mods can see automod removals and approve it manually.
1 whacko_jacko 2018-08-18
I asked the moderators of /r/politics to approve my comment yesterday. We'll see what happens I guess.
1 Peeonmybed 2018-08-18
https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/986ua5/over_70_former_intel_officers_and_leaders/e4efv7u/
Hmm doesn't seem to be a shadowban at all.
1 AutoModerator 2018-08-18
While not required, you are requested to use the NP (No Participation) domain of reddit when crossposting. This helps to protect both your account, and the accounts of other users, from administrative shadowbans. The NP domain can be accessed by replacing the "www" in your reddit link with "np".
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1 whacko_jacko 2018-08-18
How interesting. Notice that comment was posted 6 hours after I created this thread.
Last night, I confirmed through testing that my comments would magically vanish from public view when I logged out if they included the term "CrowdStrike", but otherwise they would remain visible. Repeating the same test today gets a different result. Is it possible that the moderators responded to this thread by removing that term from the autofilter? The original comment which started my curiosity remains shadowbanned.
1 Peeonmybed 2018-08-18
That's cause I read your thread then posted the comment to test your theory - which seems to be debunked.
1 whacko_jacko 2018-08-18
I understand what you are saying, however I confirmed that the term was shadowbanned before I posted this thread. That no longer seems to be the case. What I am wondering now is if this thread prompted the moderators to remove that term from their filter list. They were pinged, after all.
1 Peeonmybed 2018-08-18
Rather than your 33 upvoted post being an Alarm signal for them to rid itself of a banned term, I think it's more likely that there was no shadowban and it was your user error and/or predisposition to conspiratorial thoughts that made you THINK it was shadowbanned.
1 whacko_jacko 2018-08-18
No, it was not user error, although I can't rule out a technical glitch. I ran multiple tests, some containing that term and some not. Every time, the comments containing CrowdStrike were invisible when I wasn't logged in while the comments without that term remained visible. It was a simple test to run, and it seems to point towards an autofilter.
It's really not that far-fetched that some moderator checked his pings and decided it was silly to filter that term.
You don't seem to understand that the moderators were automatically alerted when I referenced /r/politics in the title of the thread.
1 Peeonmybed 2018-08-18
What other terms are shadowbanned from r/politics? Do you even have proof they have a filter list at all?
1 whacko_jacko 2018-08-18
It's a great question. Part of the reason I posted this thread was to see if others have had similar experiences. The moderators over there are not very communicative, but they know what they are doing. It is very easy to configure automods to shadowban based on a filter list.
1 Peeonmybed 2018-08-18
So you accuse that sub and its mods of doing something you have no proof of?
1 GhostBruh420 2018-08-18
It's almost as if someone on r/conspiracy jumped to a wild conclusion with absolutely no evidence or even thought.
1 whacko_jacko 2018-08-18
It's also possible that the moderators were pinged by this thread and decided it was better to remove that term from their filter list. Last night my tests were filtered out, but that no longer seems to be the case.
1 GhostBruh420 2018-08-18
That seems very unlikely. This sub is of no concern to anyone other than the moderators of this sub.
1 whacko_jacko 2018-08-18
That really doesn't matter. By referencing /r/politics, this thread showed up in their modmail. It's really not that far-fetched that one of their many moderators checked the automod settings and decided it was silly to filter that term.
1 GhostBruh420 2018-08-18
I just doubt they'd give a shit. Occam's razor dude. Far more likely the OP on the conspiracy sub is just a paranoid idiot living in a fantasy world rather than the mods shadowbanning every use of a rather non-contentious and extremely uncommon use of "crowdstrike".
1 whacko_jacko 2018-08-18
CrowdStrike is hardly non-contentious. They are at the center of the DNC Leaks debate and are responsible for the conclusion that the DNC e-mails were hacked by Russians rather than some other source (like an internal leak). They are the only people who were granted physical access to the devices used by the DNC to access these servers. Much of the Russian meddling allegations depend on the CrowdStrike analysis. The founder has some potentially shady ties to DNC leadership.
The question remains, why did they shadowban my original comment? I didn't break any rules.
1 GhostBruh420 2018-08-18
That's extremely incorrect. The Russian involvement has been confirmed by multiple intelligent agencies worldwide.
Now you just sound ignorant. This has been independently found by many organizations and also is based upon the countless connections between the Trump team and Russia.
1 whacko_jacko 2018-08-18
I can see how you might think that, but if you dig deeper, you will find that these intelligence agencies end up pointing back the CrowdStrike analysis as primary supporting evidence for their conclusions.
1 GhostBruh420 2018-08-18
I highly doubt that. We know without a shadow of a doubt that it was the Russians. Especially given that we know that the Trump campaign was aware of the hacking before it became public knowledge.
1 whacko_jacko 2018-08-18
I'm sorry, but you are woefully misinformed. This is natural, as a great deal of effort has gone into painting the narrative you believe. We do not know beyond a shadow of a doubt that it was the Russians. No hard evidence has been revealed to the public. The bit about the Trump administration knowing about the hacks before everyone else is also bunk. The rumors of various leaks started swirling in January 2016.
1 GhostBruh420 2018-08-18
You reject all good sources and instead believe what ever you find in the back channels of the web. How can you argue that makes you better informed? Even if I believe everything the MSM tells me I'd be better informed than you simply because your sources have no record to stand by. They have simply never been right or wrong about anything because they do not even exist.
1 whacko_jacko 2018-08-18
Actually I am suggesting that you read the primary sources critically. Pick an MSM article on the DNC hacking or Russian meddling. Which intelligence agencies' conclusions are they referring to? Where are the original reports from those intelligence agencies? What evidence do they cite in those reports? I have done this digging myself, and I found a shocking amount of circular logic which depends on the CrowdStrike analysis rather than independent analysis to confirm CrowdStrike.
1 GhostBruh420 2018-08-18
It is independent analysis confirming CrowdStrike. That's what you don't get. And none of this changes the fact that it's not a well known or contentious subject on reddit. You've been smoking meth all day if you seriously believe the phrase was ever shadow banned.
1 whacko_jacko 2018-08-18
No, it's not independent analysis. They are saying they come to the same conclusions as CrowdStrike while their evidence essentially boils down to "we are trusting CrowdStrike on this one".
It is a well-known and contentious subject on Reddit. You are not well-informed on this subject. This very debate has happened hundreds of times on Reddit.
The phrase was shadowbanned. I can still confirm that my original comment containing that phrase is shadowbanned. Shadowbanning is not some crazy conspiracy concept, it's a widely used tool on multiple platforms.
Insults and ridicule will get you nowhere with me. This discussion has nothing to do with whether or not someone supports Trump. It is entirely about evidence supporting the allegation of Russian hacking of the DNC.
1 GhostBruh420 2018-08-18
If you support Trump then you clearly have no right to talk about what is and what is not true. His administration has argued repeatedly that facts don't matter.
Simply put: your support of Trump disqualifies you from any conversation dealing with what is true or not since it shows that you don't care. You have an open disregard for factuality. How can you possibly have any discussion in good faith?
1 CelineHagbard 2018-08-18
Removed. Rule 4.
1 WinterEcho 2018-08-18
Can't go against the narrative, they're just looking out for you after you've had too much to think.
1 Master_Order 2018-08-18
We can argue semantics, but I think it is reasonable to infer that when someone uses the language I did, the individuality you expressed is supposed.
1 dsk123 2018-08-18
Wait, you say “/r/conspiracy isn’t a we” but your first comment says “We don’t care how they do it on that sub.”