Posted automatically (#21479) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here.
Posted automatically (#21468) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here.
Posted automatically (#21375) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here.
Posted automatically (#21369) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here.
I've seen you post a lot on folkishasatru, so I don't really think you're a shill (pineal gland article aside). But here's his case against you as I see it. Apparently the odd pattern he was seeing was users posting links to domains shortly after those domains were created. What's more, the domains he lists appears to be short-lived, with many of them 404ed by now.
You reposted this article, linking to a domain that was very new. However, this was 9 days after someone posted 9 days earlier in worldnews, so it seems likely you saw the article on Voat and then put it into a sub you thought it belonged in. https://voat.co/v/BloodOfEurope/2919609
You posted a link to a domain that had been registered just 12 hours before your post and it was apparently the first time it had been posted to voat. https://voat.co/v/BloodOfEurope/2913709
To me, the ludinfo24.com post doesn't seem like very good evidence since someone already posted it to voat, and you likely got it from them. If we throw that out, then there really aren't 2 questionable posts like @madworld says, just the one.
Do you remember how you found the scandallinfo.com "my hometown is gone" article? Might shed some light on what's happening.
Being a suspect doesn't mean that you are guilty of anything, it just means that we are to be more careful when dealing with you or when checking what you post.
its close to the sentiment of some. i'm fucking pissed off about people claiming shit about me that aint true
On our previous interaction I helped you prove that you had no knowledge of the suspicious nature of your post. You still have issues understanding it
The fact that you didn't have the intention doesn't mean that you didn't use the suspicious site.
It just means that you were collateral damage of other desinforming on this community. But it does show that you have gain knowledge about the future posts of the source you used.
Let me use a comparison, please, by all means don't overreact and think objectively:
You are driving a car, and suddenly you look at your phone and did not notice that a person was jaywalking and crossing the street. You run over the person and the person dies.
The person is guilty of jaywalking and endangering himself/herself and others by his/her reckless behaviour.
You didn't have the intention to run him/her over, but you still did and you killed him because you looked at your phone. You are just guilty of committing involuntary manslaughter. You didn't have the intention to kill that person, but because of your negligence you ended up killing the jaywalker.
Now you could argue it was an accident, which in fact we all can agree it was, but you still run that person over. Hence you are guilty of killing that person.
Let's translate this to your current situation:
You driving the car is you posting what you posted.
The jaywalker is the post that you used to do yours.
You looking at your phone is your negligent behavior of not making sure whether the link was suspicious or not.
You not having the intention to not kill the jaywalker is the same as you not having the intention to potentially harm Voat.
It still happened!
So you are guilty of using a suspicious link, without knowing so,but you didn't research about it. However we now know you didn't have the intention of potentially harming Voat.
And because of that we would hope you would stop using suspicious sites in the future.
Based on some of the discussion I've read I don't think anyone is jumping to any conclusions about guilt. You're behaving as if you're under attack, which ironically might lead some to decide you are worthy of suspicion.
Well, just because you're not ok with being doubted, does that mean the rest of us should be ok with fake news being posted to voat? Since you actually posted some of it, you might be in a unique position to help us figure out what's really going on here. Like @heygeorge suggested before you bit his head off, these fake news sites could be promoting themselves with ads, etc.
Posted automatically (#21488) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here.
The only person arguing anything has been you. @MadWorld presented a wealth of data. I asked you a question. You didn’t answer for days and instead behaved like a child.
Now that you’ve answered at all, it’s all very vague. You seem to have no care or interest in the fact that underhanded political interests are manipulating you.
SearchVoatBot ago
This submission was linked from this v/ProtectVoat comment by @MadWorld.
Posted automatically (#21479) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here.
AndrewBlazeIt ago
Voat tip - This post will not have the effect you desire.
WickerMan ago
Are you an old lady? Everyday there is some kind of faggotry drama that follows you around.
MadWorld ago
Please check my crosslink response, thank!
theoldones ago
this is the most fucking concrete part of it and you still cant even not be unclear.
what is the focus you just accused me of, name it, stop being coy
SearchVoatBot ago
This comment was linked from this v/ProtectVoat comment by @MadWorld.
Posted automatically (#21468) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here.
SearchVoatBot ago
This submission was linked from this v/ProtectVoat comment by @MadWorld.
Posted automatically (#21375) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here.
SearchVoatBot ago
This submission was linked from this v/ProtectVoat comment by @MadWorld.
Posted automatically (#21369) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here.
Its_over_9000 ago
I've seen you post a lot on folkishasatru, so I don't really think you're a shill (pineal gland article aside). But here's his case against you as I see it. Apparently the odd pattern he was seeing was users posting links to domains shortly after those domains were created. What's more, the domains he lists appears to be short-lived, with many of them 404ed by now.
To me, the ludinfo24.com post doesn't seem like very good evidence since someone already posted it to voat, and you likely got it from them. If we throw that out, then there really aren't 2 questionable posts like @madworld says, just the one.
Do you remember how you found the scandallinfo.com "my hometown is gone" article? Might shed some light on what's happening.
theoldones ago
it was in the new queue. think carefully before accusing me of having some knowledge of anything from where it came from
Its_over_9000 ago
did it seem like i was going to accuse you of that?
theoldones ago
https://voat.co/v/ProtectVoat/3005178/16467450
its close to the sentiment of some. i'm fucking pissed off about people claiming shit about me that aint true
sguevar ago
@theoldones
On our previous interaction I helped you prove that you had no knowledge of the suspicious nature of your post. You still have issues understanding it
The fact that you didn't have the intention doesn't mean that you didn't use the suspicious site.
It just means that you were collateral damage of other desinforming on this community. But it does show that you have gain knowledge about the future posts of the source you used.
Let me use a comparison, please, by all means don't overreact and think objectively:
You are driving a car, and suddenly you look at your phone and did not notice that a person was jaywalking and crossing the street. You run over the person and the person dies.
The person is guilty of jaywalking and endangering himself/herself and others by his/her reckless behaviour.
You didn't have the intention to run him/her over, but you still did and you killed him because you looked at your phone. You are just guilty of committing involuntary manslaughter. You didn't have the intention to kill that person, but because of your negligence you ended up killing the jaywalker.
Now you could argue it was an accident, which in fact we all can agree it was, but you still run that person over. Hence you are guilty of killing that person.
Let's translate this to your current situation:
You driving the car is you posting what you posted. The jaywalker is the post that you used to do yours. You looking at your phone is your negligent behavior of not making sure whether the link was suspicious or not. You not having the intention to not kill the jaywalker is the same as you not having the intention to potentially harm Voat.
It still happened!
So you are guilty of using a suspicious link, without knowing so,but you didn't research about it. However we now know you didn't have the intention of potentially harming Voat.
And because of that we would hope you would stop using suspicious sites in the future.
Its_over_9000 ago
Based on some of the discussion I've read I don't think anyone is jumping to any conclusions about guilt. You're behaving as if you're under attack, which ironically might lead some to decide you are worthy of suspicion.
theoldones ago
perhaps i just dont take kindly to having my fucking integrity being called into question. no reason why i should be.
Its_over_9000 ago
Well, just because you're not ok with being doubted, does that mean the rest of us should be ok with fake news being posted to voat? Since you actually posted some of it, you might be in a unique position to help us figure out what's really going on here. Like @heygeorge suggested before you bit his head off, these fake news sites could be promoting themselves with ads, etc.
theoldones ago
it was in the v/news feed
it looked interesting
i posted it
end of story
post lays there for so long i forget i put it there
i get pinged out of the blue like some participant in a conspiracy
SearchVoatBot ago
This comment was linked from this v/ProtectVoat comment by @MadWorld.
Posted automatically (#21488) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here.
Its_over_9000 ago
well, you repost some fake shit I guess that can happen
plus there was at least one questionable thing you posted that wasn't anywhere else on voat
https://searchvoat.co/?t=&s=&u=&d=scandallinfo.com&df=&dt=&nsfw=off
theoldones ago
Its_over_9000 ago
alright, well there's a clue. maybe some of it's coming from minds.
theoldones ago
it took far too much fucking argument to get to learning this then.
heygeorge ago
The only person arguing anything has been you. @MadWorld presented a wealth of data. I asked you a question. You didn’t answer for days and instead behaved like a child.
Now that you’ve answered at all, it’s all very vague. You seem to have no care or interest in the fact that underhanded political interests are manipulating you.
MadWorld ago
Well there is my response to him https://voat.co/v/ProtectVoat/3001782/16465608. Thanks for the ping.
Edit: to be clear, the first hit was only notable, and not actually what flagged him.