For fresh eyes to this sort of malarkey, Consensus Cracking Sock Puppeteering is where an individual - or a group of individuals who collaborate outside the walls of Voat - come here to manufacture a consensus view among the users here
where this differs from honest persuasion and argumentation is in the Fraudulent Fabrication of agreement or disagreement around certain topics
I'd like you all to cast a cynical eye over this conversational thread here
https://voat.co/v/GreatAwakening/3791132/23591966
me paraphrasing for emphasis:
1 "I have something very important to say"
2 "oh wow you seems very important, just by your user name alone i can tell you have gems of wisdom to impart. tell me more, oh authoritative one"
3 "yes they are important, listen to them"
1 "I'm glad you asked, blah blah "
It's pretty obvious to experienced eyes that this is one person using a sock puppet larp to manufacture a conversation - or possibly two people with a prior agreement to construct a discussion
This sock puppetteering goes the other way, too. If you were to post something important and valuable that fucks up their disinformation campaign, one jerk will jump on 5 sock puppet accounts to all shitpost under your contribution, in order to make people think in herd mentality that your view is unpopular, therefore musnt be credible
these people are very organised with Malice Aforethought. 3 years ago they made dozens and dozens of sleeper accounts that spring to life after significant dormancy to suddenly be very assertive and opinionated
NOTES for users :
- Sock Puppeteering is a bannable offence
- Consensus Cracking is a bannable offence
- The topic of Racine Wisconsin is not off limits . But if you are going to post about it, just post like a normal fucking person with relevant links and make your points clear and not wanky cryptics.
and no, Q's cryptics arent wanky. They are a necessity bc team Q needs plausible deniability. You dont. You need plausible Credibility
Edit: and before anyone else doubts me spare yourself the Faggotry Aforethought by seeing how they have admitted their consensus cracking in the comments below by freshly created user @consesuscracker
view the rest of the comments →
alphazebra ago
I’ve noticed that too. Then a bunch of supporting comments are names I’ve never seen before. Us regulars are pretty familiar with the commenters and poster handles.
consensuscracker2 ago
That's because they instantly ban anyone and everyone talking about this topic so they have to make new accounts. Look at ALL of the recent posts by my now banned account @ababcb and use your own common sense to decide whether or not I was a "sock puppet" account. That account had over 1600+ submission contribution points and over 1100 upvotes. That is not the hallmark of a sockpuppet account.
MolochHunter ago
you still think this is about racine, and not your retarded disingenuous conduct
says something about your faculties
consensuscracker3 ago
obviously that's not true. nobody is permitted to talk about Racine and this is proven by the fact that my posts are full of well sourced information that you clearly don't want anyone to see. like this.