I'll be leaving the info/disinfo argument alone for the time being, until I have a better grasp of the facts.
And I'll no longer entertain poorly sourced or formatted complaints/accusations against narratives or other users. While neither side was entirely wrong, neither side appears to be entirely correct, either.
Thank you for your time and effort up to this point, and apologies for my lack of understanding of all the nuances going on here.
view the rest of the comments →
DickTick ago
But hey, if we want to let this place, one of the last good holdouts where at least a decent portion of our members aren't actually insane, turn into a complete shitstorm of pure speculation delivered as absolute fact with 0 real sources or proof...
Then by all means, I suppose.
amarQ144 ago
I'm not sure I'm a member...never got the card. That said, you contradict yourself from one comment to the next. You can up vote, you can down vote...and you can even block her if you can't find the mental fortitude to not be compelled to read everything she posts, or to have to fact check it. As far as any claim to be defending the other retards here who lack discernment,go fuck yourself...we don't need defending!
Qdini ago
Really? That's how you behave? You sound like GodsAngell.
amarQ144 ago
It's the whole "free speech" thing, ya kno? It sounds good, but never takes long til some ass hat pops off with some stupid shit and yer panties are all back in a wad!
Qdini ago
Free speech is one thing, keep it civil at least.
amarQ144 ago
Ditto that. The mods here really need to evaluate these posts and maybe give them a civility as well as a credibility score. YO MODS...WHERE YAT?
BadPenny ago
It isn't free speech when you tell people what to say or believe. Stop it.
Crensch ago
You've all done fine up to this point. If her work is real, great. If not, that sucks.
Not saying nothing will be done ever, but I am saying my involvement is premature.
grace8 ago
I'm confused. Your title says there is more to this than u thought. What else? Did I miss something? Why do the mods always back off on u/ga?
Last I heard was the comment from QRV saying this person had been an anti Trumper shill who quickly earned a ban on QRV and then came to GA and was suddenly pro trump and posting disinfo, incendiary posts and basically controlled op. They use alt accounts like a shill, attack when corrected like a shill.
Simple to confirm this QRV report by looking at early posting. Conversion from hating Trump and Q doesn't happen overnight. I was letting this lie, but as a result of your post this new information came out from QRV that makes it seem like she is not just a problem but intentionally manipulating users here. For months it was damaging our credibility with false hope through false claims of its happening every 2 weeks long after most of us had learned the lesson not to date fag. She has posted more than once that Trump has gone over to the dark side and cant be trusted anymore, and posted inciting people to riot.
She (I have a hard time believing this is a woman!) sour most successful shill and should be ignored. If using alts, attacking anyone who disagrees doesn't tell us that, the quick big upvotes should. How many people has she driven away through false hope being proved false over and over again. We all know how demoralizing that is.
Qdini ago
Here's one of the examples GodsAngell cc'd me on that the Mod was duped by:
She claimed that Bill Barr was at Assange's arrest in London. The video doesn't look like him and I told her so. The mod took it at face value. Watch the video.
https://voat.co/v/GreatAwakening/31570
Barr started as AG on Feb 15th. Assange was arrested on April 11. Barr was tied up with all of the Mueller investigation when he first got into office. No way he was in London to give a thumbs up to Assange. And the image isn't him unless he suddenly lost 50 pounds, died his hair and was 20 years younger.
grace8 ago
We all make mistakes but God'sangel's ratio of mistake to accuracy is too high. What bothers me is the posts that get 350 upvotes in 4 hours. After months of hounding her to do better,I can put up with someone who is inaccurate due to personal failings. The suspicion that this person is not faulty but a shill is what is difficult to swallow. QRV comment saying gods was an anti-trumper shill who they quickly banned only to see them recreate themselves on v/GA as pro-trump overnight. I am in the middle of remodeling so no time to research early posts and comments on their profile to verify. Switching like that overnight right after a ban would convince me they are a Troll rather than unbalanced, damaged vet.
Qdini ago
The problem is that she claimed it was true to the Mod and he believed her.
grace8 ago
The mods have always shied away from getting involved with god's. I don't know if it is something about that user or if they do not want to judge content. U saw the 180 Crensch did.
The mods have made this a safe space. They have used the ban hammer so much that Protect voat screamed for his head. I wasn't sure Crensch would survive, but he has and things have calmed down. We have so many less trolls sand shills than we did when Strayzie ran things. She was compromised by her attempt to befriend trolls and giving them her personal contact info. Crensch is much stronger since they have nothing on him.
Crensch ago
It's nothing about that user.
It's about my getting involved necessarily meaning that I will need to get involved in more of it, and we'll wind up having a standard for evidence so high that most would refuse to post anything.