PV Mod so cucked by the troll sanctuary he helps maintain, he can't have public discussion on PV!
@kevdude @sguevar @MadWorld @Cynabuns @Puttitout @PeaceSeeker @Sandhog @argosciv @crensch @Dismember @Vindicator @Molochhunter @virge @cynoclast @Rainy-Day-Dream
Intro to cucked mod's private peace offering PV powwow, which is, as is usually the case within the SBBH culture of PV, another way of saying "how do we not get our asses handed to us for being inept and ineffectual without becoming targets of the same shitposting trolls we enlist to harass others?
"
I have taken this couple of days to think about the current state of affairs on Voat. And I truly believe still that we can only achieve the healing together and not polarizing the site anymore.
Most of us, if not all, we dislike what the faggot Zyklon_B has been doing but I certainly dislike more what happen after that for I kept trying to avoid it. However, I understand the motivations that lead to that point and hence I am trying to find a better way for us to work it together.
"we dislike what the faggot Zyklon_B has been doing"
"BUT"
always the qualifying 'but'
While Pizzagate researchers criticize comedians who make a living making jokes about child and infant rape, PV mods hide in the shadows when a shitposter, after a months long spree of "free speech to harass, threaten and 'pseudo dox'", continues unabated, endorsing the posting of graphic loli violent rape of mother and infant while claiming that is what should be done to the 'mentally ill woman and former mod' because shitposters can't take ANY restriction, like having to abide by rules of a sub they had free rein to shit up for months (with the help of PV intervention). Eventually, PV elite talking heads, who are politically in opposition to GA, could hardly bring themselves to continue pretending that they honestly cared about the situation and were happy that the mod had stepped down and hoped the subverse itself would likewise just go away.
Now after having maintain the shitposters sanctuary of PV, the mod who wrote the "peaceful resolution" invitation quoted above (and who just a day ago was in SBBH having farts and giggles with some shitposters), expects all those opposed to free rein of malignant shitposting, should submit to creating even more bureaucratic red tape of PV, which, if the remainder of the pm is any indication, is just so much empty talk and naval gazing platitudes over their existing talk and naval gazing.
view the rest of the comments →
MadWorld ago
I strongly dislike the part where it said to sell it to Voat's userbase.
sguevar ago
If you had some feedback to give about the wording why didn't you do it before?
It is obvious that some of the people here will attempt to misrepresent what I was trying to accomplish but the fact that you didn't reply to the pm nor pinged me when this thread was made shows that you are now taking part of these people trying to discredit everything is said by misrepresentations and taking comments out of context.
Could you explain why is it that you have joined this effort from them to attack me?
Do you support their attempts at doxxing another user that never published her address here on Voat before?
Do you support that they use the same methods their counterparts used so they can shut them down?
Is it dialogue too hard to have?
MadWorld ago
I strongly dislike discussions in secrecy when it comes to how Voat or its UA should be changed.
I am not part of the group that may have tried to discredit you. I ran some numbers on my own. You unnecessarily sent me your IRL info about yourself. I took that as a red flag. Maybe you tried to get close to me, but I do not like to one day be responsible for the exposure of your identity. I also took the opportunity to look up your account history and found that your timezone did not seem to agree with your location.
Of course not, I am against doxxing of other users, aside from self-doxxing. Do you ever look at zyklone_b's all-is-art doxxing attempts while fixated your target on ScrubbinOutOldBlue's submissions??
I disagree with whoever is currently using this method to make a point, which you seem to have failed to understand. I do not have much faith in PV's objectivity or supposedly unbiased interests in protecting Voat.
Crosslink
I have not look up or search on searchvoat for this specific address. Some doxxes are done on images, which are not really searchable.
I believe I have replied to your messages, with the exception of the recent ones, which were about the group discussion. The most recent one was just about how are you doing.
I do not know if you have or have not had any alts before. Some people are too smart to change to different writing styles. Unless the user is caught or has shown reasonable proof, I believe everyone deserves the benefit of doubt.
For the record, I do not have issue of someone using their alts, if they are not used for some ill intended purposes. However, I am strongly against the use of alts for things such astroturfing and consensus cracking. Take TWOS for example, using alt and main account within the same conversation to convince someone to verify certain things that he was supposed to prove.
Satisfied now? I sometimes go by a week or two, without checking my Voat account.
sguevar ago
This was done to make sure that we could reach a common ground and it could be proposed to Voat's user base as a way to achieve a closure on this whole matter. However when the post was made public you provided no feedback at all. Instead you proceeded to comment on a post that was created to slander me to which the OP of this post pinged me by mistake and then remove the ping after I called him out on his slander.
I did it because I trusted you and given the fact that this group keeps on attacking my character as a way to pursue their own agenda you as someone that can be objective on the matter can show them otherwise.
No, I called for your objectivity with proof showing who I am and that I do not use alts. And you are not responsible for such thing. The one responsible is me and me alone. The only thing I did was provide you with concrete evidence of what I have said in the past proving not only my consistency but also my honesty.
Depends on what you are looking. For example when I am at work I am connected with a VPN when I am at home or on my phone it does show my location. So for example if you are looking at my account now, my location shows probably SF, CA.
Which I have confirmed also in the past and you are quite a good researcher to find that prove yourself. You are falling by the convenience of the same paranoia this group is engaging against me. This is why I sent you my info.
Of course I did, however I do not support engaging on the same tactics as your enemies to "win" your battle but losing the war and compromising Voat's integrity on the process, which this group managed to do in one single night.
Fair enough. My commitment was to try to change that perspective on Voat. I understand why many don't believe in it, but many applied guilty by association just because several of you don't like @kevdude (anymore or at all) instead of looking at what my post history shows, and the intent that I was aiming for.
Good because it is what I have pushed for a while here and haven't received such an opened mind and eye from the part of this group that instead in engaging in dialogue proceeded by attempting to character assassinate anyone that they saw were standing between what they wanted to accomplish and Voat.
Well I am against using alts in a whole because it opens the door to dishonest behaviors much like the oldblue alt engaged on as well as the type of behavior you are describing above. However that is the decision of the individual. How would I tell others to not use alts if I was using them myself? That would be hypocritical to say the least.
I am beyond that even at the expense of a poor effort to character assassinate me and try to attack my credibility.
Now as stated before, had you had any feedback, you could have very well provided feedback on the open discussions of the post that I made in private to both of the parties that were implicated in the whole matter. Because after all this parties were discussing situations and resolutions that would have implicated and affected all Voat's user base.
You will have to excuse my dislike on how you proceeded in that comment of yours. But I will not hide it. Does that makes me trust you less? No but I certainly disliked it because in the end, whether you see it or not, you put coal to burn on their fire.
No not really. (Not regarding you) I am not satisfied with how Voat's current state of affairs is and will not be untill we reach dialogue to reach an agreement and move past from this that you can agree with me has gone way too far and for way too long.