In a sub called "pizzagate" about discovering things about the pedophile ring, submissions not about the pedophile ring are being removed.
Thanks to the many parties wanting to COINTEL this shit under the rug, leaving it to votes really won't work like it does here in PV or other places where $people$ have no interest. (see the recent posts here about the bot-voted content)
Consider this sub to be more like /v/fatpeoplehate or /v/niggers. As long as the issue isn't "ad hominem" because a mod is butthurt, we don't have a problem.
I'm not taking part in the sub at all, but if shit is irrelevant then let the up/down votes sort it out. Why would people upvoat in the first place? The reason heavy handed mod activity is opposed is not because we don't believe the reasons given for deleting shit, but because it isn't the mods duty or right to control the narrative. The community decides.
I don't agree with the comparison to hate cj subs at all, because pg claims to be conducting an investigation. An honest investigation goes where the evidence points. The community should be allowed to collaborate and have discussions about where the evidence is pointing without being squashed by any personal bias from a mod. To say "it will be fruitless to discuss whether there is a racial or religious component" is not legitimate grounds to ban those discussions. Besides, there are plenty of examples of people engaging in horrific crimes while seeking out professions and affiliations that let them wear a mantle of morality that they feel protects them from suspicion and prosecution. (see: Catholic church ). What if the mod was deleting posts based on the politics of the accused?
view the rest of the comments →
Crensch ago
In a sub called "pizzagate" about discovering things about the pedophile ring, submissions not about the pedophile ring are being removed.
Thanks to the many parties wanting to COINTEL this shit under the rug, leaving it to votes really won't work like it does here in PV or other places where $people$ have no interest. (see the recent posts here about the bot-voted content)
Consider this sub to be more like /v/fatpeoplehate or /v/niggers. As long as the issue isn't "ad hominem" because a mod is butthurt, we don't have a problem.
https://archive.is/ROL7Z
Deletions in order:
Given this, I'm more than happy to have the pizzagate mods to remove posts as long as they really are this level of shit-tier.
Let's be honest, if it's not about the investigation into pizzagate, it doesn't belong there.
PM_ME_UR_NOODZ ago
I'm not taking part in the sub at all, but if shit is irrelevant then let the up/down votes sort it out. Why would people upvoat in the first place? The reason heavy handed mod activity is opposed is not because we don't believe the reasons given for deleting shit, but because it isn't the mods duty or right to control the narrative. The community decides.
I don't agree with the comparison to hate cj subs at all, because pg claims to be conducting an investigation. An honest investigation goes where the evidence points. The community should be allowed to collaborate and have discussions about where the evidence is pointing without being squashed by any personal bias from a mod. To say "it will be fruitless to discuss whether there is a racial or religious component" is not legitimate grounds to ban those discussions. Besides, there are plenty of examples of people engaging in horrific crimes while seeking out professions and affiliations that let them wear a mantle of morality that they feel protects them from suspicion and prosecution. (see: Catholic church ). What if the mod was deleting posts based on the politics of the accused?