Tired of the drama? You can block BOTH users and subverses! (SBBHTantrums)

submitted ago by Crensch

@ExpertShitposter writes:

Zyklon has been sperging out with pings and threats against kids. Everyone called him out on his shit. However, anyone can block him.

Why look at that! He's right! Honestly, I cannot argue with this. Well done!

Crensch has engaged in reddit style moderation with pre-emptive bans based on association. No one can stop his bans.

Well, let's see how this pans out in a nice little Voat graphic:

Can be blocked
Zyklon_b ✅
Crensch ✅

REEEE U CAN BLOCK ZYKLON REEEEE -> You can block Crensch and GA, too.

Or crensch heavy handed banning behavior makes it normal for everyone to ban anyone in defense against "shills".

All you lazy fucks had to do was turn on your weakest link with the fervor you turn on mods that don't toe the line you draw for them. But he wasn't your weakest link, was he? He was an art project - like the "art" students in the towers before (((9-11))).

Keep in mind, when 2020 comes around, r/the_donald will probably finally get banned from reddit for real this time, and we will potentially become minorities compared to fresh reddit refugees. And this time they won't have a home to run back to, and won't be BTFO'd as easily as last time.

They won't be BTFO'd at all. I'll create a subverse for them and run roughshod all over anyone still stuck in the bubble of (((free speech))) as you know it.

Most people agree that both of them are wrong, but who is a bigger threat to voat?

Do everyone here a favor and define this "voat" that I'm a threat to. I'd love to have that discussion soon.

@Trigglypuff writes:

Goats used to pride themselves on having thick skins.

But also wrote:

That’s when it got personal tbh.

Where's that thick skin? You took the revealing of a PM you ADMITTED made you sound like a loon, and plastered images she's previously removed from her other accounts all over a custom-built subverse. YOU think you have room to talk about thick skin? Or about women being emotional? Or how there are NO women on the internet?

It made you sound like a loon? Yeah, it did. So much so that I had the kind of cognitive dissonance you get when an AXIOM of your life is brought into question by something so solid you cannot dismiss it.

YOU did that. I don't even know how someone can manage to look so much like a goddamned shill/liar even when they are and are low-IQ. It was mind-boggling. It tripped nearly every red flag my mind could be bothered to muster through the state of shock it was in.

Even your re-reading of it got you to that conclusion; and now the (((emotional woman))) of voat has to go around talking shit about other women to feel better about herself.

We were fucking iconoclasts.

We were... in our bubble of internal logic. Now I am, outside of your bubble of logic.

All I see now is faggotry over beliefs

Beliefs like:

Hence Crensch is more dangerous to free speech

That's a belief, is it not?

What about this one:

q is definitely a Jewish lie

... which has been used to excuse any number of attacks on Q people, who have, to their credit, laughed with you almost invariably, to the point of referring to themselves as "qtards" now and then?

Consistency.

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

Crensch ago

Offending people is fun. If these weak-minded people weren't around, it wouldn't be as fun.

Edit: Just imagine getting upset or even pissed off because of words on a screen. How do these people survive to adulthood?

Hey, @Landwhaleonline, are you going to apply that equally? Now that @Trigglypuff is everything you commented against?

You're not, are you? (((Protected class))) must defend (((protected class))).

Hey, @Trigglypuff, when you responded to:

You used your last pussy pass.

With:

Na, I had nine. Think I’m down to eight.

What was the real count?

Hey, @sguevar, when you said:

And when they are unable to argue that they result into tantrums, ad hominems, virtue signalling and character assassination to put themselves above those of us that defend still the principle of Freedom of Speech.

Who, exactly, were you talking about? I know it wasn't those above. Seems a bit hypocritical to me.

Crensch is more dangerous

-Trigglypuff .

crensch is more dangerous

-ExpertShitposter

.

Crensch is more dangerous in a strawpoll, too.

Giggling like a fucking schoolgirl over this. HEY GUIZE! IT"S ALL SATIRE AND ART AND SHITPOSTS AND WAI U TAEK INNERNETZ SRSLY?

Landwhaleonline ago

Finding offense in mere words is weak-minded regardless.

Crensch ago

So are you going to apply it to trigglypuff and sbbh in general? They sure got their panties in a wad over quite a few "mere words".

sguevar ago

Well yesterday I had a discussion with a couple of users including yout Mod molochhunter that starting saying that i was enabling what happen to srayzie and that i was basically an accomplice. So I was refering to them. I can look examples if you like. Do you have any other doubts about my intentions?

Crensch ago

I don't really care about your intentions. I care about consistency. Will you apply your words to those above that did literally everything you mentioned?

sguevar ago

You can dig me up. You van check about my consistency man. You are one of the 3 people here at Voat that have my info. I have nothing to hide to you.

I stay true to what I want. And that is that we work together. I honestly believe we need you here.

Crensch ago

You are one of the 3 people here at Voat that have my info.

I don't have any of your info. If you sent it to me, it's lost to some page of my PMs I'll not be accessing anytime soon.

I stay true to what I want. And that is that we work together. I honestly believe we need you here.

You do, because I'm the only one that can beat me.

So since my question seemed to evade you, I'll re-ask it. You said:

And when they are unable to argue that they result into tantrums, ad hominems, virtue signalling and character assassination to put themselves above those of us that defend still the principle of Freedom of Speech.

Who is "us" that is supposedly aside from all those non-virtues you listed? Are the users above not part of "us" because of their use of those things?

sguevar ago

Us that argue that there was no doxxing. I wans't referring to any specific user perse. It was a generic us.

It also includes everyone that will not compromise on the idea of free speech out of convenience.

Crensch ago

Us that argue that there was no doxxing. I wans't referring to any specific user perse. It was a generic us.

Generic. Us.

So when your own side does those things, but you attack the other side for doing those things, does that make you a hypocrite?

sguevar ago

So when your own side does those things, but you attack the other side for doing those things, does that make you a hypocrite?

Not really. It just shows what I think of resorting into such statements to attack the character of a person instead of actually attacking the argument. But I am not about censoring those comments. They have a right to say them.

I was called an accomplice yesterday and I call the accuser full of shit because he wasn't addressing what I said and he wasn't doing anything to proof that he was denouncing the situation. While myself I stood against ZB all the way and am trying to initiate a conversation so we can prevent this from happening again.

Before when I said we need you it wasn't to feed your pride as it seems you have taken it. I am not about trying to defeat you. i am trying to make you see that I am not against you and that we all at PV want to fix this. Even if to you that is not the case.

What would make me a hypocrite is saying that they are full of shit without justifying why. Not because I felt offended. But because they couldn't proof with concrete evidence what they wanted to denounce and then proceeded to attacking me conflating my defense of Voat with me defending ZB.

Crensch ago

Not really. It just shows what I think of resorting into such statements to attack the character of a person instead of actually attacking the argument.

Your language barrier is becoming burdensome. It actually does EXACTLY that.

I was called an accomplice yesterday and I call the accuser full of shit because he wasn't addressing what I said and he wasn't doing anything to proof that he was denouncing the situation. While myself I stood against ZB all the way and am trying to initiate a conversation so we can prevent this from happening again.

You're plugged in to a narrative that is crumbling under the weight of reality.

Before when I said we need you it wasn't to feed your pride as it seems you have taken it.

I know how you meant it. And I know what you all aren't admitting to yourselves. Feed my pride? I pointed it out because you seemed to not have noticed.

I am not about trying to defeat you. i am trying to make you see that I am not against you and that we all at PV want to fix this. Even if to you that is not the case.

You can't fix this. I can.

What would make me a hypocrite is saying that they are full of shit without justifying why. Not because I felt offended. But because they couldn't proof with concrete evidence what they wanted to denounce and then proceeded to attacking me conflating my defense of Voat with me defending ZB.

You claimed the group that engaged in those tactics you intended to paint others with. It does, in fact, make you a hypocrite. "us"

sguevar ago

Your language barrier is becoming burdensome. It actually does EXACTLY that.

Well you will have to be patient with me.

You're plugged in to a narrative that is crumbling under the weight of reality.

No, that is your perspective of things because you have become quite cynical about the whole situation as in the first place it didn't go like you wanted. But I will put all my effort in this after, only time can really show us the results of it. But I admit I can't do this alone and the insight if all is quite needed.

I know how you meant it. And I know what you all aren't admitting to yourselves. Feed my pride? I pointed it out because you seemed to not have noticed.

Good then you will see more of my consistency. As you requested before.

You can't fix this. I can.

No, Voat is not a 1 person deal. The insight of all is needed in this conversation. I already expressed why I wanted yours but you decided to be out of it. You are quite good at making analysis on people and I am certain, that you can't find something that makes you doubt of what I have said before. You want to for the sake of your hit pieces. But as stated man I will stand in the meddle. Whether you care or not is besides the point. The conversation needs to happen, with our without you. That is your choice.

You claimed the group that engaged in those tactics you intended to paint others with. It does, in fact, make you a hypocrite. "us"

No it doesn't. I wasn't about to post all of the examples of the people that attacked me on my comment. You are trying to use that out the context that it was meant so it fits your narrative but again, you are certainly not taking me a part. You can try as hard as you want. You won't achieve it. If you want to look at it as a challenge so be it, I am simply stating a fact: you can't defeat what isn't fighting against you. And I am not fighting against you.

So I leave it to you.

However as promised I will find the users that want to work on it and hopefully after you read it you would like to put your thoughts on it.

Have a good night man going to go to my wife now. Take it easy and try to sleep over what i have said.

Crensch ago

But as stated man I will stand in the meddle.

The eternal absurdity of the centrist. False middle ground fallacy. The middle moves constantly, and one side can actually be right.

No it doesn't. I wasn't about to post all of the examples of the people that attacked me on my comment.

You don't even see how your syntax does, in fact, make your vices an attack on others while 'us' includes those that participate in those vices.

I am simply stating a fact: you can't defeat what isn't fighting against you. And I am not fighting against you.

Said every pacifist ever.