@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.
view the rest of the comments →
heygeorge ago
To summarize:
If someone is sperging and you don’t care for it, you can block them.
If a mod banned you from a subverse for whatever reason, you can block yourself from seeing the posts you are not allowed to participate in.
These unequal ideas are presented as equivalent.
Triggly did not like that srayz shared a private conversation. This means she is an emotional woman.
You, Crensch, are no longer an iconoclast [n. A person who attacks cherished beliefs or institutions]
Some Qtards are good people.
Am I close? I think I’m close.
RockmanRaiden ago
I think 1 and 2 are equal presented with the context of the platform itself. At the discretion of proper modship, they should be able to ban anyone who's a disturbance to the public space. Like a pervert exposing himself in public. They would be removed from wherever they are.
heygeorge ago
They are objectively not the same. 1 puts the power in the hands of the individual. 2 puts the power in the hands of a gatekeeper.
They (1&2) also serve different purposes, though there is overlap.
How did you land at Voat? I am not here because I was banned from elsewhere. But I wager the case majority are.
RockmanRaiden ago
I wandered here from the r/conspiracy subreddit as McBitches.
heygeorge ago
So you weren’t censored. I have to imagine OP was censored elsewhere. But I forget his origin story after all this time.