I do understand the dangers and that's the only reason I'm speaking up now. It seems every time we have a good informative sticky it gets removed by a mod for bs. Why does the rules thread need to be a sticky?
No, I'm bitching about mods sliding the most informative thread for a circle jerk about rules. Do that shit in the sidebar. You and everyone in that thread know how to find it, new users aren't going to spend much time searching for information before they dismiss us as "fake news".
My point is you could easily get this done without removing the sticky with all the information for noob's. Obviously that not going to happen for some reason.
I understand that, new people lurking for information probably wont. I went over this in the post you replied to. Why can't you leave the thread with all the information and use the sidebar for all your "rules" threads?
Nothing in particular, atm. I'm mostly lurking, putting in 2cents here and there, upvoting. Just not used to this format. I wasn't much on Reddit either, I couldn't figure it out. Fb'er here, primarily. Until pizzagate. lol
I had a bunch of other links in the post but it wouldn't let me put it up until I took out the one from DailyMotion. Responded with "Post contains a banned domain" Didn't know if anyone knew what was up with that.
Or you could just be wrong. You can call your opinion fact till you go blue in the face but it's still an opinion. Regardless of the motivation of the attacks it's still detrimental to the sub anyway so your point is redundant at best. I'm not involved in the investigation or this sub really at all by the way. I just poked my head in to upvote a few people yesterday(that was all in the name of fun right?), so any further argument about this doesn't really interest me.
All you want to do is rile people up that are working on a serious investigation. We don't need trolls here. Hence; you should be banned form this sub.
I want to tell people like you who bitch and whine and cry about rule violations while they violate those exact same rules that they are incompetent fucks who should stfu and go finger their assholes in private.
Fucking faggot cry baby idiot piece of shit concern troll.
Actually i like calling incompetent faggots like you faggots because incompetent faggots like you think it builds up your victim cred because you're incompetent faggots.
Thank you, your explanation makes a lot of sense, I can see how the given post can be made relevant. The comment thing also makes sense now, I misinterpreted that remark. All is clear, I'll get started with checking janitor activity as soon as I can, and will report back to you.
Thank you for the invite and the information. Most of it is clear, but I'm a bit iffy about two things in particular, and I'd appreciate your input on those.
How about submissions like this? It violates rule #3, yet I believe it adds a lot of value. It wouldn't feel right removing this one, but at the same time it's clear there is nothing to source. What's the consensus on these?
By staying out of the comments, do you mean not commenting outside my strict mod role at all? If it means staying out of debate, fair enough. But if someone asks a question and I know the answer, am I expected to not get involved? What if I feel like adding an important perspective? If being a janitor should somehow dehumanize my role in the community, then I'm not sure I'm up for it. Please clarify this.
I'm late to the party but here's my tl;dr two cents:
Enforce a strict checklist for submissions to make sure overall submission quality is high, and sub is free of noise.
Trust janitors to weigh benefit versus noise and practice common sense with regards to highly upvoated posts.
Choose janitors carefully.
In more detail:
Noise is a problem, and currently a lot of it is being generated by careless friendlies rather than shills, which is why a set of rules consistently enforced is imperative.
But every once in a while, a well-thought-out, powerful submission will surface that only indirectly contributes to the investigation. Allowing those and drawing the line there is the way to go in my opinion. For example, a "this is how you can help with X" or a "reminder: we're losing focus of Y" post should be allowed in moderation (say, 1 out of 20 hot posts) if it adds value, but a not immediately relevant "this elite-related horrific thing is also happening" post should not. I'm under the impression that making the distinction here requires a human rather than a checklist, and that we should trust mods (or at least groups of mods, so we might require more than a single mod's vote) to remove or leave up this kind of content.
@kevdude, I can dedicate on average an hour or two of my time every day to the cause. Aiding a community comes naturally to me anyway. Please take a look at my track record.
I haven't really known what to do with a link I have. It's a very very good documentary on the history of the what and who behind everything (information I sincerely believe everyone should have as a base and from what I can tell don't in many cases), but I've refrained from posting it so far just because it's not a lead.
everyone can help by self-policing ...
look at your post before submitting as ask yourself "is it new research" or random commentary.
You can post not-exactly-new-research pizzagate items over on \v\pizzagate2
and
please make headlines meaningful. Stop with the "You won't believe this! dot dot dot" headlines. Put a subject in the headline.
3.1: Moderators, but the moderators need to have accountability to the voats/voaters, much like a republic.
3.2: Yes (as long as it's #PizzaGate relevant)
3.3 - Suggestion A: I'm not sure exactly how it would be done, but I'd like some of the users that follow #PizzaGate really closely to come up with evidence lines that follow a different hypotheses, because this community really is fractured in many ways. So, for instance, one hypothesis could be #PizzaGate evidence that only follows the pedophilia aspect, and stays close to the USA. Another could be more global. Another could be the pedophilia stuff combined with the Satanism stuff. Another could include other conspiracy theories that people seem to try to connect to #PizzaGate. And maybe there are some other hypotheses out there. This would be helpful in many ways. For instance, if someone found out that Satanism had no relevant connection, people may leave the #PizzaGate movement. Instead, they could attach themselves to a different hypothesis that doesn't include the Satanism influence and continue investigating.
3.3 - Suggestion B: It would be really nice if there was basically a permanent sticky, likely updated by an involved mod, with new and incomplete leads. Sometimes I'm looking to pick up a new lead, and it would be nice to have a go-to place where I could pick a name/lead to investigate further, and I think this could go a long ways in creating a badly needed organizational structure for efficiency.
6.2: It depends what you mean by meta-posts. If you mean a post about, say, satanism in general, than I find those to just be clutter. If you mean a gathering of the data into a single post then I find that to be extremely useful. I also find it useful when people post about pedophile sex rings broken up by authorities that include politicians even if not directly connection to #PizzaGate (this is because connections can develop later and elites tend to be closely connected), but not if they are just on the local level including nobody important. So it really depends what you mean by meta-posts.
Overall, I'm pretty happy with the moderating so far, but there's always room for improvement.
My biggest deal is the continuous stream of new threads started with near same info. I have been asking OP to self delete but not sure where to go after that. If they don't?
Most, or at least some appear to be innocent...like they don't take the time to read other posts or they really feel theirs is better than the other three but even if unintentional, it still amounts to sliding.
I am fully available for mod or janitorial work -- I have a submission history to indicate I'm serious when it comes to the topic at hand, and as of right now, am shamelessly unemployed so I have the time to dedicate, and I do not work anonymously so there is no concern over who I truly am - fully willing to give out my full name, etc. Just throwing my availability out there.
Is it possible to rename a sub? If so we should consider renaming it something like pizzagate - pedogate so that we can transition to a newer name and keep the following. After a while we could then remove pizzagate and stick with the newer more better named hashtag.
We need a sticky on using archive.is and sli.mg, and not imgur. I still see threads where people post potential leads with just a screenshot link to imgur, which means the targets watching this board have a chance to delete and make stuff private.
Yes, I see that, now. Voater "gopluckyourself" has explain it well and I think you've defended the rule set thoroughly as well.
I do still think there should be a stipulative agreement somewhere in the rules, a subsection of the rules, that explains how brainstorming and speculation are still acceptable as long as the poster makes some attempt to ease the purpose of investigation by supplying links to subject matter and moreover that the poster keeps the subject close to pizzagate and not merely distantly related.
Hi my name is @kevdude and i am part of the sjw cabal. i am here to turn voat into reddit for the right. we are ahead of schedule, and voat is almost entirely pro-censorship while still thinking it's pro-free-speech. the same way catholic men marry into protestant families and subvert the women to catholocism; she remains believing she is protestant. We have taken over pizzagate today, and i think we will celebrate later by taking out sanegoat for fun."
ayyy lmao you won't copy that,eh? truth burns, don't it.
I have attempted to condense and simplify the 12 rules into 6. I believe that they represent the 12 rules in full. For Posts not about Pizzagate I suggest repeated offenders are treated the same way as spammers.
CP LINKS, DOXXING will result in deletion and ban
SPAM or Posts not about PIZZAGATE will be deleted and repeat offenders banned
SPAM or Posts not about PIZZAGATE will be deleted and repeat offenders banned
Meta posts will be removed. They should be posted as comments here.
VIDEO post titles must describe video content or be submitted as discussion posts.
Forum sliding
• SPAM or Posts not about PIZZAGATE will be deleted and repeat offenders banned
Consensus cracking
• CONTENTS must cite source(s) and be able to explain relevance to PIZZAGATE.
Information collection
• No rule addressing it
Anger trolling
• No rule addressing it, some discussion of self moderation of tone and language to facilitate serious discussion
Gaining full control
• Responsibility of Moderators to be vigilant
• CP LINKS, DOXXING will result in deletion and ban
I want to focus in particular on Forum sliding and Consensus cracking in terms of janitorial / moderation activity
FORUM SLIDING:
Relevant rule: Posts not about PIZZAGATE specifically will be removed
ISSUE: The scope of PIZZAGATE has not been formally defined. Leaving janitors without clear guidelines. You WILL end up with different opinions about what is within scope of the forum. Some will be too strict, most will be too inclusive.
POSSIBLE SOLUTION: Janitors apply rules as they understand them. ONE moderator and one backup is appointed to review daily the result and re-open submissions that are judged to be within scope of investigation. That moderator is responsible for updating guidelines on what is the scope of pizzagate. You can have this post as a one week assignment for a moderator before the job goes to the next moderator, but that moderator, that week has the authority to do the job. Understand that the scope is evolving, case-by-case. Both better understanding of investigative angles as well as shill themes can inform the evolving scope guidelines.
'CONSENSUS CRACKING'
Relevant rule: CONTENTS must cite source(s) and be able to explain relevance to PIZZAGATE.
ISSUE: Janitors MUST be able to assess if the post presents a VERY WEAK PREMISE without substantive proof. Problem is, most posts deal with evidence that is circumstantial, and confirmation bias will often tilt in favour of a weak submission. I want to list three examples of possible consensus cracking activity, just to show how difficult this is to assess.
James a. legal rep Andrew Kline Is actually DOJ : multiple threads, search on Andrew kline to find them. Initially it was thought to be true, until someone demonstrated that they were two different people that shared the same name. the legal rep of J.A. turned out to be interesting, but DOJ angle is dead end. The other DOJ guy which was found in J.A. instragram posts on the other hand is still interesting.
Podesta brothers and McCann: search on Madeline and Madeleine to find them.
The jury is still out on this one. There is no consensus, or you could say that consensus was successfully cracked here. The two drawings of one guy that look like each of the brothers, etc etc… lots of circumstance, but arguably not as solid as Instagram links etc shown in other leads.
my point in bringing up these 3 examples is that it can be easy, to almost impossible to judge an assertion, but some things can be assessed without resorting to a binary true/false judgement.
Possible solution: posts that are developing into consensus cracks need to be analysed from 3 angles.
What are the supporting facts,
what speaks against, and
what negative impact could PIZZAGATE community face if the assertion is proven false or used against them.
In the coffeegate case, if the community had accepted the assertion that coffee related emails were ALSO codewords, it could be used to ridicule the community. In the Andrew Kline case, if the DOJ guy was vilified, despite not being associated except by same name, AND some kind of false flag was carried out against him (like at the restaurant) it would warrant crackdown on the community. In the Podesta / McCann case, we have already seen it being using as an example of sensationalist conclusions without merit to the detriment of the legitimacy of the open source investigation.
This post is far too long as it is, so I will stop now. willing to discuss any of the above.
... and it is really helpful to mods and to readers if you look before posting a new discussion item if the topic isnt already up.
Instead of starting a new thread just put your item in as a comment to an existing thread when possible.
It makes looking up sub-topics so much easier because key words are often in the headline of the better threads.
Also it prevents clutter on the subverse.
https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/1506509
Let me know if that link works.
Please understand that I am not defending the post, I simply think that the rules should be communicated before it is deleted. I honestly thought it was shills on the attack.
As far as making a precis on every post ?, I will do my best if not too much time is involved.
By working together perhaps we'll all get "up to speed" with each other; all coming along together?
I was working 12 -16 hours a day for months on various research..for all of this year, since the Spring, intensely, and for many years - i.e. many thousands of hours.
Since a few days before the "election" I was working on "Pizzagate" non - stop. My citations / work was all vandalized.
When I first got here I could make links to my citations, but that's not easy to re-create for now.
If you think I'm going to re-hash all that in every comment or entry I make here, you are wrong. People need to work. I am not spoon feeding people. the Internets are here, people obviously can read, and they need to study the material themselves..
I am not a teacher. I am a researcher. That is a separate thing. Those things do not always over - lap .. I'm not pre-masticating for the masses.
No, it does not, it provides avenues for brainstorming. When an investigation starts to run cold, as pizzagate is undergoing right now, you need more reaching out and brainstorming, not restrictions on what can be considered.
Thank you. This was posted before the rules were created. Please feel free to delete although I think it has slid to oblivion at this point. The issue with cresch was regarding a submission last night about an article regarding Anthony wieners computer and a lawyers tactics on getting the evidence eliminated. I felt the Information was valuable to pizzagate since it shows upcoming tactics that may or may not be debunked and possible leads of investigation. I expressed surprise at a user gopluckyourself calling for it to be deleted. This morning crensh contacted me and had a long winded conversation regarding whether it was a useless submission or not. Please note I did not post that submission, I simply upvoated it. And was surprised it was being called for deletion. Crensh did not refer me to the new rules nor tell me he was a mod. I actually though these were shills. This is the kind of unpleasant interaction that happens when posts are deleted without explanation. Communication can prevent misunderstandings. I too am on mobile and new to voat. I am still getting a hang of it. Thank you for your patience. What is going on has the whole internet gone crazy? That is how it feels right now.
Investigations require sifting through useless information to find the truth. Users who contribute to this sub verse should make the distinction between useful content and useless content. I have spent over an hour defending myself to Crensh because I do not think submissions should be deleted without explanation. As far as I can see these new rules started 12 hours ago. That is not enough time to inform the members. A lot of deleting/ censoring is going on right now throughout the internet. Is voat contaminated too? Please tell me it isn't so!
That link that you posted I never participated in it. I always provide sources. There is no specific post I am defending. Be aware that shills are utilizing these new rules to eliminate posts and to direct the conversation. People who have contributed to the pizzagate investigation should be part of the deletion process.
Also, I was thinking if someone complains "This is off - topic, un - significant data which needs to be deleted" I can just take an archive and plug it into the "conspiracy" thread. Or other threads on Voat and see what others think? The more honest eyes the harder it is to cover - up.
People are using the rules to delete data they do not want included. I have a workaround since if I see it I will archive the thread before it is deleted. Then , as these add up , it can be shown what is going on , and likely by whom.
Remember the Madaleine McCann investigation leads to both D.C. and to London. And to the Freud family. And to Podesta's Art. None of that is an accident. #1 way to close up an investigation; limit the data that will be used and considered. To get to the truth you need *all the data. You don't know beforehand what will be useful or not.
This is the way so many investigations are shut down and made to come up with "nothing." for JFK Warren Commission, to 9/11 "Commission" headed by those who designed the event. The perp networks use the same methods over and over.. And this is what they are trying to do here. Do not let them.
Sure I understand, i would have been more than happy to provide a link. No one requested it. Usually if I want to know a source I will ask. So if a source is not posted does this mean it will be deleted out of a discussion or is the source required for posting a topic?
Shills will take advantage of whatever weakness they can. If I may suggest: users that have contributed actual content should be able to request for deletion. There are some usernames out there that are requesting for deletion that have never contributed to the conversation. Their only contribution is requesting for deletion. It will help keep the shills from taking advantage .
@kevdude this user had issues with the removal of a post specifically about a lawyer's response to a warrant to search Weiner's laptop. I'll say it again; about the lawyer's response.
If this user had his/her way, articles about what Weiner ate for breakfast would be viable because he's linked to PG.
I actually have made no secret that i thought the post was valuable to pizzagate. I never said anything about Anthony wiener breakfast. I also asked cresch to please explain his reasons. He then said I must be from Reddit. We have had a very odd dialogue for the past 15 minutes. On my end I actually came over her to read the rules.
I actually have made no secret that i thought the post was valuable to pizzagate.
Never said you did.
I never said anything about Anthony wiener breakfast.
Sometimes people give examples of what absurdity would happen if your stupid ideas were to be implemented.
I also asked cresch to please explain his reasons. He then said I must be from Reddit.
You asked on two separate occasions if I was a mod instead of simply scrolling down to look at the mod list him/herself. You also suggested that I behaved like a shill after pointing out that a lawyer's reaction to a warrant has fuck-all to do with the investigation.
We have had a very odd dialogue for the past 15 minutes.
I'm not sure if you are stupid, or paid to post as you do.
On my end I actually came over her to read the rules.
Read rules, but couldn't read the modlist, modlog, or my history after hand-waving to your own 13-day history as some kind of social proof that you aren't here in bad faith.
Also I apologize but I am jumping between screens. Communication is very helpful! Just introduce yourself as a mod. It would clear so much, I thought you were some random user who had a bone to pick with me for a difference of opinion. Instead I had to go and try to learn the latest shill tactic. And reach out to mods about my concerns. Meanwhile had I known you were a mod I would have understood your reaching out to me. For the record I asked you point blank if you were a mod. I had to dig it up on my own. I am not a shill. Maybe I am not computer savvy or voat savvy but I am not a shill.
My status as a mod should have no bearing on the veracity of my words.
Please tell me how a lawyer's reaction to a warrant does anything but clutter up this space. You mentioned some outrage or appeal to those that don't know about PG, but you're posting this in the PG subverse. Everyone here knows about this stuff, and even if they don't, some lawyer's fit over a warrant is not useful information, it's not unexpected, and the target of the warrant being Weiner's laptop doesn't automatically make it pizzagate related, in the sense that it's useful information for this subverse.
"Pizza guy outraged about pizzagate hurting his pizzaprofits!" "Lawyer expresses outrage in defense of client" "Hey guys, there's a SPIRAL here on a pizza place wall!" "Male Actor #4 claims pizzagate is a bunch of lies"
That's the kind of utter crap your post fits in with.
I can't anymore, delete any post you like because it violates the rules of not citing a source. Or because you don't like the content. Heck ban my useless account too. Cut and paste posts screaming for mods to delete with out any explanation are going to create conflict and confusion. An easier method is to Simply introduce your self as a janitor and a request to delete and repost properly. Cut and paste the new rules for that matter. I am tired of this conversation, you win. I just care about the kids and don't mind sorting through information to help, most of it is useless sometimes you hit paydirt. It's how investigations work. Rules are objective and that is understandable and easy to comply with. deleting something because you think it is useless is subject to your opinion and there will be disagreement. And now we see how the disagreement is dealt with : deletion.
As for wiener, his computer is directly related to pizzagate, the defense strategies are important because it give a hint to where investigators should focus their efforts. Knowing the tactics of the coverup are important in order to counter those tactics. Similar to how you deal with shills by putting rules in place to avoid threads from being slid. Now is this wiener lawyer thread the most useful, in the whole scheme of things? Maybe maybe not, but it might be at some point down the road. Investigations evolve by connecting dots. You seem to have already made up your mind. I have not either way. You are the mod it's your call. This has been a very unpleasant experience hopefully not you intention.
Are you talking about the lawyer reaction to wiener search warrant? The few posts I have submitted have not been much. I only learned the new rules this morning. Not sure when they were posted but i have a new account. Feel free to delete my posts, one was even a question for expertise.
You defended it as if you did. Remember when you were accusing me of being an alt of the person calling it out for rule violations? I did the same to you for OP, since it's easier to believe you wrote it and then defended it on a sock-puppet account than it is for me to have been the guy calling it out while having a mod account.
Listen I am really over the whole thing. I would like to chalk it up to a misunderstanding. Voat is not very welcoming to noobs (which I am) and honestly our interaction was very unpleasant. As it is the subject matter of pizzagate is really horrible too. I thought you were a shill. You thought I was a shill. I would like to just focus on pizzagate and help if possible even in a small way. Censorship and deleting threads can be controversial.
You really jump to conclusions, let me try to explain again: I found out you were a mod when I read the rules. Because clearly I had touched a nerve regarding the thread about the lawyer. I am on mobile as well. So links, copy and paste is a bit tedious.
It's not the fact that I'm a mod that made that submission wrong, it's the fact that the lawyer's reaction to a warrant has fuck-all to do with pizzagate, and posting about it does nothing but slide legitimate posts. The idea that you can just "slide" these shitposts instead of removing them is absurd. Their entire point of existence is to slide everything else, and with the shill bot armies, the votes to do so are easily acquired.
If posts like that were to be left alone, then, as I said before, Weiner's last meal would be a post that needed to be left alone. Every meal. Every day.
Or maybe a post. Every hour. Of Weiner's reaction to his laptop being taken? Maybe that's a better example for you? How is that useful?
Its link to the actual pizzagate investigation is virtually nonexistent.
He is a mod yes. He is trying to enforce the rules to the subverse he is trying to moderate. In his opinion the post violated several of the sidebar rules so he deleted it. If the person would change their post to be compliant with all rules in the sidebar there is no issue. If they cannot make their post compliant with all of the rules in the sidebar then the post does not belong in the sub.
edit: /v/pizzarelated is a sub I've created specifically for this type of content. pizzawhatever would have probly been a better name lol
Thank you when you explain it like that it makes sense. I was referring more to a theory leading to a trail. Brainstorming so to speak. I have not posted much but always make sure to try to find a source. I understand what you mean.
Does the community want minimal standards for submission enforceable by moderator deletion? Or do we want to let votes decide?
To all, we MUST have some standards, because otherwise we are vulnerable to flooding and forum sliding by shills. If we rely on downvotes alone, this forum will become entirely useless.
First of all, thanks for addressing this. I favor letting voats decide, and calling for all lurkers to participate in that process. I have been guilty, at times, of having "unspent voats" for a 24 hour period when I know damn well there was upvoatable material. We have to send strong signals to win this thing against our formidable adversaries.
I think clarification about rules is very important, because I think there is a lot of genuine confusion / concern being misjudged as shill tactics .. etc. The same thing is taking place with the concern for the whereabouts / proof of life for Julian Assange. There are obviously disinfo agents abound, but we can't start suspecting that everyone that disagrees with us is one of them. This gets amplified by rule confusion.
As it currently stands, there is a rule in the meme thread that people may not be aware of. Memes may not be of use in a subverse focused on investigation (as they are considered "clutter"), so a separation of function may be ideal. I ask that this is formally stated in the rules in order to prevent confusion and loss of comments in discussion (as memes are migrated, at times losing valuable comments).
I think it's a good idea to have different subs for different functions. I also think, to the degree that it is relevant, additional subs can provide decentralization. This is good because it is robust.. but it is bad because fragmentation divides viewership and can become a chore. However, I think basically, pizzagate has become an ecosystem. There are enough good people in these spaces to loosely coordinate some guiding principles that transform this into a powerful movement for change.
Investigators looking for meme support, please come to /v/PizzagateMemes to discuss any memes want created.
All talented memers are encouraged to come as well. Come to weaponize the truth!
This is a problem because shills are using these rules to delete leads. Deletion only benefits the pedo elites who want to cover up this up just like the franklin cover up. Censorship is dangerous and only benefits the pedofiles.
Also: quit sucking the teet of mods as if they are some sort of benevolent god who bestows all privileges and facilitates all that is good within the world of voat.
When I first signed up I was lured in under the guise of free speech and user-friendly mods who never impeded upon the community because the community held them accountable. Mods are in effect determining where the threads go by diminishing the path in which users can get there. Never for once let an ego blind your own logic you fool.
I'd like to see a draft or two if you don't mind sharing! The sidebar is so long at this point that I hardly know what's in it. Once it's a little more settled, maybe we can even improve the formatting.
3.1 The minimal standars enforced by mods is what being proposed in 1 & 2 right? If this is what is ment my Voat is for enforcing minimal standards!
5 What are the desired requirements for document sharing. I've read some people being cautious with opening PDF, Excel, Google documents. Excel could be Pastbin, or .tsv?. PDF? not always archive.is so what's an alternative? Google Documents being an Excel or Word could be covered in a Pastebin or published list archived, but what about forms?
5 & 1 "This is an investigative sub. The idea is that people would either be posting evidence or asking questions."
Could we somehow introduce identifiers as to what a post is? For instance labelling posts with #OR = Original Research, #D = discussion/exploration #M Is for media/memes and other stuff that is deducted from #OR & #D and put into a format that can be shared on social media..
I agree that we need to enforce the rules uniformly, though I do find that people who are genuinely trying to contribute to the conversation will edit their post to include sources, or delete a link post and make it a discussion so that it doesn't violate the rules.
Other people however, seem to give away their shitty intentions the moment you ask them to provide a source. They accuse you of being CTR and begrudgingly post some bullshit unrelated blog 'news' article. If you then tell them 'I read that source, it makes no mention of any of your claims,' They start spam-posting, 'MODERATOR IS CTR VOAT COMPROMISED THE END IS FUCKING NIGH"
They also may be kids themselves and concern trolls. Unfortunately, the amount of uncivil and unreasonable people is large and you ARE PROBABLY CTR, SHILL! :)
You've been doing a fine job moderating as far as I can see.
It appears several people lost all their contribution points overnight recent, is there any way of stopppng that targeting? Maybe making a maximum of -10 per day ? .I agree on minimum standards of submission. Suggest some separation of pedogate and pizzagate. There will be overlap but the distinction is that pedogate is all global "VIP" child abuse eg presidio, franklin, finders, Sibels revelations -Hastert and beyond, Europe , australia , fiona barnett etc whilst pizzagate mainly CP podesta, DC , Clintons etc working outwards
Give posters a reminder and chance to edit posts (ive seen lots of rule 3 violations on otherwise decent posts)?
I try to do that, the only time I personally do not give someone a chance to either fix it or delete it themselves is when they are spamming.
Rule 3 is very important, and there is room for some 'speculation' as long as your post it as a discussion with a linked source in it and an explanation as to how you believe something is related/important to pizzagate. If you do those things, which are simple, then your post will not be deleted unless it violates some other rule.
Or delete and encourage resubmission?
I know many mods do this, I personally do it (sometimes I even message the user and tell them that I would upvote the submission if it were on v/conspiracy instead of here)
I don't agree not everything has a source. I don't want to read a persons blog or watch the video they are advertising. We are searching for leads and exposing dead ends. these rules are a shill tactic to help cover up their trail. There are not always going to be sources.
I think we all know what would happen if we relaxed the rules about submission: This sub would spiral downward out of control with off-topic posts and people claiming 'IT WAS ZEE JEWS'. I think the best thing we've done was create other subs for loose/general discussion.
A lot of that is actually just one guy who is creating accounts with bots though. There was a post a while back where they guy admitted it when someone noticed a whole bunch of posts by "ABot1" "ABot2" "ABot3", etc. that were deleted within a few minutes. I'm not saying you can necessarily do anything about it--just checking if you are aware.
Not to even mention the fact that he's not good at it.
He has no tact whatsoever, it's just "make another account, post some completely obvious bait/bullshit, make no attempt to disguise shitty intentions of said post, upvote said post with many alternate accounts, post gets downvoted to shit and deleted. Rinse, repeat"
Never anything creative, never anything with a goal, never goes anywhere. He's kind of sad, actually.
I vote for minimals standards enforced by moderation . Because accounts can be built up and multiplied by people with less than good intentions, voting power becomes a weapon against us. The balance of power can only be restored by affective moderation to keep content submission within the framework of this subs intention / purpose.
Addressing 3.2
I vote for separate subs to be created, which address specific aspects of pizza gate. I would even be in favour of having something called pizza gate shitposts where anything goes . Shills can post all they want there. But the title makes it clear that nothing is to be taken seriously .
As to the content of the rules to be applied for moderation , I would suggest looking closely at the documents published regarding how Shills operate . This kind of destructive behaviour can be profiled and actively defended against.
For the moderation of the janitors you pick , you should consider how to manage complaints in a transparent and effective way . Shills will inevitably try to bog down the system by escalating every single moderated post. Between the principles of transparency objectivity and fairness, Focus on transparency because objectivity and fairness are still subject of concepts and you will never be able to create a process that is both lightweight and fulfills all three of these principles.
I work with quality control of IT requirements management , so I have quite a bit of experience of assessing text based on a predefined checklist. I am not sure if I would be willing to put myself on a limb and do janitor cleanup , but I agree that it is necessary and a step in the right direction
I made /v/pizzagaterelated for offtopic/shitpost type stuff. There used to be a list of pizzagate related subs way down the page but it's gone now as they were basically all copies of this sub.
Addressing 3.1 I vote for minimals standards enforced by moderation . Because accounts can be built up and multiplied by people with less than good intentions, voting power becomes a weapon against us. The balance of power can only be restored by affective moderation to keep content submission within the framework of this subs intention / purpose.
I just want to add another reason for minimum standards: if we rely on downvotes alone, shills can easily destroy this forum by flooding it with shitposts (known as forum sliding). We have already experienced such attacks. This is why we need more janitors. Right now, there isn't always someone on duty watching pizzagate/new.
im here 18 hours a day. i would have loved to help janitor crap off this site. it's the main attack vector against voat right now. helping voat is what i do.
BUT you idiots modded v/protectvoat people, the literal sjw cabal that's taking over voat, to v/pizzagate, in effect, 100% compromising v/pizzagate.
i would never help the sjw cabal. i'd rather do meth and stick spikes up my bum then help those censoring fee-fee hurt safe-space-making faggoty nigger pieces of shit.
they have weaseled their way into the admins' ears, dividing them from the community
they code voat, but no announcement was ever made, and this truth is slid and censored by the cabal and the admins
they talk to the admins off voat, but pretend they don't.
they organize in iirc, and also run v/protectvoat to control the record, and v/soapboxbanhammer to upvoat farm their accounts (largely un-needed anymore).
you have literally just given one of their main operatives O access to your sub. you have fucked ALL of this royally.
just like the mafia guys are "concerned about da well being of a community."
what i mean is they talk to the admins off voat, but there's been no official mention of it
they code voat, but there's been no official mention of it
and they run major subs, janitor subs, run protectvoat sbbh and now pizzagate (among dozens of other subs; someone posted a list a while back on protectvoat)
Yeah, I get that there isn't much that you can do about the language that the system uses. I'm just wary of the ambiguity of using titles in place of nouns, eg Comments instead of comments.
Not trying to be pedantic, but can we avoid calling posts submissions? Submission implies diminished status or dependence on a controlling authority when our strength is our independence from voices which arbitrarily decide what forms of criticism are unacceptable.
Submission implies diminished status or dependence on a controlling authority
This is like that 'master / slave' idiocy that went on at github
In the context of what's going on here, a submission is an article given for consideration.
It is not a diminutive or relational in any way to the status of humans in hierarchical interactions
independence from voices which arbitrarily decide what forms of criticism are unacceptable.
There is much wisdom in this, thus all speech is free speech
The main problem with the ideal of free speech is that it legitimizes lying. Free speech is to communication what anarchy is to social conduct. Everyone has the right to express their beliefs, but not to misrepresent the facts in order to cause someone harm. This isn't an arbitrary position, but one which is consistent with reason and with the common law. The problem here is that "civilized" society has misrepresented the origins of the common law. At common law bearing false witness against one's neighbour was unlawful, and not simply a tort which considered only reputation while ignoring the intent of the liar, that diabolical nature which perverts the truth in order to cause injury.
but not to misrepresent the facts in order to cause someone harm.
I am of the firm opinion that personal responsibility is a major factor of civilized society.
I agree yelling fire in a cinema when there is none is a very sensible thing to hold accountable.
But we are not talking about 'the outside' we are talking about a text only internet discussion forum, with the ability to consider the evidence is at a maximum.
The main problem with the ideal of free speech is that it legitimizes lying.
Huh? Allowing all speech to be free does not legitimize false information, only people who believe without critical thought do that
In reality, any restriction to speech is a fast track to forcibly stopping people from communicating.
What that communication contains is separate to the issue of stopping people from communicating.
we are not talking about 'the outside' we are talking about a text only internet discussion forum, with the ability to consider the evidence is at a maximum.
It still has real world effects, eg the panic that resulted when the War of the Worlds was on the radio and people thought it was a real news broadcast about an alien invasion.
Allowing all speech to be free does not legitimize false information, only people who believe without critical thought do that
Nobody has the authority to "allow" what is unlawful, to do so is conspiracy. Many people do not apply critical thought, for example the 18% or so of US adults who trust their national news organizations.
In reality, any restriction to speech is a fast track to forcibly stopping people from communicating.
Do you think that I should not be forcibly stopped from DOXing you and making the false accustaion that you rape children?
What that communication contains is separate to the issue of stopping people from communicating.
Not in terms of ethics it's not. You could apply your argument to social settings to reach the conclusion that someone verbally abusing random strangers should not be stopped.
Do you think that I should not be forcibly stopped from DOXing you and making the false accustaion that you rape children?
Go for it, all it will do is reveal the nature of who you are
Not in terms of ethics it's not. You could apply your argument to social settings to reach the conclusion that someone verbally abusing random strangers should not be stopped.
I already have come to that conclusion.
Until physical action is taken (I include intimidating proximity in the definition of physical), nothing real is being done.
If you are offended by what is said, you have chosen to be offended. Your offense is not my problem.
Go for it, all it will do is reveal the nature of who you are
So you think that it's OK to slander people? If you don't think that it's OK then do you think that people should just sit on their hands when something bad happens?
Until physical action is taken (I include intimidating proximity in the definition of physical), nothing real is being done.
ThePuppetShow ago
Yep.
ThePuppetShow ago
LOL whatever dude. I get it.
ThePuppetShow ago
I do understand the dangers and that's the only reason I'm speaking up now. It seems every time we have a good informative sticky it gets removed by a mod for bs. Why does the rules thread need to be a sticky?
ThePuppetShow ago
No, I'm bitching about mods sliding the most informative thread for a circle jerk about rules. Do that shit in the sidebar. You and everyone in that thread know how to find it, new users aren't going to spend much time searching for information before they dismiss us as "fake news".
ThePuppetShow ago
My point is you could easily get this done without removing the sticky with all the information for noob's. Obviously that not going to happen for some reason.
ThePuppetShow ago
Are you playing games?
ThePuppetShow ago
I understand that, new people lurking for information probably wont. I went over this in the post you replied to. Why can't you leave the thread with all the information and use the sidebar for all your "rules" threads?
ThePuppetShow ago
I'm sure most people want the the thread with all the infomation stickied again. The "rules" thread should be the one in the sidebar.
Melitica ago
Yes, as of Monday, I can but if there are still just too many of us...no hard feelings.
azamber ago
Nothing in particular, atm. I'm mostly lurking, putting in 2cents here and there, upvoting. Just not used to this format. I wasn't much on Reddit either, I couldn't figure it out. Fb'er here, primarily. Until pizzagate. lol
IceDagger316 ago
I had a bunch of other links in the post but it wouldn't let me put it up until I took out the one from DailyMotion. Responded with "Post contains a banned domain" Didn't know if anyone knew what was up with that.
Guy_Fawkes1984 ago
Rules are for shills
Mickgoestojail ago
Or you could just be wrong. You can call your opinion fact till you go blue in the face but it's still an opinion. Regardless of the motivation of the attacks it's still detrimental to the sub anyway so your point is redundant at best. I'm not involved in the investigation or this sub really at all by the way. I just poked my head in to upvote a few people yesterday(that was all in the name of fun right?), so any further argument about this doesn't really interest me.
golly ago
Obvious trolls should be banned from this sub.
See: https://voat.co/user/grlldcheese/comments
grlldcheese ago
Why are you witchhunting me you fucking faggot?
golly ago
All you want to do is rile people up that are working on a serious investigation. We don't need trolls here. Hence; you should be banned form this sub.
grlldcheese ago
I want to tell people like you who bitch and whine and cry about rule violations while they violate those exact same rules that they are incompetent fucks who should stfu and go finger their assholes in private.
Fucking faggot cry baby idiot piece of shit concern troll.
golly ago
A troll calling me a troll. Hah. My evening is complete!
grlldcheese ago
I am a troll. Proudly.
I troll fucking faggots like you. Proudly.
golly ago
2/10 bud. Trolling is a art. And you don't have what it takes. Sorry.
grlldcheese ago
Oh so now you're a trolling expert, huh, rulefaggot.
What a pathetic cry baby fuck. Sad.
golly ago
All you do is call people faggots and curse. That's not trolling, it's being a toddler.
grlldcheese ago
Oh nooooooo.
Actually i like calling incompetent faggots like you faggots because incompetent faggots like you think it builds up your victim cred because you're incompetent faggots.
Do you understand, you incompetent faggot?
golly ago
You're the embodiment of a faggot.
grlldcheese ago
As expected, you're fucking faggotry instantly reveals itself to be flimsy, hypocritical, and incompetent.
golly ago
Your retorts lack any originality, humour or comprehension.
grlldcheese ago
I'm just creating a really long string of comments by you for sheer convenience
Also, you're an incompetent faggot.
golly ago
You're an hero.
wecanhelp ago
No problem, thanks for the heads-up.
wecanhelp ago
Here you go, @kevdude.
Janitors (last janitor activity)
wecanhelp ago
Thank you, your explanation makes a lot of sense, I can see how the given post can be made relevant. The comment thing also makes sense now, I misinterpreted that remark. All is clear, I'll get started with checking janitor activity as soon as I can, and will report back to you.
wecanhelp ago
Thank you for the invite and the information. Most of it is clear, but I'm a bit iffy about two things in particular, and I'd appreciate your input on those.
wecanhelp ago
I'm late to the party but here's my tl;dr two cents:
In more detail:
Noise is a problem, and currently a lot of it is being generated by careless friendlies rather than shills, which is why a set of rules consistently enforced is imperative.
But every once in a while, a well-thought-out, powerful submission will surface that only indirectly contributes to the investigation. Allowing those and drawing the line there is the way to go in my opinion. For example, a "this is how you can help with X" or a "reminder: we're losing focus of Y" post should be allowed in moderation (say, 1 out of 20 hot posts) if it adds value, but a not immediately relevant "this elite-related horrific thing is also happening" post should not. I'm under the impression that making the distinction here requires a human rather than a checklist, and that we should trust mods (or at least groups of mods, so we might require more than a single mod's vote) to remove or leave up this kind of content.
@kevdude, I can dedicate on average an hour or two of my time every day to the cause. Aiding a community comes naturally to me anyway. Please take a look at my track record.
Johnny3names ago
Cool, thank you.
Should that be here on the regular v/pizzagate or is there a different sub for it?
rodeo13 ago
Thank you both!
Johnny3names ago
I haven't really known what to do with a link I have. It's a very very good documentary on the history of the what and who behind everything (information I sincerely believe everyone should have as a base and from what I can tell don't in many cases), but I've refrained from posting it so far just because it's not a lead.
https://youtu.be/Sek64kjedD8
flyingcuttlefish ago
I think the infographic does that. But maybe a mini version for that would also be good.
flyingcuttlefish ago
everyone can help by self-policing ... look at your post before submitting as ask yourself "is it new research" or random commentary. You can post not-exactly-new-research pizzagate items over on \v\pizzagate2
and please make headlines meaningful. Stop with the "You won't believe this! dot dot dot" headlines. Put a subject in the headline.
Diamond_Deluge ago
aslong as I can call people (((nigger))) kike faggot jew cracker
atheist4thecause ago
3.1: Moderators, but the moderators need to have accountability to the voats/voaters, much like a republic.
3.2: Yes (as long as it's #PizzaGate relevant)
3.3 - Suggestion A: I'm not sure exactly how it would be done, but I'd like some of the users that follow #PizzaGate really closely to come up with evidence lines that follow a different hypotheses, because this community really is fractured in many ways. So, for instance, one hypothesis could be #PizzaGate evidence that only follows the pedophilia aspect, and stays close to the USA. Another could be more global. Another could be the pedophilia stuff combined with the Satanism stuff. Another could include other conspiracy theories that people seem to try to connect to #PizzaGate. And maybe there are some other hypotheses out there. This would be helpful in many ways. For instance, if someone found out that Satanism had no relevant connection, people may leave the #PizzaGate movement. Instead, they could attach themselves to a different hypothesis that doesn't include the Satanism influence and continue investigating.
3.3 - Suggestion B: It would be really nice if there was basically a permanent sticky, likely updated by an involved mod, with new and incomplete leads. Sometimes I'm looking to pick up a new lead, and it would be nice to have a go-to place where I could pick a name/lead to investigate further, and I think this could go a long ways in creating a badly needed organizational structure for efficiency.
6.2: It depends what you mean by meta-posts. If you mean a post about, say, satanism in general, than I find those to just be clutter. If you mean a gathering of the data into a single post then I find that to be extremely useful. I also find it useful when people post about pedophile sex rings broken up by authorities that include politicians even if not directly connection to #PizzaGate (this is because connections can develop later and elites tend to be closely connected), but not if they are just on the local level including nobody important. So it really depends what you mean by meta-posts.
Overall, I'm pretty happy with the moderating so far, but there's always room for improvement.
Mickgoestojail ago
Not many subs have 3k active users at times as well as being flooded with upvoted shitposts
Vindicator ago
I would love this. Also geneology and immigration history research tool suggestions.
azamber ago
This is all great, but as a relative noob, how tf do I start a new thread? I see this info nowhere. Sorry if this is obvious and I am missing it.
atheist4thecause ago
You click either "Share a Link" or "Discuss". Look for two red buttons in the upper-right hand corner.
azamber ago
OOOOHHHH!!!! lol Derp. Tyvm =)
Melitica ago
My biggest deal is the continuous stream of new threads started with near same info. I have been asking OP to self delete but not sure where to go after that. If they don't?
Most, or at least some appear to be innocent...like they don't take the time to read other posts or they really feel theirs is better than the other three but even if unintentional, it still amounts to sliding.
Thoughts?
IceDagger316 ago
Why is dailymotion banned? Is it just this sub or is it Voat wide?
christa ago
yeah absolutely - I think the latter is completely inexcusable and totally counterproductive btw.
christa ago
I am fully available for mod or janitorial work -- I have a submission history to indicate I'm serious when it comes to the topic at hand, and as of right now, am shamelessly unemployed so I have the time to dedicate, and I do not work anonymously so there is no concern over who I truly am - fully willing to give out my full name, etc. Just throwing my availability out there.
Fateswebb ago
Is it possible to rename a sub? If so we should consider renaming it something like pizzagate - pedogate so that we can transition to a newer name and keep the following. After a while we could then remove pizzagate and stick with the newer more better named hashtag.
chrimony ago
We need a sticky on using archive.is and sli.mg, and not imgur. I still see threads where people post potential leads with just a screenshot link to imgur, which means the targets watching this board have a chance to delete and make stuff private.
SaneGoatiSwear ago
so if i make a post connecting you and the sjw cabal with pizzagate, you won't delete it?
massconception ago
Yes, I see that, now. Voater "gopluckyourself" has explain it well and I think you've defended the rule set thoroughly as well.
I do still think there should be a stipulative agreement somewhere in the rules, a subsection of the rules, that explains how brainstorming and speculation are still acceptable as long as the poster makes some attempt to ease the purpose of investigation by supplying links to subject matter and moreover that the poster keeps the subject close to pizzagate and not merely distantly related.
Julian55 ago
I agree. Don't like these crazy rules. Don't like any rules if I don't trust the judger of the rules.
SaneGoatiSwear ago
Hi my name is @kevdude and i am part of the sjw cabal. i am here to turn voat into reddit for the right. we are ahead of schedule, and voat is almost entirely pro-censorship while still thinking it's pro-free-speech. the same way catholic men marry into protestant families and subvert the women to catholocism; she remains believing she is protestant. We have taken over pizzagate today, and i think we will celebrate later by taking out sanegoat for fun."
ayyy lmao you won't copy that,eh? truth burns, don't it.
goddamn shilly faggot.
samhara ago
That's a trick they use in the Justice System too - It's http://www.swarthmore.edu/writing/a-supremely-bad-decision-majority-ruling-bush-v-gore - called Arbitrary Justice and it's a sign of Corruption. The rules only apply selectively. It's a sign of despotic rule. -
Julian55 ago
thats right !
SaneGoatiSwear ago
kevdude
get off v/pizzagate and take the cabal with you.
what the fuck are you doing?
justanotherpizza ago
I have attempted to condense and simplify the 12 rules into 6. I believe that they represent the 12 rules in full. For Posts not about Pizzagate I suggest repeated offenders are treated the same way as spammers.
Let’s look at COINTELPRO techniques (see http://pastebin.com/irj4Fyd5 ) and list what rules address them:
Topic Dilution
Forum sliding
• SPAM or Posts not about PIZZAGATE will be deleted and repeat offenders banned
Consensus cracking
• CONTENTS must cite source(s) and be able to explain relevance to PIZZAGATE.
Information collection
• No rule addressing it
Anger trolling
• No rule addressing it, some discussion of self moderation of tone and language to facilitate serious discussion
Gaining full control
• Responsibility of Moderators to be vigilant • CP LINKS, DOXXING will result in deletion and ban
I want to focus in particular on Forum sliding and Consensus cracking in terms of janitorial / moderation activity
FORUM SLIDING:
Relevant rule: Posts not about PIZZAGATE specifically will be removed
ISSUE: The scope of PIZZAGATE has not been formally defined. Leaving janitors without clear guidelines. You WILL end up with different opinions about what is within scope of the forum. Some will be too strict, most will be too inclusive.
POSSIBLE SOLUTION: Janitors apply rules as they understand them. ONE moderator and one backup is appointed to review daily the result and re-open submissions that are judged to be within scope of investigation. That moderator is responsible for updating guidelines on what is the scope of pizzagate. You can have this post as a one week assignment for a moderator before the job goes to the next moderator, but that moderator, that week has the authority to do the job. Understand that the scope is evolving, case-by-case. Both better understanding of investigative angles as well as shill themes can inform the evolving scope guidelines.
'CONSENSUS CRACKING'
Relevant rule: CONTENTS must cite source(s) and be able to explain relevance to PIZZAGATE.
ISSUE: Janitors MUST be able to assess if the post presents a VERY WEAK PREMISE without substantive proof. Problem is, most posts deal with evidence that is circumstantial, and confirmation bias will often tilt in favour of a weak submission. I want to list three examples of possible consensus cracking activity, just to show how difficult this is to assess.
Coffeegate: https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/1482211 Relatively straightforward. This was deemed to be shill activity almost immediately
James a. legal rep Andrew Kline Is actually DOJ : multiple threads, search on Andrew kline to find them. Initially it was thought to be true, until someone demonstrated that they were two different people that shared the same name. the legal rep of J.A. turned out to be interesting, but DOJ angle is dead end. The other DOJ guy which was found in J.A. instragram posts on the other hand is still interesting.
Podesta brothers and McCann: search on Madeline and Madeleine to find them. The jury is still out on this one. There is no consensus, or you could say that consensus was successfully cracked here. The two drawings of one guy that look like each of the brothers, etc etc… lots of circumstance, but arguably not as solid as Instagram links etc shown in other leads.
my point in bringing up these 3 examples is that it can be easy, to almost impossible to judge an assertion, but some things can be assessed without resorting to a binary true/false judgement.
Possible solution: posts that are developing into consensus cracks need to be analysed from 3 angles.
What are the supporting facts,
what speaks against, and
what negative impact could PIZZAGATE community face if the assertion is proven false or used against them.
In the coffeegate case, if the community had accepted the assertion that coffee related emails were ALSO codewords, it could be used to ridicule the community. In the Andrew Kline case, if the DOJ guy was vilified, despite not being associated except by same name, AND some kind of false flag was carried out against him (like at the restaurant) it would warrant crackdown on the community. In the Podesta / McCann case, we have already seen it being using as an example of sensationalist conclusions without merit to the detriment of the legitimacy of the open source investigation.
This post is far too long as it is, so I will stop now. willing to discuss any of the above.
flyingcuttlefish ago
... and it is really helpful to mods and to readers if you look before posting a new discussion item if the topic isnt already up. Instead of starting a new thread just put your item in as a comment to an existing thread when possible. It makes looking up sub-topics so much easier because key words are often in the headline of the better threads. Also it prevents clutter on the subverse.
SaneGoatiSwear ago
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
LMAO
YOU @KINGKONGWASWRONG AND YOUR HALF-BOT MOD TEAM JUST GAVE THE SJW CABAL YOUR FUCKING SUB.
you cannot ever get this octopus to let go.
pizzagate just got 100% compromised.
kev every now and then you fight for what's right on voat
just like the mafia boss throws money at the lil people in his barrio.
I VOTE FOR THE REMOVAL OF ALL V/PROTECTVOAT FROM V/PIZZAGATE
Forgetmenot ago
Thanks, hopefully the rules will be communicated a little clearer next time. I am new to voat so am still learning my way around.
samhara ago
What is "tl;dr?" Thanx.
Forgetmenot ago
Thank you.
Forgetmenot ago
https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/1506509 Let me know if that link works. Please understand that I am not defending the post, I simply think that the rules should be communicated before it is deleted. I honestly thought it was shills on the attack.
samhara ago
As far as making a precis on every post ?, I will do my best if not too much time is involved.
By working together perhaps we'll all get "up to speed" with each other; all coming along together?
I was working 12 -16 hours a day for months on various research..for all of this year, since the Spring, intensely, and for many years - i.e. many thousands of hours. Since a few days before the "election" I was working on "Pizzagate" non - stop. My citations / work was all vandalized.
When I first got here I could make links to my citations, but that's not easy to re-create for now.
If you think I'm going to re-hash all that in every comment or entry I make here, you are wrong. People need to work. I am not spoon feeding people. the Internets are here, people obviously can read, and they need to study the material themselves..
I am not a teacher. I am a researcher. That is a separate thing. Those things do not always over - lap .. I'm not pre-masticating for the masses.
samhara ago
The thing about missing information - is that you don't know it's missing because it's not there.
This is happened before. It's called omission. Omission can be deliberate, yet no one can see it.
I was speaking about the future if I saw such a thing happening, or thought it might, I would archive and re-post, collect elsewhere.
I got the sense this kind of thing was going on here, but did not see it directly. I've seen it done in other "investigations" though.
Forgetmenot ago
Lol good one
sunajAeon ago
10-4
massconception ago
No, it does not, it provides avenues for brainstorming. When an investigation starts to run cold, as pizzagate is undergoing right now, you need more reaching out and brainstorming, not restrictions on what can be considered.
Forgetmenot ago
Thank you. This was posted before the rules were created. Please feel free to delete although I think it has slid to oblivion at this point. The issue with cresch was regarding a submission last night about an article regarding Anthony wieners computer and a lawyers tactics on getting the evidence eliminated. I felt the Information was valuable to pizzagate since it shows upcoming tactics that may or may not be debunked and possible leads of investigation. I expressed surprise at a user gopluckyourself calling for it to be deleted. This morning crensh contacted me and had a long winded conversation regarding whether it was a useless submission or not. Please note I did not post that submission, I simply upvoated it. And was surprised it was being called for deletion. Crensh did not refer me to the new rules nor tell me he was a mod. I actually though these were shills. This is the kind of unpleasant interaction that happens when posts are deleted without explanation. Communication can prevent misunderstandings. I too am on mobile and new to voat. I am still getting a hang of it. Thank you for your patience. What is going on has the whole internet gone crazy? That is how it feels right now.
Forgetmenot ago
Investigations require sifting through useless information to find the truth. Users who contribute to this sub verse should make the distinction between useful content and useless content. I have spent over an hour defending myself to Crensh because I do not think submissions should be deleted without explanation. As far as I can see these new rules started 12 hours ago. That is not enough time to inform the members. A lot of deleting/ censoring is going on right now throughout the internet. Is voat contaminated too? Please tell me it isn't so!
Forgetmenot ago
That link that you posted I never participated in it. I always provide sources. There is no specific post I am defending. Be aware that shills are utilizing these new rules to eliminate posts and to direct the conversation. People who have contributed to the pizzagate investigation should be part of the deletion process.
samhara ago
Also, I was thinking if someone complains "This is off - topic, un - significant data which needs to be deleted" I can just take an archive and plug it into the "conspiracy" thread. Or other threads on Voat and see what others think? The more honest eyes the harder it is to cover - up.
samhara ago
People are using the rules to delete data they do not want included. I have a workaround since if I see it I will archive the thread before it is deleted. Then , as these add up , it can be shown what is going on , and likely by whom.
Remember the Madaleine McCann investigation leads to both D.C. and to London. And to the Freud family. And to Podesta's Art. None of that is an accident. #1 way to close up an investigation; limit the data that will be used and considered. To get to the truth you need *all the data. You don't know beforehand what will be useful or not.
This is the way so many investigations are shut down and made to come up with "nothing." for JFK Warren Commission, to 9/11 "Commission" headed by those who designed the event. The perp networks use the same methods over and over.. And this is what they are trying to do here. Do not let them.
Forgetmenot ago
Sure I understand, i would have been more than happy to provide a link. No one requested it. Usually if I want to know a source I will ask. So if a source is not posted does this mean it will be deleted out of a discussion or is the source required for posting a topic?
gopluckyourself ago
We don't want to spez it up now do we :D
Forgetmenot ago
Shills will take advantage of whatever weakness they can. If I may suggest: users that have contributed actual content should be able to request for deletion. There are some usernames out there that are requesting for deletion that have never contributed to the conversation. Their only contribution is requesting for deletion. It will help keep the shills from taking advantage .
Crensch ago
@kevdude this user had issues with the removal of a post specifically about a lawyer's response to a warrant to search Weiner's laptop. I'll say it again; about the lawyer's response.
If this user had his/her way, articles about what Weiner ate for breakfast would be viable because he's linked to PG.
Forgetmenot ago
I actually have made no secret that i thought the post was valuable to pizzagate. I never said anything about Anthony wiener breakfast. I also asked cresch to please explain his reasons. He then said I must be from Reddit. We have had a very odd dialogue for the past 15 minutes. On my end I actually came over her to read the rules.
Crensch ago
Never said you did.
Sometimes people give examples of what absurdity would happen if your stupid ideas were to be implemented.
You asked on two separate occasions if I was a mod instead of simply scrolling down to look at the mod list him/herself. You also suggested that I behaved like a shill after pointing out that a lawyer's reaction to a warrant has fuck-all to do with the investigation.
I'm not sure if you are stupid, or paid to post as you do.
Read rules, but couldn't read the modlist, modlog, or my history after hand-waving to your own 13-day history as some kind of social proof that you aren't here in bad faith.
Forgetmenot ago
Also I apologize but I am jumping between screens. Communication is very helpful! Just introduce yourself as a mod. It would clear so much, I thought you were some random user who had a bone to pick with me for a difference of opinion. Instead I had to go and try to learn the latest shill tactic. And reach out to mods about my concerns. Meanwhile had I known you were a mod I would have understood your reaching out to me. For the record I asked you point blank if you were a mod. I had to dig it up on my own. I am not a shill. Maybe I am not computer savvy or voat savvy but I am not a shill.
Crensch ago
My status as a mod should have no bearing on the veracity of my words.
Please tell me how a lawyer's reaction to a warrant does anything but clutter up this space. You mentioned some outrage or appeal to those that don't know about PG, but you're posting this in the PG subverse. Everyone here knows about this stuff, and even if they don't, some lawyer's fit over a warrant is not useful information, it's not unexpected, and the target of the warrant being Weiner's laptop doesn't automatically make it pizzagate related, in the sense that it's useful information for this subverse.
"Pizza guy outraged about pizzagate hurting his pizzaprofits!" "Lawyer expresses outrage in defense of client" "Hey guys, there's a SPIRAL here on a pizza place wall!" "Male Actor #4 claims pizzagate is a bunch of lies"
That's the kind of utter crap your post fits in with.
Forgetmenot ago
I can't anymore, delete any post you like because it violates the rules of not citing a source. Or because you don't like the content. Heck ban my useless account too. Cut and paste posts screaming for mods to delete with out any explanation are going to create conflict and confusion. An easier method is to Simply introduce your self as a janitor and a request to delete and repost properly. Cut and paste the new rules for that matter. I am tired of this conversation, you win. I just care about the kids and don't mind sorting through information to help, most of it is useless sometimes you hit paydirt. It's how investigations work. Rules are objective and that is understandable and easy to comply with. deleting something because you think it is useless is subject to your opinion and there will be disagreement. And now we see how the disagreement is dealt with : deletion.
Forgetmenot ago
As for wiener, his computer is directly related to pizzagate, the defense strategies are important because it give a hint to where investigators should focus their efforts. Knowing the tactics of the coverup are important in order to counter those tactics. Similar to how you deal with shills by putting rules in place to avoid threads from being slid. Now is this wiener lawyer thread the most useful, in the whole scheme of things? Maybe maybe not, but it might be at some point down the road. Investigations evolve by connecting dots. You seem to have already made up your mind. I have not either way. You are the mod it's your call. This has been a very unpleasant experience hopefully not you intention.
Crensch ago
Tell me your post was not objectively in violation of rule 2.
Forgetmenot ago
Do you mean my reply that I wrote you right now?
Forgetmenot ago
I have not posted a thread at all. Simply have upvoated content. And replied to some comments.
Crensch ago
No, your pet post that you were defending.
Forgetmenot ago
Are you talking about the lawyer reaction to wiener search warrant? The few posts I have submitted have not been much. I only learned the new rules this morning. Not sure when they were posted but i have a new account. Feel free to delete my posts, one was even a question for expertise.
Crensch ago
Yeah. That's what started every bit of this.
Forgetmenot ago
I did not post that thread.
Crensch ago
You defended it as if you did. Remember when you were accusing me of being an alt of the person calling it out for rule violations? I did the same to you for OP, since it's easier to believe you wrote it and then defended it on a sock-puppet account than it is for me to have been the guy calling it out while having a mod account.
Forgetmenot ago
Listen I am really over the whole thing. I would like to chalk it up to a misunderstanding. Voat is not very welcoming to noobs (which I am) and honestly our interaction was very unpleasant. As it is the subject matter of pizzagate is really horrible too. I thought you were a shill. You thought I was a shill. I would like to just focus on pizzagate and help if possible even in a small way. Censorship and deleting threads can be controversial.
Forgetmenot ago
That was not my post. I am not defending a post. I am talking about deleting threads without explanation
Crensch ago
The explanations are in the modlog regardless. https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/modlog/submission
Forgetmenot ago
You really jump to conclusions, let me try to explain again: I found out you were a mod when I read the rules. Because clearly I had touched a nerve regarding the thread about the lawyer. I am on mobile as well. So links, copy and paste is a bit tedious.
Crensch ago
It's not the fact that I'm a mod that made that submission wrong, it's the fact that the lawyer's reaction to a warrant has fuck-all to do with pizzagate, and posting about it does nothing but slide legitimate posts. The idea that you can just "slide" these shitposts instead of removing them is absurd. Their entire point of existence is to slide everything else, and with the shill bot armies, the votes to do so are easily acquired.
If posts like that were to be left alone, then, as I said before, Weiner's last meal would be a post that needed to be left alone. Every meal. Every day.
Or maybe a post. Every hour. Of Weiner's reaction to his laptop being taken? Maybe that's a better example for you? How is that useful?
Its link to the actual pizzagate investigation is virtually nonexistent.
gopluckyourself ago
He is a mod yes. He is trying to enforce the rules to the subverse he is trying to moderate. In his opinion the post violated several of the sidebar rules so he deleted it. If the person would change their post to be compliant with all rules in the sidebar there is no issue. If they cannot make their post compliant with all of the rules in the sidebar then the post does not belong in the sub.
edit: /v/pizzarelated is a sub I've created specifically for this type of content. pizzawhatever would have probly been a better name lol
Forgetmenot ago
What post are you referring to ? I have not posted any threads ? He deleted a comment reply to a thread? What do you mean
gopluckyourself ago
edited my comment to more accurately reflect what is going on.
Forgetmenot ago
Thank you when you explain it like that it makes sense. I was referring more to a theory leading to a trail. Brainstorming so to speak. I have not posted much but always make sure to try to find a source. I understand what you mean.
Millennial_Falcon ago
Thanks.
Millennial_Falcon ago
To all, we MUST have some standards, because otherwise we are vulnerable to flooding and forum sliding by shills. If we rely on downvotes alone, this forum will become entirely useless.
SaneGoatiSwear ago
you now have bigger problems.
you think forum sliding is bad?
just wait until you see what the sjw cabal has next in store for you! (kev, george crensch)
belphegorsprime ago
First of all, thanks for addressing this. I favor letting voats decide, and calling for all lurkers to participate in that process. I have been guilty, at times, of having "unspent voats" for a 24 hour period when I know damn well there was upvoatable material. We have to send strong signals to win this thing against our formidable adversaries.
I think clarification about rules is very important, because I think there is a lot of genuine confusion / concern being misjudged as shill tactics .. etc. The same thing is taking place with the concern for the whereabouts / proof of life for Julian Assange. There are obviously disinfo agents abound, but we can't start suspecting that everyone that disagrees with us is one of them. This gets amplified by rule confusion.
As it currently stands, there is a rule in the meme thread that people may not be aware of. Memes may not be of use in a subverse focused on investigation (as they are considered "clutter"), so a separation of function may be ideal. I ask that this is formally stated in the rules in order to prevent confusion and loss of comments in discussion (as memes are migrated, at times losing valuable comments).
I think it's a good idea to have different subs for different functions. I also think, to the degree that it is relevant, additional subs can provide decentralization. This is good because it is robust.. but it is bad because fragmentation divides viewership and can become a chore. However, I think basically, pizzagate has become an ecosystem. There are enough good people in these spaces to loosely coordinate some guiding principles that transform this into a powerful movement for change.
Investigators looking for meme support, please come to /v/PizzagateMemes to discuss any memes want created.
All talented memers are encouraged to come as well. Come to weaponize the truth!
gopluckyourself ago
Will be spreading links to this sub
redditverse around! I keep fucking up the verbage....Forgetmenot ago
This is a problem because shills are using these rules to delete leads. Deletion only benefits the pedo elites who want to cover up this up just like the franklin cover up. Censorship is dangerous and only benefits the pedofiles.
Hermesthriceborn ago
HA your rules are so irrelevant in relation to a universal concept of free speech.
Hermesthriceborn ago
You do not understand free speech.
Hermesthriceborn ago
Also: quit sucking the teet of mods as if they are some sort of benevolent god who bestows all privileges and facilitates all that is good within the world of voat.
When I first signed up I was lured in under the guise of free speech and user-friendly mods who never impeded upon the community because the community held them accountable. Mods are in effect determining where the threads go by diminishing the path in which users can get there. Never for once let an ego blind your own logic you fool.
Phobos_Mothership ago
He said, to a mod.
No, we are enforcing rules. They're in the sidebar. Read them.
Hermesthriceborn ago
You sound like you really get a kick out of that authority, bud.
Phobos_Mothership ago
I get a kick out of support from the community
Hermesthriceborn ago
That was my feedback.
Hermesthriceborn ago
Behold, authority which makes it apparent you are unable to criticize...
Hermesthriceborn ago
Rules, rules & more rules... man fuck this place if its starting to turn into Reddit. Hate speech will be deleted. FUCK YOU
Millennial_Falcon ago
@kevdude, please include a link to the current PG Summary Sticky at the top of this post.
(https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/1497611))
heygeorge ago
I'd like to see a draft or two if you don't mind sharing! The sidebar is so long at this point that I hardly know what's in it. Once it's a little more settled, maybe we can even improve the formatting.
tjarco ago
3.1 The minimal standars enforced by mods is what being proposed in 1 & 2 right? If this is what is ment my Voat is for enforcing minimal standards!
5 What are the desired requirements for document sharing. I've read some people being cautious with opening PDF, Excel, Google documents. Excel could be Pastbin, or .tsv?. PDF? not always archive.is so what's an alternative? Google Documents being an Excel or Word could be covered in a Pastebin or published list archived, but what about forms?
5 & 1 "This is an investigative sub. The idea is that people would either be posting evidence or asking questions." Could we somehow introduce identifiers as to what a post is? For instance labelling posts with #OR = Original Research, #D = discussion/exploration #M Is for media/memes and other stuff that is deducted from #OR & #D and put into a format that can be shared on social media..
5 whats the stance on editing posts?
Phobos_Mothership ago
I agree that we need to enforce the rules uniformly, though I do find that people who are genuinely trying to contribute to the conversation will edit their post to include sources, or delete a link post and make it a discussion so that it doesn't violate the rules.
Other people however, seem to give away their shitty intentions the moment you ask them to provide a source. They accuse you of being CTR and begrudgingly post some bullshit unrelated blog 'news' article. If you then tell them 'I read that source, it makes no mention of any of your claims,' They start spam-posting, 'MODERATOR IS CTR VOAT COMPROMISED THE END IS FUCKING NIGH"
Forgetmenot ago
Requesting a source is a perfectly fair and valid.
heygeorge ago
They also may be kids themselves and concern trolls. Unfortunately, the amount of uncivil and unreasonable people is large and you ARE PROBABLY CTR, SHILL! :)
You've been doing a fine job moderating as far as I can see.
garlicbulb ago
It appears several people lost all their contribution points overnight recent, is there any way of stopppng that targeting? Maybe making a maximum of -10 per day ? .I agree on minimum standards of submission. Suggest some separation of pedogate and pizzagate. There will be overlap but the distinction is that pedogate is all global "VIP" child abuse eg presidio, franklin, finders, Sibels revelations -Hastert and beyond, Europe , australia , fiona barnett etc whilst pizzagate mainly CP podesta, DC , Clintons etc working outwards
Phobos_Mothership ago
I try to do that, the only time I personally do not give someone a chance to either fix it or delete it themselves is when they are spamming.
Rule 3 is very important, and there is room for some 'speculation' as long as your post it as a discussion with a linked source in it and an explanation as to how you believe something is related/important to pizzagate. If you do those things, which are simple, then your post will not be deleted unless it violates some other rule.
I know many mods do this, I personally do it (sometimes I even message the user and tell them that I would upvote the submission if it were on v/conspiracy instead of here)
Forgetmenot ago
I don't agree not everything has a source. I don't want to read a persons blog or watch the video they are advertising. We are searching for leads and exposing dead ends. these rules are a shill tactic to help cover up their trail. There are not always going to be sources.
Julian55 ago
agree
samhara ago
If you have to make a source; perhaps you can link back to your own blog; or somesuch?
Hermesthriceborn ago
crensch is/was bad at this and millienial falcon
Millennial_Falcon ago
What makes you think that?
Hermesthriceborn ago
Where are the deleted threads? I'll show you homie
VictorSteinerDavion ago
wew lad you be craaaazy I tells ya to take this on.
Haha, good to have you aboard and hopefully this all works out
SaneGoatiSwear ago
you are a mod on v/pizzagate.
you have just welcomed your enemy into the power position on your sub.
you have just ruined v/pizzagate.
VictorSteinerDavion ago
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHA
Merry christmas to you too
Phobos_Mothership ago
I think we all know what would happen if we relaxed the rules about submission: This sub would spiral downward out of control with off-topic posts and people claiming 'IT WAS ZEE JEWS'. I think the best thing we've done was create other subs for loose/general discussion.
rush22 ago
A lot of that is actually just one guy who is creating accounts with bots though. There was a post a while back where they guy admitted it when someone noticed a whole bunch of posts by "ABot1" "ABot2" "ABot3", etc. that were deleted within a few minutes. I'm not saying you can necessarily do anything about it--just checking if you are aware.
Phobos_Mothership ago
Not to even mention the fact that he's not good at it.
He has no tact whatsoever, it's just "make another account, post some completely obvious bait/bullshit, make no attempt to disguise shitty intentions of said post, upvote said post with many alternate accounts, post gets downvoted to shit and deleted. Rinse, repeat"
Never anything creative, never anything with a goal, never goes anywhere. He's kind of sad, actually.
Hermesthriceborn ago
That is a ridiculous nanny state comment, we can say, read or choose to ignore what ever the fuck we all want. get over it.
Julian55 ago
yes
Phobos_Mothership ago
Fix'd that for you
Hermesthriceborn ago
Wow.
justanotherpizza ago
Thank you, I will give your suggestion some thought and see if I can come up with something useful.
justanotherpizza ago
Adressing 3.1
I vote for minimals standards enforced by moderation . Because accounts can be built up and multiplied by people with less than good intentions, voting power becomes a weapon against us. The balance of power can only be restored by affective moderation to keep content submission within the framework of this subs intention / purpose.
Addressing 3.2
I vote for separate subs to be created, which address specific aspects of pizza gate. I would even be in favour of having something called pizza gate shitposts where anything goes . Shills can post all they want there. But the title makes it clear that nothing is to be taken seriously .
As to the content of the rules to be applied for moderation , I would suggest looking closely at the documents published regarding how Shills operate . This kind of destructive behaviour can be profiled and actively defended against.
For the moderation of the janitors you pick , you should consider how to manage complaints in a transparent and effective way . Shills will inevitably try to bog down the system by escalating every single moderated post. Between the principles of transparency objectivity and fairness, Focus on transparency because objectivity and fairness are still subject of concepts and you will never be able to create a process that is both lightweight and fulfills all three of these principles.
I work with quality control of IT requirements management , so I have quite a bit of experience of assessing text based on a predefined checklist. I am not sure if I would be willing to put myself on a limb and do janitor cleanup , but I agree that it is necessary and a step in the right direction
gopluckyourself ago
I made /v/pizzagaterelated for offtopic/shitpost type stuff. There used to be a list of pizzagate related subs way down the page but it's gone now as they were basically all copies of this sub.
Millennial_Falcon ago
I just want to add another reason for minimum standards: if we rely on downvotes alone, shills can easily destroy this forum by flooding it with shitposts (known as forum sliding). We have already experienced such attacks. This is why we need more janitors. Right now, there isn't always someone on duty watching pizzagate/new.
ThePuppetShow ago
Why do we keep removing the informative sticky for plan making? Is this not forum sliding at it's best?
SaneGoatiSwear ago
im here 18 hours a day. i would have loved to help janitor crap off this site. it's the main attack vector against voat right now. helping voat is what i do.
BUT you idiots modded v/protectvoat people, the literal sjw cabal that's taking over voat, to v/pizzagate, in effect, 100% compromising v/pizzagate.
i would never help the sjw cabal. i'd rather do meth and stick spikes up my bum then help those censoring fee-fee hurt safe-space-making faggoty nigger pieces of shit.
they have weaseled their way into the admins' ears, dividing them from the community
they code voat, but no announcement was ever made, and this truth is slid and censored by the cabal and the admins
they talk to the admins off voat, but pretend they don't.
they organize in iirc, and also run v/protectvoat to control the record, and v/soapboxbanhammer to upvoat farm their accounts (largely un-needed anymore).
you have literally just given one of their main operatives O access to your sub. you have fucked ALL of this royally.
mark my mother fucking words.
Millennial_Falcon ago
What exactly do you mean by "sjw cabal"? In my interactions with kevdude, he just seems very concerned about censorship.
Mickgoestojail ago
Sanegoat is a basket case. If you upset him you will be the sjw cabal as well.
SaneGoatiSwear ago
just like the mafia guys are "concerned about da well being of a community."
what i mean is they talk to the admins off voat, but there's been no official mention of it
they code voat, but there's been no official mention of it
and they run major subs, janitor subs, run protectvoat sbbh and now pizzagate (among dozens of other subs; someone posted a list a while back on protectvoat)
UglyTruth ago
Yeah, I get that there isn't much that you can do about the language that the system uses. I'm just wary of the ambiguity of using titles in place of nouns, eg Comments instead of comments.
UglyTruth ago
Not trying to be pedantic, but can we avoid calling posts submissions? Submission implies diminished status or dependence on a controlling authority when our strength is our independence from voices which arbitrarily decide what forms of criticism are unacceptable.
VictorSteinerDavion ago
This is like that 'master / slave' idiocy that went on at github
In the context of what's going on here, a submission is an article given for consideration.
It is not a diminutive or relational in any way to the status of humans in hierarchical interactions
There is much wisdom in this, thus all speech is free speech
UglyTruth ago
The main problem with the ideal of free speech is that it legitimizes lying. Free speech is to communication what anarchy is to social conduct. Everyone has the right to express their beliefs, but not to misrepresent the facts in order to cause someone harm. This isn't an arbitrary position, but one which is consistent with reason and with the common law. The problem here is that "civilized" society has misrepresented the origins of the common law. At common law bearing false witness against one's neighbour was unlawful, and not simply a tort which considered only reputation while ignoring the intent of the liar, that diabolical nature which perverts the truth in order to cause injury.
VictorSteinerDavion ago
I am of the firm opinion that personal responsibility is a major factor of civilized society.
I agree yelling fire in a cinema when there is none is a very sensible thing to hold accountable.
But we are not talking about 'the outside' we are talking about a text only internet discussion forum, with the ability to consider the evidence is at a maximum.
Huh? Allowing all speech to be free does not legitimize false information, only people who believe without critical thought do that
In reality, any restriction to speech is a fast track to forcibly stopping people from communicating.
What that communication contains is separate to the issue of stopping people from communicating.
UglyTruth ago
It still has real world effects, eg the panic that resulted when the War of the Worlds was on the radio and people thought it was a real news broadcast about an alien invasion.
Nobody has the authority to "allow" what is unlawful, to do so is conspiracy. Many people do not apply critical thought, for example the 18% or so of US adults who trust their national news organizations.
Do you think that I should not be forcibly stopped from DOXing you and making the false accustaion that you rape children?
Not in terms of ethics it's not. You could apply your argument to social settings to reach the conclusion that someone verbally abusing random strangers should not be stopped.
VictorSteinerDavion ago
Go for it, all it will do is reveal the nature of who you are
I already have come to that conclusion.
Until physical action is taken (I include intimidating proximity in the definition of physical), nothing real is being done.
If you are offended by what is said, you have chosen to be offended. Your offense is not my problem.
UglyTruth ago
So you think that it's OK to slander people? If you don't think that it's OK then do you think that people should just sit on their hands when something bad happens?
The repugnance of of malicious lies is very real.
justiceforever ago
Maybe I'm missing it and sorry if I am, but since there can be only one sticky at a time, please link this at the top of the post for newcomers:
https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/1497611
Also it should be in the sidebar.