I think you are operating under a misconception about the purpose of the submission guidelines, Voat's censorship policies, and mods intentions.
First of all as you probably know, removing posts that fail to satisfy submission guidelines is not censorship, according to the the Voat User Agreement:
Can I submit links to any subverse I want?
Each subverse has its own rules which are usually stated in the respective subverse's sidebar. If you ignore said rules, your account may be banned from submitting further content to the subverse or in some cases, globally.
Secondly, our submission guidelines were established early on by the community in order to focus content on v/pizzagate on RESEARCH posts, for the purpose of advancing the investigation and caching the information that could actually be helpful to law enforcement and media in bringing elite pedo scum to justice. To that end, we created submission guidelines, and several sister-subverses for non-research but still-important posts:
You can't just slap a few links into a post and claim you have satisfied the submission guidelines. You actually have to fully satisfy them all such that you have created a RESEARCH post that provides linked sources backing up every claim. Linking to a source that offers no actual evidence itself does not satisfy Rule 2. That is, I can't just send out a tweet giving my opinion that John Podesta is the guy in this video, and then link to that tweet as a source. Without some kind of link showing actual evidence this is JP, it's never going to be anything more than speculative. If you put a title on it claiming it is John Podesta, it's going to be removed for Rule 1 or 2. It belongs in our speculative sub.
Finally, there is no proof this video is connected to elite pedophiles at all. v/Pizzagate defines "pizzagate" as having to do with sexual abuse of kids by the GLOBAL ELITE, not the four pedos that live in your neighborhood and work at your local McDonalds.
Without submission guidelines, mods would not be able to remove anything but adspam from this board, and truly valuable research posts, such as this one, would be slid from the board by Share Blue spam. Take a look at the Hentai spam carpet bombing attack we had last night. That 9217 post came in right in the middle of it and still has received little attention, even though it is part of a research effort that is going to break open a real, elitist New Age pedophile ring.
And speaking of disruption by shills; if you really care about it, why are you constantly playing into their "mods are compromised" "Voat is a limited hangout" narrative by trashing mods for doing their jobs and removing posts that don't fulfill the mission of the board? Your energies would be much better directed toward downvoating the shill posts, helping other users understand the submission guidelines and how to make posts that comply with them, and upvoating great contributions. Seriously...what the hell?
You could also be commenting in research post threads linking people to interesting speculative threads in v/pizzagatewhatever that you feel deserve more attention. This serves two purposes: it gets people to sign up for and visit that sub, and it causes great research threads to rise in "HOT" and gain more visibility.
And yet, you come and bitch and moan and echo the shills and dump a bunch of negative, toxic bullshit into the community discussion. If you really care about the kids, you need to knock this shit off.
Please, by all means, keep an eye on removed submissions. Sometimes we do remove legit posts -- usually because the user has not spelled out how something is pizzagate related. We don't know or see every connection, and many users assume the connection is obvious. When you find one, please ping the mod who removed and let them know why you think it was a mistake. If it was a mistake, we WILL apologize and ask the user to repost. There are also sometimes research posts that get put in v/pizzagatewhatever and never seen -- ping us about those, too, so we can invite the user to post on the research board and give them any tips they need to satisfy the submission guidelines.
What I hear you saying in your comments here is that if we haven't officially proven that this is Podesta, we have to post a submission like this in v/pizzagatewhatever. You admit you personally don't believe these are real, but a trap by anti-pizzagaters. If i'm not mistaken, you also hold the belief that Ted Gunderson was not legit. IMO mods here should not be acting as judge, and censoring (unless, for instance, you can conclusively prove this is a hoax video and therefore damaging to v/pizzagate).
Usually, as with George Webb videos, you allow posts that have no conclusive proof of claims within.
Anyway, thanks for leaving this up. The type of proof you say you require is exactly what we would get from an FBI investigation - the point of this submission. How else do we get proof?
The best comparison was the one where a guy took the audio from "you think you're hot shit don't ya" and compared that with a video of Podesta saying "just get lost" trying to shoo away a reporter. The voices are eerily similar.
ted was cointelpro.
you could compare him to a modern day kevin annett....
some george webb shit is good i havent watched sincee like day 69 but the initial stuff was pretty good.
also, i honestly wanted this clip to be podesta so bad and still do but honestly it doesnt sound lie him to me
I'm not sure what your credentials are to weigh these things, but Ted was murdered slowly via arsenic poisoning. Cointelpro are people like Alex Jones, and they don't get murdered by the government because they work for them. Make sense? Ted is quoted by the leading researchers of pizzagate, he is mentioned in pretty much every major doc on the subject. There have been no credible sources questioning his legitimacy, and he has been a backbone for our research, so it gives me pause when admins claim he is discredited. The only person online who has questioned Ted, and who is behind the attacks ,on his character (now that he's not here) is himself discredited. http://educate-yourself.org/cn/Stew-Webb-Lies-About-Ted-Gunderson-and-the-Art-Bell-Lawsuit04apr16.shtml
my credentials are garbage. i initially trusted him and then read more than one thing about him not being good similar stuff id seen to kevin annett. upon further investigation the 2nd thing i read was basically verbatim to the first thing i read............... the irony of me being disproved by the website i based my name off of is.....palpable? lol thanks ive been enjoying your stuff lately all of it. see this verbatim of the educate yourself thing which i obviously didnt remember all too clearly in the first place
http://barbarahartwell.blogspot.ca/2009/12/ex-fbi-agent-ted-gunderson-exposed.html
anywhooo thanks
Actually, I am not qualified to judge who is in the video, VZ. And I don't have an opinion about Gunderson. I haven't read enough about him. I do know our guidelines, and I try to serve this board by administering them fairly. The problem is the headline claims this IS Podesta. The George Webb videos are not a fair comparison - they're Webb talking about his theories.
Dude, seriously. I apologized in the same thread because emotions run high when you hear a kid screaming from torture. I posted that in the very same thread that I was irate in. Apparently I touched a nerve, and maybe that was my intention, only because I, like many of us, are frustrated and need/want something to break here. Maybe we all need to think, since we don't have any new Podesta links, that we should lighten the requirements. It's just as important to make a connection as it is to lay out original research. Maybe we need to consider the requirements based on where we stand today, along with focusing on the elite. We're all here to save kids, maybe we need to reassess again. Why? Because sometimes keeping mojo and dialogue among researchers gets you the result you want went NOT having that results in dire consequences for the mission. Peace...and I mean that!
I totally agree that the sub needs to have a discussion on this topic and have asked several users to post their thoughts on it in v/pizzagatemods. Please do so also! We are discussing what content to put in sticky to gather member feedback about how the guidelines need to be tweaked.
Thanks for the thoughtful reply. The only issue I have is that I don't see how the video very possibly depicting Podesta torturing a kid at CPP isn't "pizzagate related". That just does not compute. "Without some kind of link showing actual evidence this is JP, this is nothing more than speculative", well isn't most of what's discussed here technically speculative? Are you saying that unless we get Podestas face on camera in that video then it has no place her because it's only "speculative"?
You can speculate about conclusions and you can speculate about facts.
James Alefantis had a picture on his instagram and a friend commented "killroom" is a fact. The insane speculation is about the conclusion, that, thus it is an actual killroom where Alefantis and friends kill people.
This video shows John Podesta torturing a kid at CPP is insane speculation about facts. Adding "very possibly" only reduces the insane speculation slightly.
Also you have two facts you speculating on: that John Podesta is in the video AND the video is at CPP. Adding in the second part makes, much, much more unlikely to be true.
Fuck off Are_we_sure you're a known shill that tries to sew seeds of doubt amongst us. Btw, could you have chosen a less damning username to go along with your shill tactics?
In this submission, we used "supposedly" Podesta and "what appears to be" child abuse, and then show people how to report these videos to the FBI for a proper investigation - something we aren't in a position to carry out, and the only way we can get the proof the mods are saying is required. People are taking note that the rules are not applied at all uniformly here, and this idea that there can't be any question about claims made does not fly when you look at the rest of what v/PG has to offer. Seriously, we host Alex Jones saying all sorts of stuff, and Geroge Webb claiming whatever he wants sans proof, and you have personally defended this saying "we don't censor, just let people downvote it".
These videos need to go in v/pizzagatewhatever, unless someone can provide COMPELLING evidence -- of the sort that would induce law enforcement to investigate him for it -- that it actually is JP. That's the deal. You are WELCOME to discuss this and link to it in comments of any thread on v/pizzagate. Speculation is perfectly legit in comments. I would recommend this thread, which includes it as part of a larger topic, without making unprovable claims in the headline.
I should also point out that enemies of PG are very likely pushing these highly triggering videos to agitate PG investigators and incite them to make public defamatory claims about Podesta that his lawyers can then go after them for. This was the tactic Jeffrey Epstein's lawyer Derschowitz used to deflect victim lawsuits and suppress the criminal prosecution. That's their MO.
Just out of curiosity, don't you think this could very likely be Podesta in the video? As I said to someone before, how many MK Ultra type child torture videos could possibly be out there with a person that sounds almost identical to Podesta (minus the slight accent), has the same lighting as CPP, and even gets called John and possibly "Skippy" too. What are the odds? Exremely slim I'd say.
view the rest of the comments →
Vindicator ago
@jstayz44, @V____Z, @dickface8, @cakeoflightylight:
I think you are operating under a misconception about the purpose of the submission guidelines, Voat's censorship policies, and mods intentions.
First of all as you probably know, removing posts that fail to satisfy submission guidelines is not censorship, according to the the Voat User Agreement:
Secondly, our submission guidelines were established early on by the community in order to focus content on v/pizzagate on RESEARCH posts, for the purpose of advancing the investigation and caching the information that could actually be helpful to law enforcement and media in bringing elite pedo scum to justice. To that end, we created submission guidelines, and several sister-subverses for non-research but still-important posts:
You can't just slap a few links into a post and claim you have satisfied the submission guidelines. You actually have to fully satisfy them all such that you have created a RESEARCH post that provides linked sources backing up every claim. Linking to a source that offers no actual evidence itself does not satisfy Rule 2. That is, I can't just send out a tweet giving my opinion that John Podesta is the guy in this video, and then link to that tweet as a source. Without some kind of link showing actual evidence this is JP, it's never going to be anything more than speculative. If you put a title on it claiming it is John Podesta, it's going to be removed for Rule 1 or 2. It belongs in our speculative sub.
Finally, there is no proof this video is connected to elite pedophiles at all. v/Pizzagate defines "pizzagate" as having to do with sexual abuse of kids by the GLOBAL ELITE, not the four pedos that live in your neighborhood and work at your local McDonalds.
Mods did not choose these rules, they were developed by the whole community through a series of stickies over several weeks, in an effort led by @Kevdude and @Crensch of v/ProtectVoat.
Without submission guidelines, mods would not be able to remove anything but adspam from this board, and truly valuable research posts, such as this one, would be slid from the board by Share Blue spam. Take a look at the Hentai spam carpet bombing attack we had last night. That 9217 post came in right in the middle of it and still has received little attention, even though it is part of a research effort that is going to break open a real, elitist New Age pedophile ring.
And speaking of disruption by shills; if you really care about it, why are you constantly playing into their "mods are compromised" "Voat is a limited hangout" narrative by trashing mods for doing their jobs and removing posts that don't fulfill the mission of the board? Your energies would be much better directed toward downvoating the shill posts, helping other users understand the submission guidelines and how to make posts that comply with them, and upvoating great contributions. Seriously...what the hell?
You could also be commenting in research post threads linking people to interesting speculative threads in v/pizzagatewhatever that you feel deserve more attention. This serves two purposes: it gets people to sign up for and visit that sub, and it causes great research threads to rise in "HOT" and gain more visibility.
And yet, you come and bitch and moan and echo the shills and dump a bunch of negative, toxic bullshit into the community discussion. If you really care about the kids, you need to knock this shit off.
Please, by all means, keep an eye on removed submissions. Sometimes we do remove legit posts -- usually because the user has not spelled out how something is pizzagate related. We don't know or see every connection, and many users assume the connection is obvious. When you find one, please ping the mod who removed and let them know why you think it was a mistake. If it was a mistake, we WILL apologize and ask the user to repost. There are also sometimes research posts that get put in v/pizzagatewhatever and never seen -- ping us about those, too, so we can invite the user to post on the research board and give them any tips they need to satisfy the submission guidelines.
V____Z ago
What I hear you saying in your comments here is that if we haven't officially proven that this is Podesta, we have to post a submission like this in v/pizzagatewhatever. You admit you personally don't believe these are real, but a trap by anti-pizzagaters. If i'm not mistaken, you also hold the belief that Ted Gunderson was not legit. IMO mods here should not be acting as judge, and censoring (unless, for instance, you can conclusively prove this is a hoax video and therefore damaging to v/pizzagate).
Usually, as with George Webb videos, you allow posts that have no conclusive proof of claims within.
Anyway, thanks for leaving this up. The type of proof you say you require is exactly what we would get from an FBI investigation - the point of this submission. How else do we get proof?
I mean, there's this, from @Orlando_Kek_Follower
educate_yourself ago
ted was cointelpro. you could compare him to a modern day kevin annett.... some george webb shit is good i havent watched sincee like day 69 but the initial stuff was pretty good. also, i honestly wanted this clip to be podesta so bad and still do but honestly it doesnt sound lie him to me
V____Z ago
I'm not sure what your credentials are to weigh these things, but Ted was murdered slowly via arsenic poisoning. Cointelpro are people like Alex Jones, and they don't get murdered by the government because they work for them. Make sense? Ted is quoted by the leading researchers of pizzagate, he is mentioned in pretty much every major doc on the subject. There have been no credible sources questioning his legitimacy, and he has been a backbone for our research, so it gives me pause when admins claim he is discredited. The only person online who has questioned Ted, and who is behind the attacks ,on his character (now that he's not here) is himself discredited. http://educate-yourself.org/cn/Stew-Webb-Lies-About-Ted-Gunderson-and-the-Art-Bell-Lawsuit04apr16.shtml
educate_yourself ago
my credentials are garbage. i initially trusted him and then read more than one thing about him not being good similar stuff id seen to kevin annett. upon further investigation the 2nd thing i read was basically verbatim to the first thing i read............... the irony of me being disproved by the website i based my name off of is.....palpable? lol thanks ive been enjoying your stuff lately all of it. see this verbatim of the educate yourself thing which i obviously didnt remember all too clearly in the first place http://barbarahartwell.blogspot.ca/2009/12/ex-fbi-agent-ted-gunderson-exposed.html anywhooo thanks
Vindicator ago
Actually, I am not qualified to judge who is in the video, VZ. And I don't have an opinion about Gunderson. I haven't read enough about him. I do know our guidelines, and I try to serve this board by administering them fairly. The problem is the headline claims this IS Podesta. The George Webb videos are not a fair comparison - they're Webb talking about his theories.
jstayz44 ago
Dude, seriously. I apologized in the same thread because emotions run high when you hear a kid screaming from torture. I posted that in the very same thread that I was irate in. Apparently I touched a nerve, and maybe that was my intention, only because I, like many of us, are frustrated and need/want something to break here. Maybe we all need to think, since we don't have any new Podesta links, that we should lighten the requirements. It's just as important to make a connection as it is to lay out original research. Maybe we need to consider the requirements based on where we stand today, along with focusing on the elite. We're all here to save kids, maybe we need to reassess again. Why? Because sometimes keeping mojo and dialogue among researchers gets you the result you want went NOT having that results in dire consequences for the mission. Peace...and I mean that!
Vindicator ago
I totally agree that the sub needs to have a discussion on this topic and have asked several users to post their thoughts on it in v/pizzagatemods. Please do so also! We are discussing what content to put in sticky to gather member feedback about how the guidelines need to be tweaked.
dickface8 ago
Thanks for the thoughtful reply. The only issue I have is that I don't see how the video very possibly depicting Podesta torturing a kid at CPP isn't "pizzagate related". That just does not compute. "Without some kind of link showing actual evidence this is JP, this is nothing more than speculative", well isn't most of what's discussed here technically speculative? Are you saying that unless we get Podestas face on camera in that video then it has no place her because it's only "speculative"?
Are_we_sure ago
You can speculate about conclusions and you can speculate about facts.
James Alefantis had a picture on his instagram and a friend commented "killroom" is a fact. The insane speculation is about the conclusion, that, thus it is an actual killroom where Alefantis and friends kill people.
This video shows John Podesta torturing a kid at CPP is insane speculation about facts. Adding "very possibly" only reduces the insane speculation slightly.
Also you have two facts you speculating on: that John Podesta is in the video AND the video is at CPP. Adding in the second part makes, much, much more unlikely to be true.
dickface8 ago
Fuck off Are_we_sure you're a known shill that tries to sew seeds of doubt amongst us. Btw, could you have chosen a less damning username to go along with your shill tactics?
V____Z ago
In this submission, we used "supposedly" Podesta and "what appears to be" child abuse, and then show people how to report these videos to the FBI for a proper investigation - something we aren't in a position to carry out, and the only way we can get the proof the mods are saying is required. People are taking note that the rules are not applied at all uniformly here, and this idea that there can't be any question about claims made does not fly when you look at the rest of what v/PG has to offer. Seriously, we host Alex Jones saying all sorts of stuff, and Geroge Webb claiming whatever he wants sans proof, and you have personally defended this saying "we don't censor, just let people downvote it".
Vindicator ago
Thank you for listening to my reply. :-)
These videos need to go in v/pizzagatewhatever, unless someone can provide COMPELLING evidence -- of the sort that would induce law enforcement to investigate him for it -- that it actually is JP. That's the deal. You are WELCOME to discuss this and link to it in comments of any thread on v/pizzagate. Speculation is perfectly legit in comments. I would recommend this thread, which includes it as part of a larger topic, without making unprovable claims in the headline.
I should also point out that enemies of PG are very likely pushing these highly triggering videos to agitate PG investigators and incite them to make public defamatory claims about Podesta that his lawyers can then go after them for. This was the tactic Jeffrey Epstein's lawyer Derschowitz used to deflect victim lawsuits and suppress the criminal prosecution. That's their MO.
dickface8 ago
Just out of curiosity, don't you think this could very likely be Podesta in the video? As I said to someone before, how many MK Ultra type child torture videos could possibly be out there with a person that sounds almost identical to Podesta (minus the slight accent), has the same lighting as CPP, and even gets called John and possibly "Skippy" too. What are the odds? Exremely slim I'd say.