I know it's not been the whole 6 months we discussed last time, but it is indeed time to talk about the RULES.
As you all know, we have a place for meta talk about the rules and the mods, /v/pizzagatemods. It's not overly public, and it's not the most elegant solution to cluttering the front page here, but that's what we have.
This sticky is here because the usual monthly concern-trolling, and @Millenium_Falcon attacking by @ESOTERICshade gathered enough notice to warrant one.
This was the deleted post. This is the post I made with my findings on the issue.
As always, mods serve at the pleasure of the users of the subverse. Please make your voices heard.
This sticky is both a polling and a discussion. Discuss whatever, wherever, but the polling will function like this:
POLLING
On a base-level comment, type any of these numbers you agree with, in any order.
1 - Rules are fine, don't change them
2 - Mods are doing a good job, don't remove them
3 - Mods aren't doing enough, and need to recruit more mods, and remove more submissions.
4 - Mods are not doing a good job, we need to talk about removing them
5 - Rules are not fine, we need to change them
6 - Mods need to lighten up and let more things slide, let's talk about that.
7 - Try no rules and no moderation for a couple of weeks
8 - No rules and no moderation in perpetuity.
Millennial_Falcon
Millennial_Falcon seems to be a popular whipping boy here. Those that show up in /v/pizzagatemods with complaints tend to target him almost exclusively. The people attacking him seem to think they're not alone, but fail to provide any evidence of wrongdoing.
Keep in mind, your accusations and support for them will not just be taken at face value, like every accuser so far seems to have expected. They will be researched thoroughly, and if there is merit to them, something WILL be done. Please feel free to be the first to provide evidence of wrongdoing on his part.
And by all means, comment on any other mod you have an issue with. Hell, if you guys want ME gone, I'll hand over the reigns to whomever you think is worthy.
Poll will end on the 18th.
Oh,
9 - Stop asking us this crap for 6 months FOR REAL this time!
view the rest of the comments →
Blacksmith21 ago
@crensch @vindicator @millenial_falcon
It's this type of shit why I suggest a minimum standard for posts. It's a hit and run, with a fake title, designed specifically to get the shill(s) and all their alt accounts to upvoat and keep hit at the top.
Want to post a credible article about circumcision and how it relates to PG? Fine, go for it. But the purpose of posts like this ^ are strictly to hijack the narrative, and to KEEP ANTISEMITIC TOPICS AT THE TOP OF THE LIST - so as truth seekers stumble onto v/pizzagate, they will be immediately turned off by the topics.
IT'S A TACTIC IT IS NOT LEGIT RESEARCH.
Crensch ago
All right, I'm going to go at this as I normally do.
What minimum standard?
What's fake about the title? The user posting it used the title of the article. Reading through the article, the title seems to not be fake.
Please explain.
The article looks fairly credible. It's also pretty common that Jews circumcise, and fight to have it legalized. What's not credible?
HAVING AN ARTICLE THAT SHOWS JEWS DOING SOMETHING WRONG IS NOT IN AND OF ITSELF ANTISEMITIC. Even if it was, that wouldn't make it wrong.
So don't speak about things because people might not like what we say?
I'm pretty underwhelmed about what constitutes "research" here so far.
Blacksmith21 ago
Show me where it says "certain people fight over who gets to eat the foreskins of newly circumcised babies". I'm not arguing against the debate. I'm arguing shill tactics. It's 101.
Show me a better resource than v/pizzagate for research.
I will say again for clarity: I am not arguing against any topic of discussion. I'm arguing against a tactic used by the "nazi ladyboys" in their various alt accounts - repost something that's been posted 2 or 3 times to date. Then try and tag a legitimate article on banning circumcision to a myth. This has nothing to do with Jews or any other specific religion. If the same thing were being done against another religion I would raise the same concerns. And, I never disputed the veracity of the source article.
Crensch ago
The first part of the title fulfilled the rule requirements of describing the content. They do eat the foreskins in a ritual called Metzitzah B'peh.
Shilling what? Who's paying someone to come out against the Jews? It's almost invariably the other way around, a la ADL and JIDF.
For research in general? I kinda doubt your asking that. Either way, not having a better PG place doesn't mean people have necessarily been doing a good job here.
I do not know of any, but users here claim there is one. Either way, the bar seems to be set very low here from what I've seen.
That's fine.
What does "nazi ladyboys" even mean? It having been posted before means it needs removed? It it being spammed, or is it like many other things where somebody doesn't see the other post and makes on on their own?
What?
So you're arguing against a topic of discussion?
It seems like you're saying that religion is not to be touched.
It looked as if you were.
Blacksmith21 ago
I'm curious @Crensch. How much have you written on the topic of Pizzagate? Or are you just using your status to weigh in without a deeper understanding of the topic?
Crensch ago
I'm curious as to why it matters. Are you saying that my not having posted something would make all my points above just disappear because reasons?
I'm weighing in because I choose to. It has no bearing on my moderation, or how the polling goes, or what winds up happening due to popular support.
It seems to me that you're just a little butthurt that you can't answer my questions, and are attacking my position instead. Would you like to try to respond without attacking me as a person, or is this your way of declaring your inability to do so?
Blacksmith21 ago
I'm only trying to establish your level of understanding on the very complicated subject of PG. Typically original submissions on a subject aer a strong indicator of one's knowledge on a subject.
The entire point of the discussion original discussion was rules. My rule about 1) enforcing existing forum rules and 2) applying a modicum of journalistic standards by requiring a minimum standard of writing for a post. Existing forum rules require that each OP state how it relates to pizzagate. That post doesn't meet existing rule standings.
Get it now?
Crensch ago
What does that have to do with this?
Typically submissions that run afoul of the rules get removed. What's your point?
That's what I thought.
I'm not overly opposed to this.
I agree. But not for the reasons you presented. It simply doesn't link directly to the elites.
I get that you're probably not a troll, and are attempting to communicate something, which is why I've been extremely cordial. I get that there is definitely a misunderstanding here, and possibly a position or two being held that may never be reconciled.
There IS a miscommunication somewhere, though.