You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

Vindicator ago

@hojuruku, thank you for rewriting this thread in a serious attempt to comply with our submission rules. This is a huge improvement. It's not quite to the point where I am comfortable removing the flair, but because you've been willing to work on it, it seems fair for us not to take it down just yet. Here is what I'm still stumbling over:

  1. Please just chuck the first four paragraphs documenting your prior attempts to submit the story. That's all still Rule 4 crap that belongs in v/pizzagatemods. It clutters up what you are trying to say. If you need to vent about it still at this point, please do it in the appropriate subverse.
  2. You've done a really excellent job embedding the supporting links into your very densely-packed material -- well done. It's a great improvement! However, I am still not seeing a link supporting the premise of your title: that BBBS was operating as a man-boy dating site. That is a pretty serious charge that requires evidence...in the form of screencaps of their chatroom, or a quote from a kid "groomed" there with a link to where it was reported, or evidence presented in the criminal cases. If this is your opinion of how the site was used, that's fine but you need to say so rather than making a definitive statement of fact.
  3. If what you are saying is that McCool used BBBS chat to take advantage of kids and BBBS did not provide sufficient safeguards to protect kids, then say that, and give some linked evidence of their negligence (even if that's just McCool or someone else talking about the lack of oversight). It's not fair or accurate to brand an entire charity because one sick fuck took advantage of the organization to hurt kids (if that's what happened). (Also, that approach also really undermines your credibility as an activist/researcher, as well, so it's not in the best interest of your piece. You want to change minds, right?)
  4. In any case, we need linked support for the "man/boy dating" claim to be able to leave this up. I looked at several of the links from the BBBS pedo search you suggested, and did not see anything that supported your headline claim. You need something directly supporting it. If there is no evidence, then you need to create a different headline.
  5. I was a bit confused about the different people you've mentioned: McCool, Hall, Power and Bowersox. It became very difficult to follow. At first I thought you were saying they were the same person, and then I thought you were saying there were numerous different pedos connected to BBBS as part of your argument that BBBS is being run as a man/boy hookup service. Who's who and why they are in your thread needs to be very clear, so that it's possible to understand what you are asserting and assess the linked support you provide for it. (ProTip: If you have a piece of research you haven't yet gotten the evidence for, drop that down into the comment section as a "P.S. I am still investigating my suspician that...." Comments are free range).
  6. Consider using a less loaded rhetorical style that hits people with facts that make them think what you think they should think, rather than opinions that tell them what you think they should think. No one likes to be told what they should think. Opinions are like assholes, right? Everyone has one. The only people who listen to them are people who agree with you. What's the point of writing for people who agree with you? If you want to change minds, set up a domino chain of facts that lead to an inevitable conclusion. For example, if you want to convince people that Jews or gays are behind the normalization of pedophilia in Australia, it's much more effective to slip in the fact this is a relevant factor -- especially if you can use their own words like you did here -- than if you engage in a bunch of namecalling. It also gives you fewer things you have to source.

Okay...that was a lot. I hope you're willing to edit this a bit more so that we can leave this up.

@think- @Blacksmith21 @kevdude @Crensch Let's give hojuruku another day to work on this. He's put quite a bit of effort into embedded formatting, which he'll lose access to if we remove it. Hojuruku, I've also saved a copy of your source code here in the event other mods don't see this comment of mine.

Vindicator ago

@ben_matlock @EricKaliberhall @srayzie @Honeybee_ See parent. Let's give hojuruku another day to work on this. He's put quite a bit of effort into embedded formatting, which he'll lose access to if we remove it.

hojuruku ago

You are tagging my trolls now Vindicator.... faaak me. It's done. Agree to diagree and leave the 24h hold. Censorship gets you nowwhere. I'll only link to this when I dig up all the MSM about the homosexual child abuse (pretty much only) at BBBS in America and the warnings given in 2002 that it would happen on my next post.

All MSM and American sources exposing something as big as the Catholic Priests, or Boy Scouts of America perversion file that hasn't got the attention it deserved because (((THEY))) Run it.

Maybe this Super Big Brothers Big Sisters Catholic Church pedo hunter will take the case. Tell him I'm coming...

http://www.lubbockonline.com/news/2017-12-03/big-brothers-big-sisters-serves-many-children-possible <- BBBS SERVES UP CHILDREN WITH (((MACDONALDS))) Is maccas more masonic - your thoughts?

http://fox8.com/author/billsheil/ - BBBS hero claims to be against pedophilia.

Vindicator ago

You are tagging my trolls now Vindicator.... faaak me. It's done.

No, hojuruku. I pinged the other mods whose job it is to remove expired flairs so they would be sure to give you more time to edit. I guess that was wasted effort on my part. You seem determined to believe everyone is out to get you.

Agree to diagree and leave the 24h hold.

Not happening. If we do it for you, we have to do it for everyone. If you want to post in v/pizzagate, you have to follow the community rules just like everyone else.

hojuruku ago

Do you even believe what you write, or you just do it to troll / be annoying?

Vindicator 0 points (+1|-1) 9.3 hours ago

ben_matlock EricKaliberhall srayzie Honeybee_ See parent. Let's give hojuruku another day to work on this. He's put quite a bit of effort into embedded formatting, which he'll lose access to if we remove it.

Since when is that shitposting meme lord @srayzie a mod....

P.S. My movie psych warfare games are better than yours. https://voat.co/v/ProtectVoat/2499289/12508183

CC @auralsects @Cuckbot @Dfens @GeorgeT @Joe_McCarthy

Vindicator ago

Since when is that shitposting meme lord @srayzie a mod....

Srayzie was invited to mod v/pizzagate the day Falcon was demodded. She was busy building her v/GreatAwakening subverse at the time. She accepted the invite yesterday.

So you are going to censor this a 4th time based on refuted claims?

If I were interested in censoring you, hojuruku, I would have already removed your terribly-written post and banned you. You've already been given miles more leeway than most shitstirrers we deal with.

Do you accept people use dating sites for friendship?

Do you accept gay men can be in BBBS and mentor boys?

Do you accept boys use the dating site ran by Disney above?

You are debunked.

Sorry, dude. That's not how proving something works. You made a definitive statement that Disney and BBBS facilitate child abuse. You have to prove it with linked evidence, not hypothetical statements about what might be happening. We have a subverse for that: v/pizzagatewhatever.

We also have a subverse for complaints about how the subverse is moderated and the community agreed long ago those discussions to not belong on the research board or in research posts. Your belligerent unwillingness to honor the rules and remove that material from your post will not only force us to remove this thread, but all future ones that ignore Rule 4 as well. The flair is a privelege, not an entitlement, and it won't be offered to you in the future.

hojuruku ago

You refuted it's a dating site. Men and boys meeting for friendship on Disney servers are happening? You accept that?

Did you not see all the links in the comments and google to all the BBBS facilitated child abuse that was warned of in 2002 when they made their non discrimination policy.

You are debunked. You are covering up pedophilia scandal bigger than the Vatican or Boy Scouts. Shame on you.

You refused to answer the question. You say I'm using the wrong method. I am using the right method you prick. I asked do you accept the claims I made above based on the EVIDENCE in the OP.

I am making claims based on EVIDENCE.

Just look at all the cases on the first 1.2 pages (13 google results) i've tried to fit in the OP but didn't have chacters. Gay men and boys on dating sites = child abuse. Look at all the MSM coverage backing up my claims.

https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/2500972/12503033

So try again vindicator. Answer the questions I quoted. Quote my questions again then type your answers to them. DO IT PLEASE. Don't be evasive by refusing to justify your abhorrent censorship actions.

hojurukuisatroll ago

Claiming that you failed to provide adequate sources is not the same as "refuting". Do you understand how research works? He is not saying that you are wrong. He is saying that in this sub you need to provide direct evidence. Speculation does not meet the standard. You will ignore this. Because you are a troll.

hojuruku ago

use your real account vinny. I'm glad you are taking the first steps to accept you are prick by not using your real account because you (or at least your kikeshill alias) don't to be held accountable for it.

I don't talk to anon's or sockpuppet accounts - so fuck off blocked. Squatting on my name? You know imitation is the best form of flattering kiketroll. You can't be me, so give it up. I appreciate your admiration though.

hojurukuisatroll ago

If I use my real account you will use all of your alt accounts to attack me with down votes.

hojuruku ago

fuck off kikeshill. go back to /v/anontalk where nobody can hear your autistic screeching.