user @3151692653 decided to push about a removal until @vindicator decided to ping me, so here's what I found: (pizzagatemods)

submitted ago by Crensch

https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/2033103/10051146

I honestly don't know if this subverse has just become one big larping circlejerk, but the users upvoting this crap should feel ashamed for doing so. This (probably)Shareblue 3141592653 user had 3 submissions on the front page. Embarrassingly irrelevant bullshit on the level of the random hobo or nigger kidnapping and raping a kid.

THAT IS NOT WHAT /v/pizzagate WAS DESIGNED TO DISCUSS

http://archive.is/dik44

1- African children (nobody cares, not linked to elites)

2- Afghan Forces (nobody cares, not linked to elites)

3- Yazidi people (nobody cares, not linked to elites)

4- Random CP website (not linked to elites)

It's obvious that this user does not give a FUCK about the rules of the subverse, but had the gall to ask for a deletion by MF to be overturned. Nice D&C job if there is indeed intent.

I don't blame @Vindicator for his response, @kevdude agreed with his conclusion, and I had to delete the first paragraph of my response, agreeing with them, linked above because I, too was leaning towards that end. I only decided that this was designed to change the rules to allow sliding threads once I began looking at their submissions.

I don't know if there were any other reasons this particular play was made beyond relaxing the rules for slides and possibly some D&C, but even if there might have been some merit to the claim that lower-level military might be useful to investigate, not allowing it seems like the smart move.

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

Vindicator ago

I think there's been a misunderstanding @Crensch -- @3141592653 is not an enemy of v/Pizzagate

I'm sorry it took me so long to make this comment; I was occupied with recruiting new mods and some real life responsibilities and it took me a few days to gather all the links for this. A number of key facts were missed in this unfortunate bruhaha which ended up becoming a takedown campaign against a longtime v/pizzagate contributor by a v/pizzagate Owner, and it's my fault. Here's how it went down:

  • 31415 originally postedthe news about the Airforce pedo arrests in v/pizzagatewhatever
  • I am the one who suggested it be cross-posted to v/pizzagate, because our definition includes military abuse of kids
  • One of the two men was making child porn of his own kids and distributing it to a network. Because I've see these posts daily these past 8 months, and there have been numerous cases of military personnel and defense contractors involved in sexually abusing kids, it seemed part of a larger pattern which could be related to the deep state "coup" discussed by Steve Piesczenik back in November.
  • 31415 cross-posted to v/pizzagate on my suggestion, but MF removed it
  • 31415 then followed the Moderation Rules to the letter and requested an explanation of the removal as a comment, pinging me
  • I responded with my logic for it NOT being a Rule 1 violation; MF disagreed
  • At the time, my inbox was full of complaints from frustrated, longtime users about unfair removals and bans by MF over the previous week, asking me to do something about the draconian enforcement of the rules
  • Modmail had over 30 unanswered requests for explanations about posts MF had removed
  • At that point, it seemed like MF was growing ever more strict in his interpretation of Rule 1 and we were at an impass; so I pinged the O's to gain some clarity about Rule 1:

@VictorSteinerDavion, @Crensch, @kingkongwaswrong and also @Kevdude what are your thoughts? How restrictive should the "elite" part of the Pizzagate definition be? Users and mods seem to be having many disagreements about this lately. This is likely to get worse as more busts occur and more of the Clinton corruption is revealed. Can you chime in and give us a better understanding of the original intentions regarding scope of Rule 1 and definition of Pizzagate? This has come up regarding a number of posts removed recently and it is beginning to effect subverse morale. Frustration levels are getting pretty high.

Please note: It was ME, not 31415, who requested the attention of O's.

Unfortunately, for some reason, Crensch saw 31415 as a disrespectful forum sliding shill rebelling against the mods and went into punishment mode, going back through the user's history and deleting multiple posts that mods had left up as Rule 1 compliant. Not only was the user attacked, but the reason I pinged the O's in the first place -- clarity about how restrictively we must interpret the rules -- was not resolved.

This whole incident was a total shitshow. And it's symptomatic of the fundamental flaws of the current set-up of v/pizzagate. @VictorSteinerDavion @Kevdude @Heygeorge @sensitive @Millennial_Falcon

No O's are active, contributing members of the community who understand what the community cares about or what direction the users themselves want v/pizzagate to take. There is no one to set the direction when mods have differing views. And unlike most subs on Voat, users don't get to let their votes decide, because most posts are removed. This is a real problem.

My sense is, most users' desire is a somewhat relaxed interpretation of what is Pizzagate related. Are the Awan brothers related? It's too soon to tell, but users sure want to talk about it. Are the whitehouse leaks and firings related? Again, too soon to know but people want to talk about it. Who decides? Shouldn't the community decide?

Can we please address this? Otherwise, what is the point of the shill-shackling rules if they lead to all of this frustration and division among mods, regular legit users, and absentee-landord Owners? We should be working as a team in here kicking pedo ass, not tripping each other up.

VictorSteinerDavion ago

No O's are active

Yes, we are, but not in the day-to-day management of the verse.
This is a structured choice to prevent / mitigate the ability of the adversarial forces to enact a takeover of the subverse.

I do no remove content or comments, as much as I might want to, in order to maintain a separation between issues of content and issues of management.

This entire escapade has followed a rather predictable pattern and ultimately the only outcome is a general questioning of what groups the word "elite" includes.
Which , following the mantra of 'do not rule churn', will be addressed over time by the community.

There is no one to set the direction when mods have differing views

Incorrect, this is specifically what I'm here for.
But if users are wasting my time by continually pinging me for petty small time bullshit - I'll just tune out until something that matters happens.

If the 'M' level team can't get their shit straight as a group - don't pin it on me and expecting me (or @Crensch) to come and save the day.
The 'M' level mods are all responsible collectively for the day to day management of the sub and associated subs are there to support that management.
Use them to resolve these kinds of issues.

most users' desire is a somewhat relaxed interpretation of what is Pizzagate related

the entire reason for v/pizzagatewhatever is to address this issue, forcing the main thread to be all inclusive will rapidly dilute the base of factual sourced evidence the main sub is intended to be the repository for.

As an operational measure, the more people push for change the more resistant I will be to change.
There is nothing wrong with evolving over time, but continued forced efforts to dilute the community, with rule churn, definition sophistry or calls to fragment the community to new venues will now be considered active efforts to discredit and diminish the community.

A considerable amount of energy has been wasted on this and it disappoints me to see the energy wasted as it was not spent getting closer to the capture of people in power who systematically and ritually use children for abuse, molestation and other vile and disgusting acts.

argosciv ago

I pretty much said the following to @Crensch, in a private discussion about my presence here and recent activity - it's apt here too though:

Brilliant. I truly applaud your ethics.

Crensch ago

As usual, well said.