Crensch banned me for "Relevance" (pizzagatemods)

submitted ago by NOMOCHOMO

https://voat.co/v/whatever/3432945/20638202

Ask me to answer your questions again.

sigh. here goes nothing.

Okay @Crensch @Vindicator @Heygeorge @Erickaliberhall @kingkongwaswrong

why did Crensch ban me? Can I appeal?

NOMOCHOMO Rule Violation in v/pizzagate: 1: Relevance; Description: Causing problems with the removal of things that have not been proven to be pizzagate. Using divisive tactics against the mods. Arguing dishonestly, even after being warned that this was not a joke. Constant pattern of disruptive behavior and supporting users like esoteric Crensch 10.9 hours ago

https://files.catbox.moe/q5grgu.jpg

-Swamp Takedown -> 24 hours Grace Relevancy

I ask for clarification as to why a person Vin calls "swamp" is deemed "irrelevant" by Crazy-Mensch

I thought "swamp" indicated Pizza/Pedos....hence it being a flair in pizzagate...I've also lurked for years as ya'll know....why I was confused as to why "Ed Buck" a name I know I'd read submissions on b4 was getting removed.

TLDR: Why am I banned for "relevance"....for defending a relevant post (edit2: and it's not my post)....

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

NOMOCHOMO ago

https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/3535879

1) Brock's CTR is a coincidence -> explanation -> same exact wording and function.

https://search.wikileaks.org/?query=&exact_phrase=correct+the+record+&any_of=&exclude_words=&document_date_start=&document_date_end=&released_date_start=&released_date_end=&order_by=oldest_document_date#results

Wikileaks demonstrates "correct the record" was used by official State Department channels 760 times as early as the 1973 PlusD cables

@shewhomustbeobeyed

Crensch ago

Wikileaks demonstrates "correct the record" was used by official State Department channels 760 times as early as the 1973 PlusD cables

Good for you! I'm sure SWMBO is SO proud of you for finding that put.

NOMOCHOMO ago

so your claim of "uniqueness" ie: this phrasing "from" the CIA in 1984 and "was used to guide David Brock" = speculation

Qanon drop #3632 links to thisPNG image showing classified SECRET document bullet point #5. In it the exact words "correct the record" are stated

This is a plan to create something. With this CIA document, dated 8 June 1984, one wonders if this was used to guide Brock in creating his CTR, and possibly in previous iterations of similar projects.

Given the EXACT same wording, I'd say it's worth looking into; Brock and his CTR could be CIA.

^[bolded statements are declarative] + [italicized statements are speculative]

Rule 2: Empiricism: Avoid baseless speculation

since the term didn't originate from CIA in 1984, your speculation has no base.

I'd be commenting this on your post. But you banned me for a comment.

@heygeorge @shewhomustbeobeyed @vindicator

shewhomustbeobeyed ago

Hey nomo, I'm up to my elbows in bread dough, will be all day. My home smells like a swedish bakery. :)

Not reading any submissions until tonight.

If you would like me to post something to PG in your name, I will.

I think you should make an IDENTIFIABLE alt and post it yourself. You were banned under a set of rules that crensch made up for his own subverses. Those rules no longer apply.

You know about the Q stuff, I only know shit when I smell it, doesn't mean I know where it came from. ;p