The Great Honesty Trap: Neutralizing the Poison (Part 1)

This is all outside my wheelhouse but perhaps @MadWorld could take a look and weigh in. To me it looks like any correlation to v/pizzagate is probably coincidental just based on the responses you are getting.

link

thewebofslime 5.7 years ago

Now that I have seen what everyone has had to say about it; I'm ready to include the part where, after the "How to Compete with David Brock" post, I had people send me PM's explaining that Vindicator was going to try to get me banned. My SOP of setting honesty traps (as explained in my post a year ago) then exposed his true nature, where he repeatedly lied, insulted and wanted everyone to think I've been a "sleeper shill" for three years.

Leaving out the opening gambit was the best way to set the honesty trap because I didn't know who was telling the truth, relying merely on basic human psychology to learn the truth. This is exactly what Trump is doing to his enemies, it is exactly what I've done to opponents in court and it works every time against people who are dishonest to expose their true motivations.

any correlation to v/pizzagate is probably coincidental

My post only has two downvotes and, coincidentally, had two low level, amateurish probes that were manually entered. It basically looked like someone was trying out "hacking" for their very first time on my site within minutes of Vindicators first insults, where his credentials have matching characteristics to a lot of other accounts that have correlations between them.

Passwords like "iloveyou" may not be good indicators, since they are so common, but 100 accounts that all have passwords that start with "fnonf_$" become increasingly suspicious and less likely to be a coincidence; especially when they span gmail accounts, caci.com accounts and qinetiq.com accounts and include "iamq" in the account names.

link

think- 5.7 years ago

It basically looked like someone was trying out "hacking" for their very first time on my site within minutes of Vindicators first insults, where his credentials have matching characteristics to a lot of other accounts that have correlations between them.

Your post has had more than 5,000 views now. It was posted seven days ago. (Would anyone maybe have an archive - @shewhomustbeobeyed maybe?) It must have had hundreds of views the day you posted it.

Why on earth do you think that @Vindicator was the one who hacked your computer?

He would never do such a thing, and apart from that, he isn't even tech savvy enough for hacking someone's computer (I know this because we frequently discussed the CPP hacks, and the hackers' claims at the time).

And why on earth don't you just contact @PuttItOut, the owner of Voat, when you think one of the mods hacked your computer, as @Vindicator suggested?

These are serious allegations. This needs to be investigated by the admins, and not discussed on the public threads the way you are doing it.

I already explained to you why @Vindicator quoted the 'IAmQ' post. It's a damn good post, with lots of important info. It's totally normal that he likes the post, and it's not a 'long-forgotten post', as you said, he reposted it three months ago, as I showed, and I bet that many here will remember it well.

@SandHog @srayzie

link

Vindicator 5.7 years ago

Your post has had more than 5,000 views now. It was posted seven days ago. (Would anyone maybe have an archive - @shewhomustbeobeyed maybe?) It must have had hundreds of views the day you posted it.

It's been archived several times since March 27. 424 views in the first 15 hours.

link

srayzie 5.7 years ago

He’s just a narcissistic trouble maker that wants attention. He’s butt hurt that @Vindicator didn’t bow at his feet. I highly doubt he got any private message about Vindicator, unless his handler was giving him instructions on what to say next.

@think- @Crensch @Kevdude @Sandhog

link

think- 5.7 years ago

It doesn't make any sense at all. Beginning with CACI - it's obvious a globalist outfit, so why would they be behind Q?

Why would CACI hack his computer, and leave a trail, that could be connected back to them? They are a major MI contractor. Do we suppose they leave trails, so that the people they hack can go to the police, and files charges?

The only 'proof' he posts is that @Vindicator quoted a post submitted by someone with the screenname 'IAmQ'.

That's no proof at all. It's just some kind of weird conjecture.

@thewebofslime @SandHog @Crensch @kevdude

link

srayzie 5.7 years ago

And Q stands for Q clearance. It wasn’t planned years in advance and has nothing to do with British intelligence

link

Vindicator 5.7 years ago

It doesn't make any sense at all. Beginning with CACI - it's obvious a globalist outfit, so why would they be behind Q?

Exactly. The only logical reason would be because they are another fake Q impersonator attempting to discredit QAnon by muddying the waters.

It's bound to fail, though, because Q predicted all this, warned us about it, and deliberately only communicates via 8chan.

link

shewhomustbeobeyed 5.7 years ago

https://archive.is/GEz91

link

think- 5.7 years ago

Thank you!

link

think- 5.7 years ago

@Crensch @kevdude: please see parent. Thanks.

link

SandHog 5.7 years ago

I had people send me PM's explaining that Vindicator was going to try to get me banned.

If you are going to level accusations at someone then you should name these people. How do you know they aren't trying to manipulate you? If you are all about honesty then you will name these people and post the DMs so people can see who they are and the context of these exchanges. At this point anything less than that is unacceptable.

Of course @Vindicator thought you were trying to dox him because that is what you were literally trying to do. You made three different threads saying this and implying he was a shill and now you are up to five counting realProtectVoat (hmm) and Pizzagatewhatever. You've also made threads on reddit and I'm assuming you've probably done the same on the chans. All of this before you could prove anything. Given that doxxing is a bannable offense I'd say it's a pretty predictable response to call attention to what you were doing. You said you were going to do it. It looks to me that you have reached your conclusion before you ever set out to investigate anything and are picking out whatever pieces fit your predetermined conclusion.

So now two downvotes on your post equate to the two attacks on your website. Vindicator found some old post on Pizzagate by a person named IamQ and flaired your post because it did not comply with the rules and that means he is a double-agent? Or he tried to hack into your site? Either you are completely lost in space or someone has been feeding you some bullshit. That's easy enough to fix.

@srayzie @Crensch @kevdude @think-

link

think- 5.7 years ago

It was me who told him that he might get banned at some point, when he posts submissions that get flaired.

Because people get banned if they frequently post submissions that get flaired. I tried to get him edit his submission, which got flaired when I wrote the PM. sigh

That's what I wrote:

I will leave it up to you whether you want to edit your v/pizzagate post or not - please feel free to get back to me anytime if you need help. With this post or any other you might want to submit.

I'm currently a bit clueless as to how to convince you to post in a way that adheres to the v/pizzagate rules.

It's fine if you choose not to, but I'm afraid than they might ban you at some point.

Replying from my inbox, going to read the comments above now.

@thewebofslime @srayzie @Crensch @Vindicator @kevdude

link

SandHog 5.7 years ago

Thanks think-

link

think- 5.7 years ago

I don't know which other people he might mean. He says he got the PMs by people after he did the 'David Brock' submission.

I PMed him the day before he made this submission. He might have mistaken what I wrote. I meant it in the context of posting submissions that get flaired.

He might have written 'people' out of courtesy, since he didn't want to name me. Or he got PMs by other people telling him he might get banned; not sure. Whatever.

I asked him whether he has actually contacted @PuttItOut, as @Vindicator suggested. Waiting for a reply.

@srayzie @Crensch @kevdude

link

Vindicator 5.7 years ago

Good to know. I think he's just deliberately trying to stir up drama and confusion. His claims don't hold up logically under scrutiny and his tactics are highly dishonest, disrespectful and manipulative. We can't really believe anything he says, at this point.

link

thewebofslime 5.7 years ago

I told everyone I was setting an honesty trap as I was doing it.. totally transparent. I explained that I was going to be polite. What is dishonest and manipulative about that? IN fact, you are the only one who has been repeatedly caught lying?

Even @think- who people were accusing of being a shill passed the honesty trap.

Honesty traps don't work on honest people.

So, your dog whistling has maned to convince what... 5 people? Meanwhile, everyone else on other places on the Internet, who know none of the players involved, all interpret the data one way.

Keep in mind, I still haven't made a call to action. My motive has always been truth. I am not asking anyone to do anything.

I haven't insulted anyone through this whole process.

So, why did you lie when most of the others involved seem to have no problem telling the truth? Why act exactly as I described in this post about honesty traps that I wrote last year?

https://www.reddit.com/r/raisedbynarcissists/comments/7pje8n/neutralizing_the_poison/

Your behavior has checked all the boxes.

So, how much time to I waste trying to convince 5 people when I have a half a million impressions all over the rest of the Internet, per month?

Of these people, none seem ready to accept what is apparent in the data.

Do you plan on adding another insult or lie to this conversation? Are you going to try to make it seem like people are against me? Are you ever going to unflag my post to show you are a good guy? Not biased?

The honesty trap will continue to trigger. That's how it works. That's how I explained it. I've been totally transparent... though you see that I trickle out the evidence to see who keeps changing their story.

link

kneo24 5.7 years ago

How do you go from "my own personal website with little to no traffic" to, "my own website with all of this large amounts of traffic"? It doesn't take much to find inconsistencies in what you have to say, and this makes it even easier to pick apart anything else you write. Again, I ask, who do you think you're fooling?

link

SandHog 5.7 years ago

So, your dog whistling has maned to convince what... 5 people?

@Vindicator didn't convince me of anything. You did. You with your accusations. You with your nebulous evidence. Your insistence on spreading a bunch of unfounded garbage all over the place right from the vary start and insisting it was a foregone conclusion when it wasn't and still isn't. An honest person would not do that. An honest person would make sure they had their facts straight and could prove their assertions before blasting them all over the internet.

So, how much time to I waste trying to convince 5 people when I have a half a million impressions all over the rest of the Internet, per month?

You still don't have any convincing evidence and you have failed to provide anything further when I questioned you about what you do have both publicly and privately. If you were honest you wouldn't care nearly as much about your reach as you would about finding the truth.

Where are those DM's? Or are you going to ignore that question too?

link

Vindicator 5.7 years ago

why did you lie

You have yet to prove I lied about anything.

Here's the thing...and here's the reason your LARPy bullshit isn't flying on Voat. Some of us actually believe in the United States Constitution and the legal ideals that flow from it, in particular Presumption of Innocence. You have to actually PROVE someone has done something wrong before their innocence is discarded. You have yet to do so, and I am not the only one who has pointed this out. No one here gives a crap what people on Reddit have been brainwashed into thinking. Here on Voat, you have to bring your A Game. You have to bring evidence. The more words you speak without providing evidence, the more words you use to tell people what to think rather than simply linking to the proof, the more of an obvious lying faggot you reveal yourself to be.

If I were really doing all the things you've tried to ham-handedly implicate me with, you would have reported it to Voat admins, as I pointed out. But you haven't. You just keep bloviating like a squid squirting ink to cover its ass-covering maneuvers.

The only person triggered here is you. You've harmed me in no way whatsoever. In fact, @think- and I were in the middle of a disagreement and even she has been defending me (that's what honest people do, when they see abject bullshit). That, in turn, has restored some of my faith in her. So, you see, you've actually strengthened the globalist resistance here. I guess the Streisand Effect sucks, eh? Y'all still haven't figured that one out.

I've been totally transparent... though you see that I trickle out the evidence to see who keeps changing their story.

Yeah...how's that been working for you? I know multiple people who took your spam bot seriously until you jumped the shark accusing me of hacking your silly ass website as part of some MI6 operation.

I note you've linked zero evidence of anyone "changing their story."

You just aren't very good at this, are you? You should go back to Reddit, before the Voat goats eat you.

link

srayzie 5.7 years ago

This is exactly what Trump is doing to his enemies, it is exactly what I've done to opponents in court and it works every time against people who are dishonest to expose their true motivations.

ThisIsTotallyNotMe is killing me 😂 I didn’t pass his test either 🙄 Look how that turned out. The coward abandoned that username 3 months ago and his alt, nothereforpizza, won’t even reply to any of my comments anymore. You must be doing something right @Vindicator. Good job.

link