SRS is actually an internet cult and they meet most of the criteria needed for being a cult. The way in which they effectively serve as an internet cult is that it is possible for anyone to easily join the cult so long as they have an internet connection and a reddit account and are willing to do exactly what they are told by the SRS moderator hierarchy and the people who control and run the subreddit. The worst thing about Shitredditsays, however, isn't that they have their own shitty subreddit that makes zero sense to the outside world and to those who are sane and don't believe in the views of social justice warriors and radical feminists. The worst thing about SRS is that they and their friends from other like-minded subreddits on reddit - with the cooperation and unspoken support of a few reddit administrators - have managed to turn reddit into Digg 2.0 where a clique of users who are chummy and friendly with each other have managed to take over a very large portion of this website. The users who have turned reddit into Digg 2.0 and who threaten to ruin the site are what I and some others who understand the situation have come to know as and refer to as "metareddit cancer." I have taken it upon myself to go ahead and create the subreddit /r/metaredditcancer to act as a watchdog that chronicles everything that this cabal of reddit users are doing to turn reddit into Digg 2.0 and - in particular - to turn the site into a place run by social justice warrior and feminist moderators who tolerate no deviation from their beliefs in the numerous subreddits that they have come to control as moderators.

My hope is that after reading this comment of mine that you will subscribe to /r/metaredditcancer so that you can stay well-informed about a very serious situation that has arisen - largely unknown to most users - on this website so that we can all gain a greater understanding of what a powerful cabal of agenda-driven users are doing to and have done to this site that we all love. I am a long-time user on reddit who has intimate and in-depth knowledge of this cabal and who has modded multiple subreddits both large and small, who has been intimately involved in discussion with this cabal of users regarding their control of reddit, who knows what their agenda is and what they want to do with their power and control, who has sat in their private discussions in internet chat rooms, who has seen leaks from their private subreddits, and who has absolutely had enough of what they have done to reddit and of what they will continue to do to this site unless the rest of this site is exposed to who and what they are and what their endgame is. What happened to Digg and what has happened to 4chan very recently is undeniably and positively what is happening to reddit now and what has been happening here since 2012.

The cabal of users and moderators who I refer to as "metareddit cancer" hail from the subreddits Shitredditsays, circlebroke, Braveryjerk, circlejerk, TheBluePill, SubredditDrama, SRDbroke, and Drama. This cabal of users are - for the most part - the moderators of these subreddits and these users also control many other subreddits with thousands and even hundreds of thousands of subscribers. They mod subreddits like /r/news, /r/politics, /r/worldnews, /r/Subredditdrama, /r/creepyPMs, /r/offmychest, /r/TIFU, /r/explainlikeimfive, /r/changemyview, /r/LGBT, and numerous other subreddits where they have managed to worm their way into moderator positions over the years and then go on to have total control over the type of discussion that goes on in their subreddits. They make sure that any discussion that goes against their social justice and feminist beliefs is censored and controlled and/or they mod their subreddits like ban-happy dictators who get rid of anyone who breaks the circlejerk that goes on in their subreddits every week. This is absolutely the case with offmychest, creepyPMs, and Subredditdrama. Maybe the worst example of their way of worming into moderator positions and destroying subreddits is that of /r/LGBT and how 2 transsexual radfem SRS trolls - one of which has become infamous on reddit and other chan websites - managed to take control of the subreddit in 2012 and then acted like dictators and abused their power so badly that reddit's administrators had to be called into the drama. The admins refused to remove the two SRS moderators, the LGBT subreddit went into meltdown because of them, and this led to the subreddit being ruined and people having to flock to the newly created /r/ainbow subreddit because one of the biggest forums for discussing LGBT issues on the internet was taken over by members of Shitredditsays. This is the first notable time that SRS and other metareddit cancer have taken control of subreddits and they've gone on to manipulate reddit's subreddit request system to bring even more subreddits under their control. They organize subreddit request attempts in private subreddits where they plan out their agenda and they do the same in their internet relay chat rooms as well. I can say with total confidence that there is no other reddit clique and group operating on this website that looks to take over and control as many subreddits as they can in a clear and indisputable attempt to control the flow of conversation so that conversations in any given subreddit always lean and kowtow to radical feminism and a perverted form of social justice. NO OTHER GROUP EXISTS that is looking to take over as much of this site as possible.

One of the more troubling things that I have come to understand having been an intimately involved user of reddit for years, is that some of reddit's current and past administrators support and belong to this cabal of metareddit cancer. An administrator who was fired from reddit two years ago immediately was added as a mod of Shitredditsays as soon as he left his admin role and made clear what some users had already known: he was literally a member of Shitredditsays and as an admin he used his power to carry out SRS's agenda. He routinely ostracized and terminated the accounts of (shadowbanned) people who posted in subreddits that SRS want destroyed and now he sits as a moderator of SRS. This is one of the biggest yet unknown bits of corruption in reddit's history yet you wouldn't know it because the subreddit created as a watchdog for this sort of thing - /r/Subredditdrama - was taken over by SRS and reddit metacancer in 2013 and they censor discussion about themselves so that people aren't aware of what is going on. The takeover of SubredditDrama is one of the worst things that has ever happened on this website because of its 150K subscriber size and because the very people who are the problem that I am discussing happen to be in control of SubredditDrama. This is clearly a monumental conflict of interest given that anything nefarious that this group of users do cannot be openly discussed in SubredditDrama without their consent.

What caused this cabal to come to be and what is it that unites them in their desire to control the site through moderator power and through cliques?

A cabal on Digg is what led to the deterioration of the site and is what led to the migration that saw users flood to reddit. I'll be damned if I watch the same type of behavior from a group of a few dozen users continue to move reddit towards becoming Digg 2.0. 4chan has been thrown into a serious mess like this after Moot gave mod positions to authoritarian mods in the last year who now control the site given his recent abdication as site admin. Let's not let this develop further on reddit because there's a point of no return.

TL;DR: The SRS cabal controls too much of and is ruining reddit

Comments ()

[deleted]

What the guy before me said

What the guy after me says.

Edit: Why I oughta!

I'm a stupid moron with an ugly face and a big butt and my butt smells, and I like to kiss my own butt.

What the guy before me said

What the guy after you said.

Oh dear... I'm stuck.

That's what she said

Ugh, wait a minute...

Fill my cup, put some liquor in it

Hey, you said it. Not me.

An administrator who was fired from reddit two years ago immediately was added as a mod of Shitredditsays as soon as he left his admin role and made clear what some users had already known: he was literally a member of Shitredditsays and as an admin he used his power to carry out SRS's agenda.

wow.

/u/intortus is a scumbag.

/u/intortus is a scumbag.

I agree, scumbag.

Bags of disrepute deserve rights and respect as well.

Oh look, yet another username with '88' on an account that dislikes me. I wonder what it could mean.

I wonder what it could mean.

I might be reading too much into it, but I think it means you're a cunt.

88 huh... must be a Nazi.

Careful not to cut yourself with that Occam's razor.

That people born in 1988 don't like you? I dunno.

27 year olds don't like you?

Illuminati?

Oh look, yet another user with those closed-minded ideas thinking 1988 is an evil year.

Whoa, they're from San Francisco, SJW land.

Why am I not surprised?

https://np.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/comments/2we97d/women_forced_off_a_bus_at_gunpoint_punched_and/coqd2c2

Wasn't fired, waited three months before they even invited me to mod, wasn't a member before then, and the only agenda I pursued was to minimize the harmful effects of manipulated dogpiling on reddit (did you know, many redditors will just believe whatever they read on /r/askreddit?).

so why did you join one of the largest dogpiling subreddits there is?

/r/kotakuinaction? I haven't subscribed, only interjected.

You have to be a bit of a special person to think it's even slightly believable someone joins SRS with the reasons you've described. Nobody believes that heh..

KiA? i haven't been but i know a few mods, they seem like decent people, havent ever heard one of them try to brigade before

(that's because they haven't)

i didn't think so but they are the new boogeyman

The guy who posted that is now shadowbanned

[deleted]

He knows too much. SRS loving admins shadowbanned him

Wellll. Fuck. Good thing I don't visit many of those subs.

On the other hand, first the came for the defaults, and I said nothing. Then they involved the Admins, and I still said nothing...

And then they came for my niche community and there was no one left to speak out.

I don't visit many of those subs.

now i know why I don't visit many of those subs.

I know, like I want to read that, because it seemed to start off interesting, but fuck! I have shit to do, I ain't got time for that.

I need a TL;DR or an ELI5 here for /u/metaredditcancer's novel.

Femenist social just warriors are in the process of taking over reddit, they are pushing their agenda and banning anyone or any posts that disagree with them. They are supported by at least two reddit admins

This comment has been overwritten by an open source script to protect this user's privacy.

If you would like to do the same, add the browser extension GreaseMonkey to Firefox and add this open source script.

Then simply click on your username on Reddit, go to the comments tab, and hit the new OVERWRITE button at the top.

Bullshit. /u/cupcake1713 was pretty anti-sjw. Many times she took the banhammer to SRS brigades that I reported. She and sporkicide are the good guys.

Edit: And here she is in her own words saying that she thinks it's "all pretty silly". Sorry, she's not with those fuckwits.

Cupcake was awesome. Very reasonable and helpful to a lot of mods regardless of subreddit.

Can confirm. She banned hundreds of /r/againstmensrights feminists as well. With no apologies.

[deleted]

I got a static ip. Im a bit afraid these days because of this happening and now internet daily on a VPN. Never made a new account anyway because when this one is going to get banned ill just leave this site for another place to hangout.

Proxy? Tor?

Failing that, voat.co seems to be on the rise.

Beautiful site! And no defaults! Im sold already haha. Time for me to comment there and post a bit. Adios Reddit!

Lol. I'm hanging out on both for the minute. See what happens.

Lol yeh lwt me get back on my words. Content is still a bit poor but as I saw higher quality.

I have just started seeing some of the craziness that is going on.. I don't quite understand some of these subreddits myself. Seriously, what is SRSWomen and SRSMen, etc? Does it really mean 'ShitRedditSaysWomen'? How in the world does that make any sense? You go into that subreddit and it's nothing but Feminists bashing men and women that don't agree with them.

Also, does no one here not know how to change their IP? It is quite possible to start rotating your IP and force the subreddits to ban their own team members on accident. Especially if these people are in universities and colleges.

On accident? I think you meant: 'by accident.'

[deleted]

Funny how that's a closed sub for the rest of us

Woahdude. I thought this was a website where racists, feminists, fetishists, neckbeards, pirates and misogynists and anyone can express their views freely, open to criticism but able to jerk in their own circles if that's what excites. Also watchpeopledie, atheism, christianity and wtf. Sometimes all in one submission. The idea that people are mounting an attack and takeover on this ideal offends me mightily, but what is one to to? Arrr.

I find the phrase "Whoahdude" offensive, should I get to decide whether you should be banned or not?

Fuck you and the horse you rode in on. Keep feeding the obamatron to provide milk for the sheeple. Death milk that is not meant for you! Fucking Sassenachs.

I change my mind, I ban you for being scarily unstable.

Please, never Reddit around sharp objects.

My devices all have rounded corners. Edit: also /r/relationships is pretty toxic.

Funny how that's a closed sub for the rest of us

I don't know how you can see that the admins are totally on board with this and actively encouraging it, and still say they're 'in the process of taking over'.

Because its spreading to more and more subs

Just to be clear where exactly is this takeover happening?

Read the parent comment...

No I'm not reading a massive conspiracy article about how feminists killed digg and shit, point me to exactly where in Reddit the evil feminists are taking over? Is it in justiceporn where basically any image of a woman being injured is met with 'lol EQUAL RIGHTS EQUAL LEFTS RIGHT BITCH'? Is it in videos where if a woman is present and makes noise they flip out about what an annoying bitch she is? Is it in literally any sub with pictures where if a woman includes herself in a picture showing something the same tired old 'lol attention whore' images are posted to shame her for having a face?

Maybe it's in the defaults where if you literally post a picture of any woman, including your own mother or sister or whatever, you have tons of strangers telling you they want to fuck them?

Boy this feminist coup is really ineffective.

its pretty bad in some places, but a lot of subs seem to have good moderation/users that remove/report that shit

Is it in literally any sub with pictures where if a woman includes herself in a picture showing something the same tired old 'lol attention whore'

i think theres a big distinction here though,if you make a post titled 'look at my halloween costume' and half the image is cleavage (i mean, not a full body shot, and clearly angled to maximise skin visibililty); its not about the costume

the same is true with food, books or whatever items you're trying to show off, often theres absolutely no reason to be in the picture (male or female) but people do it anyway ('selfie style')... pet peeves and stuff

But didn't you just prove yourself wrong by being a dissenting voice.

I think ~~you~~ we are all a little crazy, but this reminds me of a riddle: "What is so fragile that naming it will break it?" Silence.

What I don't really get is why you lied with your first question. You clearly have an opinion. I'm not saying that they shouldn't not be pieces of trash, but you clearly want to force people to act a certain way which makes you one of the people the conspiracy talks about.

Maybe I'm just easily confused.

Just to be clear do you think literally any rule is bad then, because apparently we can't FORCE people to not be terrible shitbags? Like, I'm not saying put a fucking gun to their head, I'm saying maybe it'd be cool if this site wasn't actively hostile to most minorities.

I said I understand. I'm just confused by your horrible excuse for logic. Like, you seem to want me to respect your point of view, but you are using accusative and hostile language. If we were having this conversation in person I would feel threatened right now.

This site is not actively hostile to minorities (women are not a minority by the way- they happen to be a little more 50% of the population). For every horrible remark there is a someone making a counter point. That is the beautiful thing about democratic debate.

It is kind of ironic that people who vote brigade complain about rules breaking. Just saying.

Right but the horrible remarks are usually highly upvoted and the counterpoints are usually called sjws or told to shut up or whatever.

Also minority means more than just numbers, there's also a power imbalance factor.

Your remark is highly upvoted and you are telling people to shut up. See, I agree with you fundamentally, but your arguments are weak and circular. Basically, you're a hypocrite.

"Minority" is all numbers- it is in the name.

Good job defeating that straw man, my hero!

He even got gold for it! Wowee! Strawman killing really does pay!

A logical flaw you looked up on Wikipedia is not an argument.

inb4 "no you"

Arguing with logic. The gall of that guy. Doesn't he know feelings trump reason?

oh jesus this sarcastic arguing makes me want to puke, it's so reddit

They were just asking for actual examples of this aside from a bunch of circlejerk subs where internet friends make fun of people in mod mail

Found the cancer.

The takeover alluded to is the push by the srs cult to ban all of the things you just mentioned. The conspiracy is that the new rules about "harassment" and "hate speech" will be used to censor all of those things. They want the rest of reddit to be forced into observing the guidelines they have which determine what is and what is not appropriate.

The thing is, if Tumblrinaction is harassment for making fun of people then that very same definition applies to SRS.

The only cancer is the influx of hateful misogynists and racists from 4chan. Reddit wasn't always as awful as it is today, where implementing rules governing basic courtesy between users (which are present on almost every web forum everywhere, bar 4chan), is met with childish cries of "censorship".

I think you replied to the wrong comment or something. It looks like you are arguing, but we just can't tell with who. Your points do not address anything OP said.

You angry bro?

lol @ the gold

"Thank you for building that strawman and knocking it right down! I'm so desperate for you to be right!"

You find that funny but what about the gold for the people drowning in upvotes saying 'I know I'll get downvoted for speaking out against SRS' and 'I'll stand with you' like it's some sacred cause of noble bands of brothers standing against the waves?

But these people are not building horrible strawmen and then saying, "You're all stupid fucks, feminism lol."

You keep using that word but I don't think you know what it means

straw man

noun: strawman

  1. a person compared to a straw image; a sham.

  2. a sham argument set up to be defeated.

What are you trying to say?

But I'm using actual things that happen?

Like is it a strawman to say at KKK meetings they talk about not liking black people?

Here, let me break down your original comment to make it easier for you to understand:

No I'm not reading a massive conspiracy article about how feminists killed digg and shit, point me to exactly where in Reddit the evil feminists are taking over?

Words like "evil feminists," "massive conspiracy article," are a way to make the people you're arguing against seem stupid, which is probably the main reason you've even used them.

Is it in justiceporn where basically any image of a woman being injured is met with 'lol EQUAL RIGHTS EQUAL LEFTS RIGHT BITCH'?

You're literally making it seem as if the /r/justiceporn subreddit is a bunch of men who like to see women get beat up. And you're kind of close, except you're spinning it in a light to make them seem ridiculous, and so you can easily counter those fake and silly arguments you've made up. And speaking from personal experience, that sub does not upvote things like random women getting punched for no reason, but rather, women pushing men around and even hitting them solely for the reason that they know the men are not going to hit a women back.

Is it in videos where if a woman is present and makes noise they flip out about what an annoying bitch she is?

Are you literally basing that off of one video? And then turning it into a gender problem? If that was a guy, would they also not get mad at him?

Is it in literally any sub with pictures where if a woman includes herself in a picture showing something the same tired old 'lol attention whore' images are posted to shame her for having a face?

Half the time that happens, that woman really is an attention-whore, in the nicest way possible. But yes, that's probably the only valid point you had.

Maybe it's in the defaults where if you literally post a picture of any woman, including your own mother or sister or whatever, you have tons of strangers telling you they want to fuck them?

You mean strangers that are always downvoted to hell and shamed to death?

Boy this feminist coup is really ineffective.

Nobody said anything about feminism. This was about SRS and SRD... wot?

Note: Now that I think on it, I don't think those were strawmen. They were very similar though and I couldn't think of any other words to describe them. Also, damn, I didn't think I'd make a post this long about something so stupid.

That's hyperbole not strawmen, and no I'm not 'basing it off one video' or whatever. Also an answer of 'no but they ARE attention whores' isn't an actual answer.

Or, to make it easier so you don't accidentally make a huge post again

WORDS IS HARD

To be fair, it's only a huge post because of quoting you. And pressing enter a lot.

Anyway, no it's not a hyperbole if you're literally taking the most retarded examples that get downvoted and then claiming them as an example of the whole community.

WORDS IS HARD INDEED

The feminists love censorship of anything they cannot grasp or anything they disagree with. The world does not need people like this in any place of power or influence.

Modern feminism/tumblr, special snowflakes, and a horde of mentally ill and confused kin are major blemishes on the face of western society, and cannot lead humanity anywhere but down into confusion and despair.

Humanity (men and women) must do all we can to stop the spread of feminism and these other types of social cancers because it will only stagnate our growth in society and pretty much waste everyone's time. I would love to personally poop on the faces of each and every mod of SRS, just to show my solidarity with my brothers and sisters who hate censorship and hivemind-like thinking.

I bet you have 14 words that can explain your manifesto better

I'm in JP a lot and in their defense, those women are pretty drunk and cunty.

Whatever helps you get hard my brother

Yeah sure. It gets me SO HARD. Let's go with that. Because that's a reasonable response.

If you were on the McDonald's menu, you would be the McButthole.

Are you trying to make a point? Or just saying things?

God you're delusional

Reddit is literally a massive conspiracy, and everything is controlled by a tight knit group of users who are basically probably somehow SRS or essentially worse than hitler.

Source: ( ͡☉ ͜ʖ ͡☉)

Social justice slacktivists inject themselves into mod positions of popular subreddits

Just look at SRD.

And ruin the shit out of them.

This has happened to creepypms, offmychest, oneychromosome, and subredditdrama. Those are the ones that I can think of off the top of my head.

Haha what. SRD talks shit about SRS plenty, creepypms has been called an evil sjw/fempire part since it started so that's a pointless 'takever', offmychest is just salty mods complaining about drama that only existed in their heads, and I have no clue what oneychromosome is at all.

The "tone", if you will, of SRD has experienced a massive shift in the last year and a half. Creepypms, well you might have a point there. Offmychest has /u/TheYellowRose, TheIdesOfLight, DualPollux, /u/IrbyTremor, and /u/mach-2 as mods. TIOL/DP/Irby are the same person and is an unabashed racist/sexist and long time SRSter. Same for YellowRose and Mach-2.

allegedly /r/shitredditsays

You can always hideout in /r/technology... not a woman near there for years... and SJWs can't computar.

We all wish, bb. Trust.

this is a user who has a real, real hate-on for... basically everyone and everything. but us, specifically.

Basically he forgot his medication and thinks anyone who disagrees with him is a radical feminist and that its not possible other people could just have different views than his without some grand conspiracy.

Its not about having different opinions. Different opinions are great, but its when your opinions, or anyone elses opinion, is forced on the majority. SRS tells people how to think.

I literally said this out loud as I was fast swiping through it on my phone.

More like lol.

These are real people.

[deleted]

Uncommon?

Jace is typically a Mythic. :)

[deleted]

There's an $80 card called Jace the mind sculptor, It's one of the top 5 fastest banned cards.

It's more like $100

Ah tits, we're all fucked!

Sculptor

I couldn't not say it

Character limit screwed me.

I feel like the BR list screwed you more. I believe in a modern format with Jace.

The invasion of the neck beards

I didn't read any of it

How long did u read before scrolling Down to see how long in the actual fuck that bullshit was? I made it to 1/4 way Down before my brain started interpreting it as shjt djrjdndneke jn r d. &》_£ £¡;》&#,# #&-;

Holy shit.

He got shadowbanned.

He deserved it.

[deleted]

[deleted]

No I think it was just sheer ignorance.

[deleted]

GAMERGATE TRIED TO KILL ME WITH WORDPRESS PLEASE SUPPORT MY PATREON.

I actually laughed at that. Kudos. :)

Well I'm glad now they have absolutely no excuse to pull that kind of PR stunt.

You remember how Quinn claimed someone had hacked her blog account?

Remember how you couldn't even type her name without getting shadowbanned?

Those were the days... Err...

Can you give me a link that explains the Zoe Quinn story? At the time I had no idea what it was and thought it was just some gamer drama so I didn't care, but apparently it involved SRS so that makes it pretty interesting. Also, if you're willing, I'd love a TLDR.

Here's an ELI5 Sorry no TLDR, I'm still afraid of getting shadowbanned.

Holy shit that censorship and that SJW bullshit.

I remember those nudes... lol, so fucking nasty.

What a whore! xD

ha-ha xD ikr lol! I came so hard to them! :P

Eww... no. She is pretty gross, both personally, and physically.

Nice try GamerGhazi

You realize he made that up, right? And you people are still going along with it.

Like, a 3 second google search would have cleared that up. And yet it got upvoted. And then someone built up a conspiracy theory about something that totally didn't happen and that got upvoted.

And the OP's comments about Digg are completely just, way out of left field and have no basis in what actually happened... yet it's being upvoted.

Y'all some stupid niggas.

EDIT: Wait you're the guy making shit up. Hahahaha, dude. That's pretty funny and yet totally pathetic.

Never attribute to malice (or in this case, wit) that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

Every situation in life can be easily explained by a popular generic cliche.

[deleted]

But if you TEACH a man to create platitudes...

he'll be marginally more productive than the other guy?

If I were a malicious person I'd make sure that particular platitude was spread far and wide for my own protection.

Hanlon's Razor, which is funny, because Hanlons agree with SJWs, so I have no idea why you said that.

"the patriarchy"

When ever I hear that thrown around it sounds like how David Icke will always blame 'the lizard people' for all the shit that happens in the world or Alex Jones and his 'global elite'/'one world government' conspiracy theories.

It is ironic that you are calling a group of people who are backed by a rather large branch of academia conspiracy theorists while buying in to this long screed of baseless accusations. Calling feminists a cabal? B-, feminists are actually an illuminati lizard NWO super cabal.

It is ironic that you are calling a group of people who are backed by a rather large branch of academia conspiracy theorists while buying in to this long screed of baseless accusations.

Actually I never said that - show me where I said that in my original post.

Oh please, the implication is clear. You directly compared the idea of patriarch to that of lizard people.

Yes, I stated that the idea of the patriarchy is as crazy as the conspiracy theories dreamed up by Alex Jones and David Icke. The idea of this nebulous ever present entity that is the apparent cause of everything wrong in the world. The moment you start labelling every that goes wrong in your life as because caused by the patriarchy is the moment you've entered into the realm of craziness.

Why? Why do you find it crazy to insist that certain problems that are faced by men and women today are the result of aspects of our current and past cultures?

If you do not reject the notion that our culture might see women as generally less able than men and you do not reject the findings of studies like this it is not a strain to say that this aspect of our culture, which we will umbrella under the term patriarchy, is responsible for this societal ill.

We have all of this fucking data which show exactly to what degree women are disadvantaged compared men.

The narrative that patriarchy supplies is something which is supported rather strongly by evidence. It is, to the best of our knowledge, true.

Wordpress doesn't have a default password. It generates a random one for you at the end of its config...

So... does this make tomnomnom an inside job false flag distraction?

or just a hardcore renegade hacker who can type admin:admin into a user/pass form. bet he even runs kali linux and defaces hardcore sites like grandmasflowers.com

I have no idea... is there really any way to tell?

You just got everyone in this thread banned from reddit

[deleted]

Bro I feel you. Looking at this makes me wish I was stoned. Reading it all is making me sick.

Oh dude, you're so stoned, you're so cool.

Oh dude, you mock other people, you're so cool.

lmao you got him good dude

Inferiority complex much?

wut

You perceive yourself to be inferior. This causes you to lash out.

Why do you think I perceive myself as inferior?

lash out vb (intr, adverb) 1. to burst into or resort to verbal or physical attack

lol

Making fun of someone seems like a pretty clear cut verbal attack to me.

Why specifically are people suggesting you have an inferiority complex? Well, because you seem to need to put down others so you feel better about yourself.

I'm not sure, man.

at·tack take aggressive action against (a place or enemy forces) with weapons or armed force, typically in a battle or war.

an aggressive and violent action against a person or place.

I'd rather not play the dictionary game if you don't mind.

It's important to know what the words mean.

Tell you what, inferiority complex isn't real. It was only used as an excuse when you were bullied in school as to make yourself feel better.

[deleted]

stchatterbox Member Posted 9 years ago #

wordpress create a special password for you during installation and you may change the password to your own preference after logging in.

https://wordpress.org/support/topic/what-is-default-password-in-wordpress

kek^kek^kek

[deleted]

I think that's what stchatterbox meant by "special password for you"...9 years ago.

God damn bro dat adderall

WordPress doesn't have a default password. A random one is generated each time you install the software.

edit: The parent post has edited out the claim from the post, but as originally written it claimed a bunch of "SJWs" ran their WordPress installs with insecure default passwords (which WordPress doesn't have). Something to consider when evaluating the rest of the claims.

With all the vulnerabilities you might as well use a default password.

Honest question: what are these hateful and radical views?

I think he's referring to the radical feminist and SJW agenda.

If you're unaware of what a SJW (Social Justice Warrior) is, here's a reference from Urban Dictionary:

Social Justice Warrior. A pejorative term for an individual who repeatedly and vehemently engages in arguments on social justice on the Internet, often in a shallow or not well-thought-out way, for the purpose of raising their own personal reputation. A social justice warrior, or SJW, does not necessarily strongly believe all that they say, or even care about the groups they are fighting on behalf of. They typically repeat points from whoever is the most popular blogger or commenter of the moment, hoping that they will "get SJ points" and become popular in return. They are very sure to adopt stances that are "correct" in their social circle.

The SJW's favorite activity of all is to dogpile. Their favorite websites to frequent are Livejournal and Tumblr. They do not have relevant favorite real-world places, because SJWs are primarily civil rights activists only online.

1:

A social justice warrior reads an essay about a form of internal misogyny where women and girls insult stereotypical feminine activities and characteristics in order to boost themselves over other women.

The SJW absorbs this and later complains in response to a Huffington Post article about a 10-year-old feminist's letter, because the 10-year-old called the color pink "prissy".

2:

Commnter: "I don't like getting manicures. It's too prissy."

SJW: "Oh my god, how fucking dare you use that word, you disgusting sexist piece of shit!"

Source


There's recently been a backlash online with lots of SJW influence in huge social networks most notably Tumblr and recently 4chan.

These blogs have been lead by prominent figures involved with the feminist movement and have been attributed to the

gain [of] policies that advantage women, often disadvantaging men in the process. (Though they still claim to be about equality) They have lobbied for and won many pieces of legislation that advantage women.

Just a few examples:

They got women included in affirmative action encouraging employers to give some favoritism to female applicants.

The Women's Educational Equity Act helped feminism favor girls in K-12 education, which is a large part of why fewer boys go onto college these days.

The Violence Against Women Act, as the name suggests is about women's interest, in contrast to most laws which treat men and women equally.

They have gotten most colleges to lower the standard for finding men guilty of sexual assault, thus creating more false "convictions".

Source

I know what an "SJW" is. It's a buzzword used by reactionary people who feel threatened on the internet. The real world version of this is called an "activist" and they've actually been around for the better part of human history. You probably agree with the causes of some activists and disagree with others. But then you just lump all of the activists you disagree with together and assume that they're just horrible monstrous people that'll do anything they can to disadvantage you.

So I'd just like an example of these hateful and radical views in real life.

They don't exist much like the blogs. He made it up.

These people are literally creating their own fantasy land where they are being attacked. They have an entire narrative that they believe is true without anything to back it up.

But holy shit they're angry about it. Like legit taint troubled over nothing except the things they think are happening.

Please, someone explain to me, how this is not crazy.

His story about Digg is entirely funny given that the reason for Digg's downfall was widely popularized. I am not even sure how it got past so many people.

This is some war on christmas bullshit.

Great copy pasta though.

[deleted]

I feel fine.

[deleted]

How am I brainwashed?

I feel like the conversation is now trending towards some neckbeard's facebook post that would top /r/iamverysmart.

You haven't said much but damn you sure are confident about whatever is you probably won't eventually say.

They're honeypots. They'll use connection and IP data to gather information on you should they ever need leverage.

I'm not going to burn down the building I'm just saying there is a pile of oily rags and a few bricks of thermite in the basement.

Reddit management needs to be sorted out. That includes the global moderators.

I don't think death threats are the best way to get things done in a civilized society.

That's surprising because there's no default password on wordpress.

what kind of subs do they mod?

/r/bjbs

gud meme

wanted to know what sad ideas this dudebro had about the supposed existence of a bravery cabal kek

This is some illuminati shit right here.

It's real tho. Visit 8chan's gamergate board sometime. And wonder why that's not talked about in r/gaming

[deleted]

Sometimes I leave the link out on purpose, fuck this bot

yes lovely little place that, every time i've had a peep it's had their enemies home addresses and phone numbers everywhere

Why are you warning them of their loopholes?

Because they don't exist, much like the blogs, so he can't warn them anyways. Or do you think they are going to change the passwords of blogs that don't exist?

Are you saying that this cabal doesn't exist?

What kind of security is there on a website with both a default password,

AND NOT MAKING YOU CHANGE THE FUCKING PASSWORD?!?!

Like an idiot's luggage combination.

WordPress doesn't have default passwords, read above.

THEY ALL USE THE FUCKING DEFUALT PASSWORD ON THEIR WORDPRESS BLOGS

There is no 'defualt' password you liar. When you create a WP account you need to choose a password.

Reddit - where a post completely made up of shit gets more than a thousand upvotes just because it's against feminists

Can't tell if sarcastic or SRS shitposter

I'm not sarcastic and I'm not a "shitposter" - the person I replied to made up a story about blogs using the default WordPress password when WordPress has in fact no default password. Yet more than a thousand people thought the comment, which was obviously a lie, thought it was relevant to the discussion because "muh feminists".

social justice warriorness

Social justice war?

Why did you tell them?

If your password is 12345, you're gonna have a bad time.

You should've totally ruined their shit.

Wait what? Default password? Wordpress doesn't have a default password. Wtf are you talking about?

watch out hardcore w0rdpress 0day right here, h0w many guesses did it take y0u? and then did y0u type alert(1) int0 all the search fields?

als0 every0ne wh0 runs a w0rdpress bl0g and is c0nnect3d t0 srs is n0w l00king at their l0gs

Why didn't you change all their passwords and remove mod positions?

"Gamergate hacked my WordPress pls support my paetron"

AHAHAHAHAHAHAH I just made a comment over there, and was banned in about 5 minutes. I wonder what dumb bitch is sitting there furiously fapping to banning people. I hope she has fun. Also, I was gonna post this but, you know, since they can't being take told off to their faces or they might cry and ruin their makeup:

SRS: Well, we had forgotten you. See, you're so incredibly unimportant, no one really cares to even give you a passing through generally. You know how when you pass a dead animal on the road you sort of feel bad for it and then forget it and move on? Yeah, that's this sub.

It's just, it's Saturday night. We're all bored. Why not brigade the brigaders. It's hilarious, we're all having a bunch of fun laughing at this ub and the people who actually believe the baby dribble you guys spout. Oh man, if I could stop laughing long enough to be upset...I still wouldn't care. You guys define a new type of pathetic, and really need to try and troll harder. We all just laugh at you at this point, then forget you exist.

Oh, and how butthurt can I make you guys? Cunts, whores, sluts. Women deserve a good slap every once in a while, gotta keep em in line. Why don't women need watches? There's a clock on the stove. What's a woman good for? Not much. You wanna hear the most hilarious thing ever? Women's rights. That's it, go ahead and get pissy, I'll be getting my popcorn.

Go ahead, downvote my entire account. Then know I'm sitting here drinking whiskey and laughing. A lot.

do you need a hug? you sound like you need a hug.

You went on there and called them bitches what did you expect? Whatever the agenda of other people are you come across as a bit of a prick.

It's a bit sad to see this comment, it seems you have a hurt bottom from the ban. But if you go in with that sort of attitude, don't be surprised if you get banned.

The lady doth protest too much, methinks

You should delete this comment

Lol "guys".

This is my favorite comment on reddit. I wish I could gild you but I'm a broke college kid

I wouldn't be surprised if the default password was left intentionally so that if/when something happens it just becomes Drama Fuel(tm) to further their Agenda.

can you show me a known account. i want to fuck their Femininazi bullshit up

http://ha.ckers.cf/wp-admin/

Haha, I told a guy I know about this. He was able to sign in and grab all the IPs the admin accounts signed in under.

Most of them are home boxes.

I'm sure he'll have his fun as he does, the rascal. :)

so he's going to, what, nmap a bunch of residential ip's? cool that will take days and come back with 65535 filtered (ie nothing)

Ok I'll subscribe to your subreddit. But in return you have to subscribe to mine, /r/bugfights

All bug fights, all the time! There's no social justice but there's survival of the fittest?

survival of the fittest

So ableist! Shadowbanned!

Careful, sjws don't like survival of the fittest, they don't like stuff they don't fit into

[deleted]

there are zero fighting avocados in your sub, fuck you.

[deleted]

One can dream.

Meanwhile, to make sure I'm an OP that delivers, /r/TAKBIR has actual content.

You're a bit like /r/surprisejihad or whatever it is

Yeah there's another one doing the same thing that was launched like a month after mine. Much more popular too, oh well.

Allahu akbar!

Fuck that, go to /r/andthisisjackass for quality content.

That subreddit is amazing.

Haha holy shit that's great, I'm eating so I won't watch now but that's a cool sub

Not conspiracy man but I just subbed to his and yours

Bug fights?!?!

You have a new subscriber!

Hey I'll subscribe to yours if you visit my sub. /r/whatsthatgif basicly I thought it could be a fun way to find gifs on reddit considering the search engine sucks

fuck that sub gave me goosebumps me out more than I thought it would.

Funny, seeing two MMA fighters beat shit out of each other has little to no effect,

That's because they're both willing participants who have trained for that moment. They do it because they love it. They have doctors, referees, and corner men. They don't die (Besides the few accidental deaths).

Those bugs are actually killing each other.

How's that different from /r/bugwars?

Holy crap!!! It's literally the exact same sub!!!! Lmao! I can't believe I basically recreated the exact same thing. I don't even know how to fix this! This is embarrassing...

finally something worthwhile in this subthread. I'm totally in for /r/bugfights.

/r/EmpireTV for the show, guys.

That's a pretty cool sub, i subscribed

holy shit this is a brilliant idea for a subreddit

subbed cuz i like your style

Subbed a few months ago. Rock on!

This is great. TY

I was a little unsure at first, but I think I have found my new favorite Subreddit.

I subscribed. Now can I shamelessly advertise my subreddit? It's /r/satchel. Everything you ever wanted to know about satchels. All satchels, all the time.

I thought I was a longtime subscriber there but it turns out I wasn't. I wonder why the bugs are so mad at each other.

i will subscribe to yours if you sub to /r/ducksgonewild and provide pictures of ducks, preferably going wild, or not, we just like ducks

Don't forget /r/gaming

Yeah, funny how a scandal about corruption in the media turned into "you hate women if you disagree with conflicts of interest in the media."

Also suspicious mass shadowbannings.

[deleted]

Hey remember when GamerGate tracked down the worst harasser of Anita and she refused to even acknowledge it let alone act on it?

Good times.

https://np.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction/comments/2ksmw3/gamergate_members_track_major_anita_threatener/cloaty7

[deleted]

The two GamerGate communities I'm aware of are both heavily moderated and absolutely don't allow dox or harassment of any kind.

If you're upset that people have free speech on the internet, I'm not sure I know what to tell you.

[deleted]

I'm absolutely ok with you spouting your nonsense. It's when you push your fucked up ideology on entire communities, cyberstalk people who don't fall inline, bully, brigade, dox and ruin lives that I start taking issue.

[deleted]

What are you talking about? I don't condone death threats in the slightest. I literally just said that.

Are you retarded?

IT's hilarious to me that /u/TheIronGoat talks as if anti-gamers don't already doxx and harrass women and minorities on a regular basis.

They don't see it as doxing and harassment. They see it as justice.

That's how fucked up these people are.

Oh I know, I know. Being in the grips of an ideology is a bitch (for everyone else).

And now said user removed it all. So brave, much warrior.

One could always hope that he looked at what he had written and had an epiphany about what a repellent individual he was, and deleted from shame. Not likely, but TiA has many subscribers who have managed to escape the clutches of the SJW ideology, and I try to be optimistic about these things.

Oh, absolutely not, I didn't want some 12 year old going through my post history overnight and down voting all my comments, gotta keep dem internet points yo.

Anyway, I'm not a "SJW" , I'm just better than you, because I don;t support racism, sexism (except against white cis middle class males because it's funny), and the normalization of pedophilia.

That is caled hypocrisy when you claim to hold some standard, preach it, but then excuse yourself from holding it on a whim.

And I can say that u/aztec_mummy is better than you, as he is against necrophilia, brutal group rape, murder and eugenics.

I am NOT a hypocrite. I am explicitly against racisim, sexism, and discrimination unless it is against white cis males who promote the normalization of pedophilia. It's only hypocritical if I claim all sexism and racism and discrimination is wrong, but being racist and sexist to white males is funny, So I support it when other people are too.

I feel so sorry for you...you've accepted a narrative so simplistic and improbable that it makes the conflicts in professional wrestling seem like a Dostoyevski novel.

I hope when you do come around you are not too hard on yourself.

you've accepted a narrative so simplistic and improbable

That minorities and women are people too, and not just middle class white cis males?

I expect that you feel it is clever to be disingenuous. I find that is how teenagers are. Like I said, I feel sorry for you. That you have to invent motivations for people you don't know out of whole cloth to make yourself feel better is truly pitiable. It makes me grateful I live in the world, and not a bubble.

It makes me grateful I live in the world, and not a bubble.

Girl, calm down. You're on reddit.

It just so happens the most pressing issue of corruption in the media is almost entirely 'sjws' and women right?

Most of them are straight white men actually, although they do almost uniformly support SJW politics. That's not important though, they could be hardline conservatives, it would still be corrupt.

But the problem with the GG conversation was that the focus never properly fixated on that.

Er, yes, yes it did. It's sites like polygon and kotaku that are trying their damndest to keep things focused on the LWs. We call them that because they wouldn't be all that relevant if they didn't keep reinserting themselves into the drama over and over.

It's always been fixated on that, just see GG's victory with the FCC.

No, who said that?

Honestly, if that's your first thought, then you're pretty sexist. Media corruption is gender agnostic.

Right it's just GG just happens to view their biggest enemies as 'sjw' types and assorted minorities who don't agree with them.

Yes, I fight to stop those damn minorities like Jonathan McIntosh, Phil Fish, Jason Schreier, Ben Kuchera,... wait, what were we talking about again?

You're dreaming if you think they will admit most of their champions are white heterosexual males with wealth privilege.

All of those have been called 'sjw types' though, right, you know, the first part of that line?

Funny that the majority of "sjw types" are all privileged white dudes.

I'm sorry I was just told by people that it was not cool to use white dudes as an insult, you're basically treating white dudes like Hitler did the Jews apparently.

nice tumblr meme

No I'm literally using words a gg supporter in this thread used.

gg supporter

Well i think where you lie social justice friend.

I don't care?

I think you do

I don't think that's the case at all. As a matter of fact, I think that's the narrative used to discredit and suppress the legitimate outrage of those concerned with corruption in the media. It's intellectually dishonest, and really only creates a straw man with the hopes of demonizing those who want to make their community better and less susceptible to manipulation and corruption.

Basically, I'm saying the only people fighting the culture war were those you referenced, and other opportunists who were hoping to use the scandal to further their own careers. Gamers were upset about the fraud taking place in their community.

IGN giving 10/10 for games that are widely agreed to be shit? Games being published at the behest of sexual favors? There's clearly something wrong here - that's the real story.

This all started because there just happen to be a figure at the center of the controversy that fancied herself as a representative of said "assorted minorities," and in defense of her own nefarious actions, twisted the narrative of her own wrongdoing into a social war between the sexes.

If you go to wikipedia now and read up on GG, the layperson would get the impression that a bunch of dudes just started some hate campaign on poor innocent Zoe Quinn for no reason at all, and I'm sorry, but that's just gaslighting of what the original concern was about and it's nothing more than a continuation of this narrative spin put on the whole ordeal.

So no. Gamers don't view SJW's nor minorities as enemies (and being a gamer is not mutually exclusive to being a minority or SJW, for that matter). That's a complete straw man, it's destructive to any sort of dialogue that we could be having, and it treats both parties like they're incapable of coming to any sort of understanding - and when you do that, it's exactly what you get.

In the Dorito Pope's defence, ign has stayed out of involvement in the GG drama.

If you go to wikipedia now and read up on GG, the layperson would get the impression that a bunch of dudes just started some hate campaign on poor innocent Zoe Quinn for no reason at all

shit you can go to the gg board on 8chan.co and get that impression. never have i seen so many dox threads. hope someone rm's that place

You mean the sexual favors that never happened in exchange for publishing?

Also you don't know what gaslighting is.

I've barely ever seen IGN come up, it's almost always people like Wu, FemFreq, Quinn, basically an entire list of minorities and women who get shit on for saying 'hey maybe there's some problems here'.

I've had friends get harassed by people for making tweets, not using the gg tags or whatever, just like making a gamergate joke or something and getting floods of death threats and shit. Groups like 8Chan and KiA are more focused on saying child porn is an elaborate feminist plot and being angry Intel said diversity is probably important. They're more concerned punishing people who don't like them than getting anything done in their alleged causes, so boy if these people don't view others as their enemies they're doing a weird job showing that.

Except the whole child porn thing was found out, for a fact, to have been a plot for defamation by an anti-gg person..

Actually disregard my last post fuckin loooooool

I like how white male is being used pejoratively here. The Germans referred to the Jews as oppressors, and as well all know, you can't oppress the oppressors, right?

Yea bro you're not biased. Men: BASICALLY the new Jew in Nazi Germany.

When did I say that men are the new Jews in Nazi Germany? And in context to the conversation, the OP was actually referring to white men as if it was somehow inherently bad.

Would it be okay if I started using your demographic as a pejorative term, then dismissed your perspective in life due to some sort of epistemological superpower that you lack?

Next time you see someone compare something, try to realize that they're trying to make a point out of the comparison, not actually say they're 1:1 allegorical.

Also, I like how you can't contend with my argument on it's own merit- instead you have to quote mine for something that makes me seem "biased" as if having a bias somehow dismisses the argument at hand. I am biased toward cheese pizza, doesn't mean my opinions on French impressionism are tainted.

Would it be okay if I started using your demographic as a pejorative term, then dismissed your perspective in life due to some sort of epistemological superpower that you lack?

As a gay Jewish guy of Roma decent I'm super not a good person to play this card to. Like, your own ego vs actual discrimination is not a great fight, let alone one to invoke Hitler.

Actually you're a perfect person to play this card do.

Answer the question; would it be okay to start using your demographics as a pejorative term and then dismissing your perspective in life due to it?

The point is when the guy got all pissy about it it wasn't some blanket pejorative but a statement that someone from outside the community affected by shit like bigotry probably doesn't get it.

Also yea boy it'd sure suck if people started insulting Roma and Jews and mocking anyone from those communities who spoke up, boy that'd be new and bad.

Also yea boy it'd sure suck

Yes, it would. Which is the point. How is this not getting through to you? It's bad to dismiss your perspective in life because "lol fucking jews", it's just as bad to do it because of your colour or gender too.

Right but if I was, for example, dismissing some black dude's story because hey I'm Jewish and never experienced that, wouldn't it be fair to go 'christ you don't get it, shut up'?

What possible relevance is that?

You meant Jews right.

It's funny that some gamers just figured out that consumer product media is tightly linked to the industries that produce the products. Everyone who has ever read a car, motorcycle, bicycle, gun, photography, etc... magazine already knew.

Also it's funny how the gamerghazi shitshow started with some asshole insulting his ex girlfriend because she might have cheated on him and was obviously a lot happier without him.

Sorry bro, but corruption alone would probably not have started all this. Come back again when all of these consumer product medias shit all over said consumers and look like this: http://imgur.com/a/VUHxA and when they finally had enough and complain with concrete examples of wrongdoing to top it off they try to shut it down all across the Internet.

Also it's funny how the gamerghazi shitshow started with some asshole insulting his ex girlfriend because she might have cheated on him and was obviously a lot happier without him.

I thought we were supposed to listen and believe when a victim talks about their experience.

After they chased two women out their houses and ignored the journalists that supposedly had conflicts of interest.

One went on a vacation planned before gg and the other did interviews from her house saying she was at a hotel

Also another one. And the fbi was involved. And then they doxxed both of them. And then they issued a threat to shoot up a university campus.

There was no tie to gg in that threat and the fbi dismissed it as non-credible

I know they run /r/offmychest , that was one of my favorite subreddits until /u/TimPowerGamer, the original mod, or one of the last original mods left. You can read the whole thing here. https://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/1oya54/developing_mod_drama_over_in_roffmychest_one_mod/

Yeah. Sorry guys. I couldn't stop the take over.

SRS had the subreddit from the beginning. The afk original moderator was a backup account of one of the many SRS activists. After another mod and I made that subreddit into a damn good place, they popped back in. We couldn't do anything about it, so the other mod left.

I stuck it out for a while (I wasn't belligerent enough to get rid of, but my dissatisfaction was showing), but those recruitment posts were actually happening before I left, and that's one of the reasons WHY I left. I tried butting heads, but they wouldn't have it, so I left on my own terms instead of on theirs.

Nothing you could do man, that subreddit was awesome while you were in charge.

How exactly has it changed since he hasn't been in charge? Seems to be the same as always

Let me just ask, do you believe the original post?

Is offmychest toxic? The administration is. The community, I'm admittedly not certain on.

No, the one by /u/metaredditcancer

He is shadowbanned btw.

I heard he was evading a previous ban.

Bit out of the loop...around what time did this happen?

It's been something like two years now.

I knew when I got banned from that sub like 6-10 months ago that the mods were heavy SJWs. Glad to see it was right.

What happened to it after you left?

Well, they went full SRS, banning people for making posts that they didn't agree with and taking a radical spin on the moderation of the subreddit. We frequently get individuals in /r/trueoffmychest (I didn't name it, name kind of sucks) about people angry for getting banned from offmychest for no good reason.

Well shit. I popped in there the other day and read several posts and felt like the tone of the sub had changed for the worse since I'd last visited. I guess it wasn't my imagination after all.

Tagged as 'Awesome Mod'. You go dude.

Hey man you did well. I was priviliged to have use it when it was still free and open and not a fucking hugbox. It's not your fault. Anything that these SJWs/Feminist cunts touch turns immediately to shit. Unfortunately they are all obese fatasses who never go outside and think fighting online and grabbing power online is the be-all and end-all. It's funny because Im a minority and I have to say even the "viler" subs have better implementations of free speech, and not reacting like censoring bitches at opposing ideas. The somewhat good thing though is that SJWs are doing themselves a huge reputation disservice. It's definitely shifted over the years Ive been apart of the site. Kinda bad because it's collateral damage for non-crazy and the good SJWs. Though thems the breaks!

Were you around at the same time as cpt-sisko? IIRC that sub really went downhill when he left... which was around 80-100K subscribers. I certainly don't recall SRS having such a stranglehold, and the IRC room wasn't around which didn't give them a nice convenient platform to brigade/shill/co-ordinate from.

Nope. I've never heard of that user.

For what it's worth /r/TrueOffMyChest is a smaller, more sincere alternative that doesn't censor or have radfem/SJW dictators for mods. Check it out.

For now. :(

and in 2 years /r/truereallyreallyreallyoffmychest

and in 2 years /r/truereallyreallyreallyoffmychest

Gah, I know, I hate this. For other people who get bugged by this: I'm working on an alternative way to associate subreddits with topics; that would allow more than one subreddit to be associated with "funny" or "off my chest" or etc.

I'm building it as an extension right now but might make it a website instead, to promote more rapid adoption. Will post to (theory of reddit? dunno where it would go) if it gets anywhere.

Is this project open source? I'd love to take a peek and see if I could contribute.

Wow. I went to the sidebar on offmychest and all the way at the bottom under "resources" is "A visit from the political correctness police" and "Six rules for allies". Wtf does that have to do with getting things off your chest?

Absolutely nothing. It just allows them to remove shit that makes them uncomfortable. It's pretty pathetic. I bet with your name you wouldnt be allowed to post lol. Fucking SJWs on this site are insane. Check out /r/creepypms (which used to be great until the feminists fucks gutted it to protect the feels of of course the wimmenz). Also, /r/racism run by some Asian fuckface banned me for respectfully criticizing black people once to a posited question instead of responding in echo chamber lingo... and Im black.

Lol I already got banned from creepypms. I forgot why, but I think it was something about victim blaming? I might go through my history to see if I can find it

How I got banned because I beat some little bitchass SJW/Feminist mod in an argument. Then she held a grudge. Knowing how SJWs have no fucking to little separation from powertripping online rather than going outside every couple of days. She tagged me and then just waited for something else to flip out about and ban me. Silly little harpies.

You type real good for one of them colored folk.

Yeaaaaaiii booiii

Coming from SRD, that first comment is ironic in this situation.

[deleted]

Or, you know, he's breaking site rules like voting on his own posts, with one of his many alt accounts...

/u/metaredditcancermod
/u/metaredditcancermod1
/u/metaredditcancermod2
/u/metaredditcancermod3
/u/metaredditcancermod4
/u/metaredditcancermod5
/u/metaredditcancermod6
/u/metaredditcancermod7
/u/metaredditcancermod8

Something something log in your own eye

What does SRS have to do with this?

When the rules are selectively enforced, the rules are just a convenient excuse to ban people.

While those are all alt accounts, they aren't all alt accounts of one person, and they are not being used for brigading and vote manipulation. They've been looked at more than once by the admins.

They seem consistent to me. Are you suggesting that those kids are guilty of core manipulation? The admins have looked into it multiple times and states that that is not the case.

That's proof of nothing.

As opposed to a wall of text rambling about SJWs taking over subreddits with no links to anything even resembling proof. That must be true.

From everything I've personally witnessed, he was spot on.

A lot of people have sockpuppets. That's not proof of vote manipulation.

So anonymous anecdotal evidence confirms other anonymous anecdotal evidence. Let's start ourselves a movement based on that, then.

I don't have an opinion about sock puppets or shadowbanning, but if you read that wall of text and thought "that's accurate, and I need no further evidence to form an opinion on this," then I feel sorry for you.

He's the one making the claims. Go take it up with him. But if you wanted to do even the most minimal amount of research go dig into the whole Laurelai LGBT ordeal and you'll realize he's not making shit up.

Again, having multiple sockpuppets is proof of nothing. So take that weak shit to the park.

IT PROVES HE TRYING TO MANIPULATE VOTES WITH ALT ACCOUNTS!

I know it's not proof, but it certainly suggests he's not innocent.

Either way, the previous poster made a claim without any evidence, so I dismissed it without evidence.

I know it's not proof, but it certainly suggests he's not innocent.

It's not against the rules to have alt accounts. It's against the rules to do vote manipulation. It's pretty funny that you say that someone made a claim without any evidence, and here you are doing just the same. Evidence of alts is not evidence of vote manipulation.

It's not against the rules to have alt accounts.

I don't know why you bothered to point this out, I never claimed otherwise.

It's against the rules to do vote manipulation

Yes, exactly!

It's pretty funny that you say that someone made a claim without any evidence, and here you are doing just the same.

No shit. The bar for evidence seemed to be set low since he was able to make shit up without evidence and everyone just went with it. I guess evidence is only required when it goes against your preferred narrative though since no one called him out on his baseless accusation.

Evidence of alts is not evidence of vote manipulation.

No, bit being banned and having a lot of alts certainly suggests it.

I guess evidence is only required when it goes against your preferred narrative though since no one called him out on his baseless accusation.

The accusation that SRS has been infiltrating and controlling subreddits where they ban people they disagree with personally? This has been documented and talked about for years now; although this is the first account of someone claiming to be in their internal circle. With the amount of reach and pull that these people have, I don't think it's easy to take them down without risking being doxxed; nobody wants their workplace receiving e-mails or calls talking about how they are rapists or women haters. Hell, a girl lost her job because they kept spamming the company with porn. Or how about the two guys that lost their job for making a dongle joke to themselves in a tech conference? Heard of those cases? Just do a google search for Adria Richards and Pleb Comics+Gamergate.

I guess evidence is only required when it goes against your preferred narrative though since no one called him out on his baseless accusation.

Well, evidence is not required at all by these people. I think "listen and believe" is a core portion of their belief system.

Most of what the OP posted is not sufficient to convince an impartial person, I agree... but in all seriousness, what is? When gamergate started, it was because a guy posted a really long rant talking about how his girlfriend cheated on him with journalists and even her boss, including screenshots and everything. You would think that a chat log where she is admitting to all the wrongdoing would be sufficient evidence, but even in this thread you will find people talking about how the leaker was an asshole... even after the evidence was presented detailing how she was exploitative and treated him like a crazy person when he started suspecting something was off.

So what would be good evidence of these things happening? /r/subredditdrama has been controlled by SRS for a long time now, and it was a gradual meltdown. SRS destroying LGBT is a well-known fact, and everyone who was there to see it can tell you who Lorelai is and what she did, and she's still a very much influencial person in SJW circles.

What claim is the most unbelievable to you?

What claim is the most unbelievable to you?

/r/subredditdrama has been controlled by SRS for a long time now

This seems like a good place to start.

How can you tell? He may simply have multiple accounts (like we all do).

Because the alternative is that the reddit admins shadow banned him for having an opinion they didn't like, which I find pretty ridiculous. That would require that all of the reddit admins are okay with banning people like this. Given that reddit is growing its staff, they'd have to be somehow screening all their candidates to make sure everyone would be cool with that kind of censorship and be willing to keep quiet about it. I know people who actually interviewed at reddit who mentioned no kind of screening for SJW opinions. The type of people who apply at reddit are going to be very pro-free speech, just by nature of the talent pool they're pulling from. The fact that we don't have any whistleblowers from within the company decrying unjust shadowbanning, the most plausible scenario by far is that this user broke the rules and got banned. The reason the admins won't say why he was banned is because it goes against the privacy policy of the site. This means that you only ever hear the point of view of the one who broke the rules, which means you're always hearing a slanted and highly biased account of what went down.

[deleted]

When you list multiple accounts and say he was vote manipulating, you imply you know it as fact.

This is the kind of objection an 8th grader looking to be contrarian pulls. The guy posted a baseless accusation. I posted an alternative and much more likely scenario. Why are you giving me shit but not him when he made an accusation with no evidence, just as I ostensibly did? You're not arguing with me because I claimed to know something, you're arguing with me because you like his version of the events better.

The way you come across makes you look like part of the conspiracy.

I just noticed you post to /r/conspriacy. There's literally nothing I can say to convince you that you're being utterly irrational here.

Why are you giving me shit but not him when he made an accusation with no evidence, just as I ostensibly did?

Cool your jets. I'm making a point that the way you simply say that he was manipulating votes but NOT listing your logic makes you look crazier than he is. Your "theory" is plausible, but you state it as fact. Another theory is that he mentioned a former reddit employee who then joined /r/srs as part of this "cabal".

There's literally nothing I can say to convince you that you're being utterly irrational here.

People who follow conspiracies are much more open minded than people who don't. The problem is just the opposite of being closed minded, its one of being to open minded and taking in ideas that are pure bat shit crazy. The trick is to hold all the ideas in the mind at once and carefully weigh each one to determine whats likely to be true, not to reject ideas just because they are not liked.

I'm making a point that the way you simply say that he was manipulating votes but NOT listing your logic makes you look crazier than he is.

Only to the crazies. I'm perfectly happy with how I presented my point in that comment.

Another theory is that he mentioned a former reddit employee who then joined /r/srs as part of this "cabal".

Since when do former admins have shadowbanning abilities?

The trick is to hold all the ideas in the mind at once and carefully weigh each one to determine whats likely to be true, not to reject ideas just because they are not liked.

I know all about considering alternative view points. Don't patronize me. The vast majority of my redditing takes place on /r/changemyview. People who take /r/conspiracy seriously are not the people that are carefully weighing various view points. There is not a lot of rational thought or argumentation in that sub. There is passionate alarmism and terrible argumentation.

Another theory is that he mentioned a former reddit employee who then joined /r/srs as part of this "cabal".

Since when do former admins have shadowbanning abilities?

No, you're not supposed to name people. He may have come close enough to naming the person that the admins felt justified in shadow banning.

I know all about considering alternative view points. Don't patronize me.

Dude, you've got lots of buttons to push, and I'm not even trying to push them.

People who take /r/conspiracy seriously are not the people that are carefully weighing various view points.

I just said that /r/conpsiracy people tend to take in to much shit. Would you consider aliens rule the world in considering alternatives points of view? Probably not, and that's my point. People of /r/conspriacy tend to give TO MUCH weight to crazy ideas, not to little. Thus to say I'm closed minded because I post stuff to /r/conspiracy is counter to the actual mindset of a conspiracy thinker.

No, you're not supposed to name people. He may have come close enough to naming the person that the admins felt justified in shadow banning.

A username is not doxxing.

People of /r/conspriacy tend to give TO MUCH weight to crazy ideas, not to little.

The problem is they don't consider the rational viewpoints, or even remotely apply Occam's Razor to most situations. They tend to be contrarian for the sake of it rather than because they are looking at all viewpoints and consider the crazy idea to be the most likely.

A cabal of one..?

This made me curious so I went and looked at their moderator list:

ArchangelleMichaelle (281) 3 years ago full permissions
ArchangelleGabrielle (27307) 3 years ago full permissions
ArchangelleRaguelle (55) 3 years ago full permissions
ArchangelleUrielle (63) 3 years ago full permissions
ArchangelleZadkielle (58) 3 years ago full permissions
ArchangelleJophielle (1675) 3 years ago full permissions
ArchangelleHanielle (617) 3 years ago full permissions
ArchangelleSamaelle (803) 3 years ago full permissions
ArchangelleDworkin [-1] (22098) 3 years ago full permissions
ArchangelleFalafelle (2355) 3 years ago no permissions
ArchangelleWeezyelle (5) 3 years ago no permissions
FempireGynquisitor (1) 2 years ago full permissions
ArchangelleJor-El (5108) 2 years ago full permissions
ArchangelleTenuelle (193) 2 years ago full permissions
ArchangelleStrudelle [+1] (17047) 2 years ago full permissions
ArchangelleCaramelle (348) 2 years ago full permissions
ArchangelleCastiel (992) 2 years ago full permissions
ArchangelleCatselle (5047) 2 years ago full permissions
ArchangelleZurielle (48) 1 year ago full permissions
ArchangelleFarrah (879) 1 year ago full permissions
ArchangelleLegibelle (1) 1 year ago full permissions
ArchangelleHuckelle (16) 1 year ago full permissions
ArchangelleMarvelle (340) 1 year ago full permissions
AutoModerator (311) 1 year ago access, posts, wiki ArchangelleLiraelle (104) 1 year ago full permissions
ArchangelleJazeera (238) 11 months ago full permissions
intortus (5380) 10 months ago full permissions

It's like they don't want people to know their main accounts because they don't want to be held responsible for their shitty actions.

I'm a mod and I use alt accounts (this is my mod account, obviously). 75% of the mods I work with do the same thing. We do this work for free for fucks sake. I think we deserve our privacy. This trend isn't something specific to SRS.

EDIT: Apparently this wasn't clear. I'm not an SRS mod. I mod community subreddits, not meta subs.

We do this work for free for fucks sake.

There have been plenty of "scandals" in the past where Mods have either sold their services to companies looking to advertise or pushed their own websites to ensure they get hits, thus getting themselves some web traffic.

Not saying you do it. Not saying most Mods do it. Just saying it happens. And when a Mod is an anonymous person it makes it easier for them to be corrupt and thus harder to have faith in.

And when a Mod is an anonymous person it makes it easier for them to be corrupt and thus harder to have faith in.

Isn't this what the admins are for? The admins can see all. The site is completely transparent to them. When someone abuses the system, anyone can message the admins and complain about it.

Yeah, but you have to explicitly break the site rules to get hit by the admins

Exactly. If you promote something illegal, if you dox someone, if you use vote manipulation, if you spam, then the admins take action. Otherwise, mods make all other decisions.

So why isn't SRS banned then?

They don't break them http://www.reddit.com/rules

Oh hell yes they do. Admins have banned other subreddits for much less than what SRS does (invading subreddits, brigading, doxxing). The fact that they STILL don't use .np links should be proof enough that SRS are favored by the admins.

Actually, if you look at the list of banned subs, they've all been banned for more blatant violations or for being part of major scandals that make the site look bad. SRS does not officially encourage brigading,(it's listed in their sub rules as not being allowed) it is simply a byproduct of linking to other subs, /r/BestOf has the same problems as well along with many other similar subs.

So you guys deserve privacy and not having your comment history stalked through for dirt, but the people your sub targets don't?

Holy hypocritical bullshit. You guys really are a cancer.

My subs don't target anyone. We're community subs. /r/PurplePillDebate is the most active sub I moderate with this account.

Edit: I moderate larger soccer subs with another accout, but they're much less demanding.

Fair enough. I assumed you meant you mod SRS.

Cyberstalking has been a serious issue that reddit has known about for years and has done fuck-all addressing it.

2 shitty years and you're the mod of five subs. And you have the hide to complain about "work". You're a joke.

We can easily get 100 or even 150 reports a day on/r/PurplePillDebate, sometimes more when it's really active. With only 5 active mods, that can be 20 comments per mod. Then I moderate a soccer sub with my older account with 30,000 subscribers, but it's practically no work compared to PPD.

Simply put, you don't deserve privacy. You should have to choose between privacy or power and accountablity. If you want to be an asshole you've only yourself to blame when called out for abusing your power.

We're on a god damn news aggregator site, these people aren't running for public office.

Scale doesn't mean anything. And this isn't a news aggregator site if it is party to a group that selectively removes stories it finds offensive or unfit for the story that they want. Ripping pages out of an encyclopedia doesn't make you a scholar.

This isn't an encylopedia.

And yes it is a news aggregator site if you can remove shit you don't want on your subreddit.

That is how reddit has worked since it's inception, and that is how it will continue to work for the foreseeable future.

Don't like it? Make your own subreddit and abide by your own rules.

No one is attacking your free speech. There isn't some site wide movement that people somehow don't know about silencing those we disagree with.

I don't understand how your statement about encyclopedia is even relevant or even remotely makes sense given the context of the conversation, I'm literally giggling at this entire thread.

Except this is about people subverting and infiltrating community subreddits, not just making calls in their own subreddits. Little communities built up over years in some cases destroyed by autists with a hero complex. We know, you're way too cool for caring about reddit, but some people genuinely spend most of their time here, so having their favourite places to go destroyed might not be as big of a joke to them as it is to you.

Except this is about people subverting and infiltrating community subreddits, not just making calls in their own subreddits.

Except you know what's not happening? This.

If you actually believe there is some "SJW" movement taking over subreddits you are literally, literally crazy and should probably just stick to /r/conspiracy. If you believe that "autists with a hero complex" are performing community takeovers then I bet you're a kid that wore a cape to school because holy fuck that's retarded.

The only people who really ever say this in the first place are people who get taint troubled for getting banned in default subreddits for either being racist or saying shitty stupid things and then acting like people shouldn't react to what they say.

They need to go live in the real world.

But of course it's not their shitty opinions that are the problem, there is clearly a cultish movement on an online news aggregator site with the sole goal of silencing their free speech and intellectual ideas. It couldn't possibly be them.

On reddit.

And further more this SRS boggeyman is absolutely hilarious given the size of the community, the fact that reddit admins have stated it doesn't happen, mods state it doesn't happen, it's against the rules in SRS, and SRS hasn't been notable for a long, long time. Msot people who speak of SRS weren't even there for when there were problem mods or SRS related drama but they have no problem acting like their dumb as fuck opinions are somehow worth the trouble of being birgaded.

SRS has always been trolls on the other fence and damn they're doing a good job now. They don't even have to do anything and redditors start acting absolutely crazy over nothing.

And on top of allll that, SRD is no where near close to SRS and it's definitely not "SRS-lite".

But people upvoted that, they upvoted the bullshit story about Digg -- which could have been cleared up with a 5 second google search on what happened, and then upvoted technically wrong posts about wordpress blogs which again could have been cleared up with a 5 second google search.

Mainly because they want to believe it. And they're crazy. On top of believing everything before with no proof just to fulfill some whimsical, Illuminati-esq narrative you people believe there are community takeovers that somehow happen without the community being aware and without explaining how exactly this happens or where it's happened. You can't even point out where any of this has ever happened.

This entire thread is full of moronic idiocy and it's delicious.

Nope, ~~admins~~ mods get targetted and shadowbanned all the time on reddit. It makes perfect sense for them to have a backup account.

Also, there's a huge push at the moment to end anonymity on the internet to enhance "accountability." The people pushing for it are the ones who call up businesses trying to get people fired for saying stuff they don't like on forums.

Admins don't get shadowbanned, they do the banning. What you're thinking of is harassment. Which ending anonymity will increase. The cognitive dissonance that SRS displays in wanting to end harassment by removing the anonymity they use to such an amazing degree is staggering.

Sorry, I meant mods.

Which just reinforces my point. If a mod gets shadowbanned its because they did some shady shit. Seems kinda silly that the subreddit about the open letter was made private.

If a mod gets shadowbanned its because they did some shady shit.

Or because they posted something the admins don't like. Don't forget the hundreds of accounts shadowbanned for posting about the quinnspiracy in /r/gaming

Which feeds into that whole web of SRS/SJW shit.

We do this work for free

We do this work

this work

work

get the fuck out of here, srs is a freaking cancer.

He was talking about being a moderator in general, not being a moderator of srs.

redditors are prone to witch-hunt moderators who do nothing wrong. I can't blame mods for using alts.

I'm not defending SRS. I defending the responsable use of alts by mods from any subreddit.

Also, I'm pretty open about my political views with my mod account. I try to be as transparent as possible. I also post on SRD with my mod account because I don't want to hide that I post there (aparently some people don't like SRD). It's nice watching drama unfold without having to deal with it myself.

I like how you idiots are angry. He was talking about moderating in general.

Source: I have alt accounts for moderating.

"Work". Just fucking stop right there. It's a hobby, not work. If there's so much "work" to do, why are there so few mods to do it?

Because you can't bear to share your precious internet powers, that's why.

Because we don't trust other mods. It can be difficult to find capable mods for a sub like PPD.

lol, stop acting as if you're doing anyone any favours. No one asked you to do shit.

Yeah, I volunteer my time. If you strip mods of privacy, no one would volunteer.

no one would volunteer.

Bullshit. I moderate /r/EVE. People do volunteer. Someone volunteered to moderate /r/EVE just yesterday.

Pretty much 75% of people I've asked to mod my subs have asked to do so wih alt accounts. I've added about 25 mods in my history on reddit. Most people aren't willing to use their main account.

I didn't advocate that, I just said lose the attitude.

What attitude? I just explained how this stuff works and why we use alts.

That's not at all unreasonable, if anything it's smart. I'd respect their decision except that they seem to have no problem with doxxing and threatening the jobs of other users.

Also, intortus is a main account. He's a former reddit admin who got canned. People were calling him out for years for being biased towards SRS but he wouldn't admit anything. Shortly after getting the shove from the reddit admin team he's made an SRS mod.

That's not at all unreasonable, if anything it's smart.

It's smart of cancer to resist excisement too.

I'm not saying all mods are good and uncancerous, I'm just saying that they're high profile targets and it's intelligent for them to take precautions.

Yeah, I've heard some horror stories about what angry users have done with mods they dislike, both here and on many other forums

Violentacrez jumps to mind.

I think they did it more out of fear of being doxxed. If you hadn't noticed, reddit really hates SRS, so it's hardly an unrealistic fear.

Hmm. A fair point. But how about this one: They view themselves as avenging archangels. Whose primary abilities are to whine and downvote brigade things. They should have chosen names of harpies.

cyno

... Eve Player?

/r/EVE moderator actually. But the name isn't related.

It's a portmanteau of cynical and iconoclast and predates my EVE playing.

also, happy cakeday!

Nice! What group do you fly with in-game?

NPC corp currently. Sort of a guest star, but my heart is with Aperture Harmonics.

I made them change my title from "The Final Solution". They picked Stone Cold Killer.

You do realize that it is fairly common to have alt accounts for subs you moderate?

I'm so glad people are finally waking up to this shit. And everything you're saying is true.

Question: How do we change this? If they're already admins/mods is there anything else we can do?

Well there is a reddit alternative which is not just a clone, has the features of RES inbuilt natively and already has a few thousand subscribers.

However the mods are currently deleting any comments in this thread which link to that site.

Please for the love of god, PM me this as well. I'm tired of putting up with this site.

voat.co

1\ Owned by young European couple who have a strong anti-censorship stance.

2\ Written from the ground up to share no common code with reddit, has many RES features inbuilt into the site and updates inbox in real time.

3\ Many anti-brigading and anti-power user measures, takes a while before you can upvote, even longer before you can downvote, users can only moderate 10 subs at a time.

[deleted]

No, some people mod over 500 subs

No cabal here though.

Thanks man. You have no idea how sick I am of this site. I appreciate it.

Please Pm me as well?

Advertise subreddits that aren't being controlled by SRS. There are usually alternative subreddits for any of the more mainstream subs. Look at the mods of the subreddits you go to and see what other subs they moderate or frequent.

The same way we defeated radical atheism, as ironic as that was: be aware, have no tolerance. Though this is a lot more... long lived.

Well I moderate /r/news and I can assure you SRS doesn't control us. I dislike them and what they do and used to bitch about them all the time. AFAIK I'm the only mod there with defined political beliefs and they are certainly not SJW-like.

I don't know how much of what else he said is true but given that that part is completely made up, I'm going to guess not much.

Found the SRS stooge.

I must be the only SRS stooge with a history of vocally and publicly criticizing SRS and feminism.

If I were a big tool of feminism why would I repeatedly say things like this???

While I was joking and and was in fact inclined to agree with you, I hope you understand that even if all you said about yourself were true, you are one person amongst a tide. I am currently ignorant of the mod situation at r/news, but you cannot account for each one of them, and even a single mod compromised can mean much.

I apologize if I have offended you.

You haven't offended me but I appreciate the thoughtfulness.

It's not made up though. If you're gonna infiltrate a sub and try to take over, obviously you're not gonna advertize your colors and being overt about it. These people has taken over various sub. That you proclaim that it hasn't happened in your sub doesn't mean that it isn't happening. How much do you trust your fellow mods ?

They also don't have to be SRS people, some of them do it just for the fun of fucking subs up, and Admins are pretty relax about it.

It's not made up though.

Well what actual evidence has he given?

If you're gonna infiltrate a sub and try to take over, obviously you're not gonna advertize your colors and being overt about it.

Right but they all have personalities outside of that which are contrary to being a SJW, and I see the moderating that they do and that it's not by SJW standards.

These people has taken over various sub. That you proclaim that it hasn't happened in your sub doesn't mean that it isn't happening.

What evidence is there that it's happening?

How much do you trust your fellow mods?

I lead the mod team and know & choose them all, so, a lot.

Yeah no. No reason to believe you especially when you immediately try to discredit him.

So youre going to believe the dude making elaborate claims with zero evidence, over the person whose actually has first hand experience with the subject and whose posting history corroborates what he's saying?

Well the mods match up and lots of people are coming forth with testimonials.

Well the mods match up and lots of people are coming forth with testimonials.

None of our mods match SRS at all???

/r/SRS is modded by alts; where's the proof that those same users mod other subs?

SSSHHHH! We're trying to take the internet seriously over here! The post definitely wreaks of a guy who got banned from a few subs and decided to connect all of these subreddits and came to the conclusion that they're all ran by a large conspiracy.

The sad thing is, the guy is acting like he's waging an actual war against an actual threat. I suspect it makes him feel important.

Your life must be boring

What? Why? I live a generally pretty great life as a uni student living in a city.

I highly doubt that there's some sort of giant conspiracy to take over Reddit. I think Reddit gets its left leaning ideology naturally. I know of subs that aren't involved with this supposed "cabal" that are left leaning in a different way.

Do you really doubt that? This is a huge platform for sending a message. I'm not saying I believe it but it makes a ton of sense

it's rediculous how downvoted you are. everyone has decided you're a puppet for the world srs anti-man conspiracy and you have no say in it. reminds me of McCarthyism

It's actually hilarious.

I'm not a fan of /r/SRS, but it's hilarious that people think that SRS controls any of the news subs.

Does no one remember the racist drivel spewed from /r/news during the Ferguson riots? SRS controlling Reddit, what a joke.

They make sure that any discussion that goes against their social justice and feminist beliefs is censored and controlled and/or they mod their subreddits like ban-happy dictators who get rid of anyone who breaks the circlejerk that goes on in their subreddits every week.

Thank you.

notto mention the extremely suspicious shadowbannings that happened late last year.

You do realize that it IS a circlejerk sub and they constantly tell you if you want a discussion with them, to go to srsdiscussion?

Except if you try to discuss anything in "srsdiscussion" they ban you there too.

I don't like to go to places where people who don't like my views ban me for having them. That is just playing into a bullies hand.

They also say they don't vote brigade and that they don't do anything shady whatsoever.

Just because they say it's satire doesn't actually make it so.

/r/Subredditdrama - was taken over by SRS

Here is a user who trolled SRD by taking a bunch of comments from SRS and pasting them verbatim into threads in SRD. They went for it and upvoted all but one of the copied comments.

Then he was banned by that little bitch and wholly biased, but fronts as if their neutral mods for "being a novelty acccount" lol. Though SRD will claim (in typical SJW fashion btw) not a conspiracy, SRS is not SRD. You cant even breathe an opposite view in there without the little SJWs getting in a tizzy.

SRS is the Scientology of Reddit.

Hey hey, what bad has Tom Cruise ever done.

Can you explain why feminism and social justice are negative things to promote? I've never been to the sub, so I don't deny that they might regulate conversation and try to assert control in detrimental ways, but what about those core principles is so off-putting?

When feminism and social justice get brought up on reddit in a negative light, it's almost universally (and accurately) talking about third-wave feminism.

Unlike first wave (which focused on legal right and suffrage, ~1900s-1930s) and second wave (which focused on job rights and gender equality, ~1940s-1990s), third wave feminism takes a much more aggressive approach to, well, everything.

Whereas in the past feminism could be said to be for the promotion of womens' rights through the proliferation of equal rights, 3WF (which, unfortunately, has all but entirely co-opted the term "feminist" nowadays) eschews the concept of "earn equal rights" and focuses more on "reduce mens' rights." The role of the patriarchy and a men-oriented society is seen as a bar that needs to be lowered rather than overcome - rather than adapt and meet the norms of modern society, feminism seeks to force modern society to adapt to their norms.

But how does this tie into SJWs? Well, it's almost synonymous, though "SJW" generally applies to a broader picture that includes women, LGBTs, and (for lack of a better term?) the mentally deviant (other-kin, transethnic, etc). SJWs and modern feminists, rather than striving to achieve equal rights for the groups they represent by proliferating them into society healthily, seek to do so by forcing others to repress any criticism or disagreement.

The application of this can be seen pretty easily, especially on the net. Take /r/tumblrinaction, for example - while those are usually the very extreme manifestation of the SJW mindset, it's still accurate to a large degree. You can't question a person's self-defined identity, regardless of how nonsensical it is ("No, you are not a goddamn half-wolf half-elf spirit trapped in a human body"). You can't use certain words, because they're "triggering." You can't imply that men are anything other than suppressive, corrupt, sex-crazed pigs, because who else would be the source of our victimization complex? If you agree with them, good, if you don't, you're obviously a patriarchy-propagating misogynist (it gets even more hilarious if you're a woman who disagrees).

On reddit, this manifests as very harsh controls on a lot of subreddits - on /r/games and /r/gaming, good luck if you try to bring up Gamergate, since even though it's about media corruption it's labelled as "misogynistic" and discussion of it is banned. On /r/offmychest, "bitch" is a banned word. Comments, posts, off-subreddit discussions - more and more subs show evidence of mods following a Zeroth Rule of "We reserve the right to remove whatever content doesn't mesh with our political ideology."

Feminism (and its logical extension, "Don't treat people like a dick because they're different") is, itself, a good thing. I don't think you'll find anyone who disagrees that women/all people should have the basic right to equal opportunity and freedom from hateful discrimination.

However, third-wave feminism and the modern SJW movement take things too far - rather than opt for a gradual, healthy proliferation of feminist ideas by setting a social example and through due process, they take the goddamn nuclear option. By analogy, a healthy feminist movement would look something like Gandhi's liberation protests; the modern feminist movement looks something more like ISIS.

* ಠ_ಠ

the modern feminist movement looks something more like ISIS.

I saw a video of a man locked in a cage burned alive by members of ISIS, and another of a guy getting his head blown off by a member of ISIS. Call me when Feminists start killing folks, and maybe I'll take you seriously. Until then, no matter how much you don't like them, stop comparing them to fucking terrorists.

You totally missed the point of that comparison, didn't you?

What "point" was there, exactly? lol.

This is an old comment, but fuck it, I'll bite:

Point is that both groups believe in "the ends justify the means" and rely on extreme and very harmful methods to fight for their beliefs. Both groups also seem to be really interested i power and control (just look at reddit and wikipedia). ISIS is overly aggressive in pursuing their goals, glorifies and encourages violence against those that are not subscribing to their ideology, particularly those who dare to criticise them. Third Wave/SJWs is overly aggressive in pursuing their goals, glorifies revenge and shaming those who are not subscribing to their ideology, particularly those who dare to criticise them.

Both groups are willing to ruin lives. In case of ISIS it is by killing and torturing people, in case of Third Wave Feminism/SJWs it is in form of doxxing, online harrasement, spreading rumors, and slandering in order to ruin careers and social lives.

Wait, what about wikipedia? Are they ruining that too?

Oh man, are you in for a treat! Just for shits and giggles, check up on /r/wikiinaction. If it's a bit too chaotic (which I can totally understand) I'll be happy to summarize things for you. Just give a shout.

Well, that's all the more reason to not use Wikipedia. Seems like mostly gamer gate related stuff? Or are they editing stuff like history?

It came to light in all seriousness because of GG, but it has long been known (unofficially) that wikipedia isn't always equally reliable. Once there is an agenda to push, you can count on people behind the scenes not actually adhering to "neutrality". There have been other hints anyway.

See this Reddit, this is someone who doesn't know how analogies work. This is a person who can't tell the difference between a literal or a figurative comparison. Bravo u/Yutrzenika1 for failing 6th grade literature. Also Bravo for brigading here from SRS. Now go back to your hug box.

There's a limit to how far you can reasonably stretch an analogy.

You can compare Saddam Hussein to Hitler, even though there are differences between them. You can't compare Bush/Obama to Hitler. At a certain point, comparing things to Hitler/ISIS/whatever is just an aggressive way to say "I don't like this" rather than a legitimate comparison. The very concept of analogy becomes meaningless when it just devolves into a game of "What's the most repugnant thing I can think of to make a baseless comparison to?"

By /u/mrmeeseeks3 rational anything can be an analogy for anything else which really renders the whole thing meaningless.

Edit: Analogies and Comparisons don't mean total identicality. Happy now? :Edit.

I can totally validly liken Bush to Hitler if in the context of the analogy I'm talking about their bond with their pet dogs. That doesn't mean I'm saying bush is LITERALLY hitler, or that they are basically exactly the same thing. I'm comparing a single facet between the two.

I'm not sure I agree with the ISIS/Fem analogy anyway, but regardless, they aren't saying Feminists literally kill, torture and behead people like a caliphate, and frankly anyone who responds with that logic is a fuckwit.

They're saying ISIS and Feminism have some particular facet in common, in this case it would be their single minded aggression. ISIS's method of responding to criticism (like Hebdo) is to retaliate as aggressively as possible. 3rdW Feminism's response to things they disagree with as aggressively as possible

Having dug up that video, it's worth pointing out that behaviour is not dissimilar to the aggressive muslim response to something they found offensive. I'm not sure the analogy is all that unfounded. Unless you try to dismiss it by pretending it's a 1:1 comparison.

No there isn't, because an analogy isn't a comparison.

Google analogy, literally the first thing that comes up:

a comparison between two things, typically on the basis of their structure and for the purpose of explanation or clarification.

Superb! My terminology is off. Thanks for noticing.

However, the point still stands and is in fact supported by that definition, analogies and comparisons are the same thing, and neither mean a 1:1 direct equivalency.

"Geez, Bush and his dog are like Hitler and his dog" still doesn't mean you think Bush is an anti-semitic mass murdering World-War starter. And it doesn't mean you can automatically ignore the comparison by claiming as such.

and neither mean a 1:1 direct equivalency.

Yeah, or another way to put that:

You can compare Saddam Hussein to Hitler, even though there are differences between them.

The point is, ISIS is a mass-murdering paramilitary group attempting to establish an Islamic caliphate. Trying to compare ISIS to tumblrinas is ridiculous. Tumblrinas are obnoxious but they don't rape and murder people.

If you think there's a legitimate anaology to be drawn between these things, then the concept of anaology becomes menaningless because you may as well compare anything to anything else. Why not compare tumblrinas to a vespa scooter while we're at it, both are made of atoms.

Tumblrinas are obnoxious but they don't rape and murder people.

Again, not a 1:1 direct equivalency. No one is actually saying that but you.

Why not compare tumblrinas to a vespa scooter while we're at it, both are made of atoms.

And if you're talking about atoms then yes, this is a totally acceptable analogy. In fact it's an analogy often used to teach young children about atoms. "Atoms are tiny molecules, this desk is made of atoms, and so are you, you're both made of the same thing."

Oddly enough your teacher wasn't saying you're a four legged piece of metal and wood, because they weren't making a direct 1:1 total likeness comparison, they were using the comparison to make a point.

by exactly the same measure saying ISIS and Feminazis have something in common with their overly aggressive nature doesn't mean you're saying feminists are beheading and raping people, it means you're using the comparison to make a point.

It is unbelievable how often I have to explain this to people on reddit, you'd think the majority of you haven't finished fourth grade.

Atoms are tiny molecules, this desk is made of atoms, and so are you, you're both made of the same thing."

Lol. That isn't an analogy. I honestly don't think you understand the concept of analogy.

It is unbelievable how often I have to explain this to people on reddit

Protip: If you find yourself "explaining" the same thing to people over and over, it probably means they understand something you don't.

Stupidity of the masses doesn't equate to correctness.

I find it worrying you'd think that toddlers know something their teacher doesn't because she has to explain the alphabet to people over and over again.

What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you little bitch? I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Navy Seals, and I’ve been involved in numerous secret raids on Al-Quaeda, and I have over 300 confirmed kills. I am trained in gorilla warfare and I’m the top sniper in the entire US armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another target. I will wipe you the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with saying that shit to me over the Internet? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of spies across the USA and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for the storm, maggot. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. You’re fucking dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can kill you in over seven hundred ways, and that’s just with my bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in unarmed combat, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the United States Marine Corps and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the continent, you little shit. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little “clever” comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldn’t, you didn’t, and now you’re paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will shit fury all over you and you will drown in it. You’re fucking dead, kiddo.

A better comparison would have been to the Westborow Baptist Church. SJWs are fucking annoying, but they don't kill anybody.

And what kind of comparisons can be drawn between feminism, and a terrorist group that wishes to establish an Islamic state?

If you're seriously asking, they're both cults that take a good thing (feminism/Islam) and twist it with their caustic hatred for people unlike themselves and use it as a justification for whatever the hell they need to justify.

And in doing so, they make the everyone hate the group they're pretending to be.

That's not feminism

I have no idea what you just read to make you reply with that comment, but ISIS isn't Islam either...

Feminism isn't a cult with a caustic hatred for men that seeks to justify their own agenda. And the majority of the population does not hate feminism either

Youre being retardedly obtuse in order to resist his analogy, but you're right. Muslims are all terrorists.

I haven't even mentioned religion, I don't know where you got that idea from

In a comparison between ISIS and third wave feminism, you don't know who's talking about religion.

You're a worthless human being. Do you even know what ISIS is?

I don't know what's going on

And Islam isn't a terrorist organization.

The more you comment the more I think you believe ISIS=Islam...

I'm talking about your incorrect analogy for feminism, I haven't mentioned anything about ISIS

In that mountain of text this is what you deicide to focus on?

Why not? As soon as someone say something unimaginably stupid, don't you disregard them?

That depends on whether they confirm my bias or not

No, because that would be a fallacy.

False analogy isn't a fallacy?

What does him committing a fallacy have to do with you committing a blatant fallacy??

wut

You commit fallacy. Commit fallacy not good. You no commit fallacy in future.

Is that better??

But they are terrorists, look at how they use people's personal info to blackmail them. It's like the HUAC but with racism instead of communism.

Mind you, the definition of "terrorist" is "someone who terrorizes". This is exactly what SRS is doing.

I don't know much about the history of SRS other than that people don't seem to like them. What terrorism have they done?

They helped get a child porn subreddit banned a few years back iirc. Besides disputed brigading that's about it.

And that's... terrorism?

Like, what threw me off here (in addition to being compared to ISIS which is absurd) is that thor mentioned Gamergate -- where people actually threatened violent action at an Anita Sarkeesian talk, as well as a number of personal threats levied at Sarkeesian herself.

Busting a child pron subreddit should be rewarded with a slap on the back and a free beer, I'd think.

Yeah apparently child porn falls under free speech for some around here.

what threw me off here (in addition to being compared to ISIS which is absurd) is that thor mentioned Gamergate -- where people actually threatened violent action at an Anita Sarkeesian

Oh, you mean this

Liars deserve no respect.

I'm confused, that says exactly what I expected?

someone made a flash game where all you do is beat her up.

i'd be super cautious if I had people like that disagreeing with me too.

Yeah, this is what I mean -- the report says that she was threatened, she asked for extra scans for weapons, they couldn't do that and so she cancelled. Seems reasonable.

Very reasonable considering Elliot Rogers was fairly recent when she announced that. If someone threatened to shoot up a feminist convention at a school and you (the speaker) were a bigger bigot attracting internet villain than actual murderers I think canceling is more than reasonable. She also said it wasn't responsible for her to endanger the students. Even if you didn't like her you'd think there'd be a bit more empathy for someone with such a difficult decision to make.

Members of SRS as well as various other feminists on tumblr, twitter, etc. have been known to dox and harass anyone who disagrees, particularly gamers, people who browse any kind of chan, and people with right wing opinions. Typically this gets thrown under the rug because "no bad tactics, only bad targets".

The incite harassment is probably the most that can be said, but that's also indisputable.

people need to stop defending second-wave feminism so much, it was extremely transphobic (transwomen were seen as men trying to invade female safe spaces) and it's where the "all PIV sex is rape" bullshit came from.

it's fine to criticize third-wave feminism for many reasons, but third-wave also deserves credit for sex-positivity and trans-inclusion.

2nd wave also gave us Political Lesbianism. Which perpetuated the belief that lesbians just hate men and all the other bullshit stereotypes they faced after that.

The "all sex is rape" bullshit came from critics of second wave feminism. It is a strawman argument that has been reported as fact for years. The idea is attributed to Andrea Dworkin who neither said it nor did she mean to imply it.

No, I wasn't saying that [all heterosexual sex is rape] and I didn't say that, then or ever. ... The whole issue of intercourse as this culture's penultimate expression of male dominance became more and more interesting to me. In Intercourse I decided to approach the subject as a social practice, material reality. This may be my history, but I think the social explanation of the all sex is rape slander is different and probably simple. Most men and a good number of women experience sexual pleasure in inequality. Since the paradigm for sex has been one of conquest, possession, and violation, I think many men believe they need an unfair advantage, which at its extreme would be called rape. I don't think they need it. I think both intercourse and sexual pleasure can and will survive equality. It's important to say, too, that the pornographers, especially Playboy, have published the "all sex is rape" slander repeatedly over the years, and it's been taken up by others like Time who, when challenged, cannot cite a source in my work. — Andrea Dworkin, Fighting Talk, from New Statesman & Society. Interviewed by Michael Moorcock. 21 April 1995.

[deleted]

I'm an astro engineer, not a sociologist

I shows. You seem to be very good at regurgitating vague, common anti-feminist talking points (one suspects you might've picked up most of your knowledge about the movements from, say, TiA or Gamergate subs), but you seem woefully unacquainted with the actual history of feminist thought or activism (like, really? You're going to defend second-wave feminism while deriding third-wave feminism for being too radical?). Could you even name a popular third-wave feminist thinker (hint: Sarkeesian doesn't count) or a popular third-wave idea without the aid of Google? I mean, Christ, I have a lot of problems with aspects of third-wave feminist theory and activism (often there's too much focus on individualism and specificity, making collective action sort of difficult, for instance, and a great deal of popular feminism has "devolved" into wholly apolitical lifestyle feminism), but I'm not so uninformed as to 1) throw the entirety of contemporary feminism under the bus, and 2) make such ridiculous, sweeping statements ("third-wave feminism is like ISIS" -- seriously?) on the basis of my knowledge of popular Internet feminisms.

Perhaps you should either stick to subjects you're familiar with, or put in the effort required to speak authoritatively on such a broad topic as second- and third-wave feminisms.

In otherwords-nobody should ever discuss anything at all. Because you know-you don't have a degree in EVERYTHING.

I don't think I suggested anything like that. I certainly don't think you need a degree to talk about second- and third-wave feminism (I mean, studying history, philosophy, or political theory is nowhere near as rigorous as studying, say, theoretical physics or anything like that), but if you're posturing as some sort of expert and making broad, sweeping claims about a massive intellectual field, I'd expect your familiarity with said field should go beyond your experience in Gamergate/TumblerInAction subs and that hour you spent on Wikipedia.

The fact remains that this user, while launching into an ostensibly informed diatribe against third-wave feminism, made glaring mistakes that anyone even mildly familiar with the history of feminism would find laughable (the second-wave was far more "aggressive" than contemporary feminisms, for instance, and what does "the second wave focused on... gender equality" mean? -- all feminisms are concerned with gender equality). What's more, he seems to have confused popular Internet feminism (which is not without its problems) with the whole of third-wave feminist theory and activism, and resultantly, he's assumed his familiarity with things like TiA somehow makes him an authority on feminist topics. I should think that, to any reasonable person, these glaring oversights would engender at least some skepticism (but of course, this being Reddit, and Redditeurs being woefully underinformed with regards to feminism, most users lap up the anti-feminist platitudes like Mountain Dew xTreem Blue).

If the whole of your information on a given topic is gleaned from hackneyed stereotypes, then yes, you shouldn't discuss that topic; much less should you discuss that topic with such misplaced confidence on a broad public forum. Christ, I've been studying feminist theory and history on and off for nearly a decade now (both formally and informally), and even I wouldn't be able to write such a cocksure appraisal of second- and third-wave feminisms. The two are such broad and diverse categories of thought that they preclude any sort of 500-word, broad stroke summary.

Reading over what the person said-they were not stating anything authoritarian-you were. That person presented as how they understood. It was not a diatribe-though maybe you or I are mixing posts/replies? IMO it is all seeming to be a "No True Scottsman" scenario-"Tumblr =/= Feminism" and yet-they all claim to. They all claim to be the TRUE feminists too. The rest seems to be to be subjective. When someone says "Gay men are the ultimate misogynists because they won't have sex with women"-many laugh it off. But not all. The internet pattern seems to take eventually where the more psychotic one is-the louder a voice, the more power as well. The end result is people actually believing those statements as coded law. The same statements a few weeks ago were laughed at.

Meanwhile those who try and say "Wait.. What?" are attacked and hounded to silence.

It's a world where an expectation that students use APA formatting (In line citation) vs. Chicago Style (Citations at bottom) is somehow racist. A world where accusations seem to matter more than validity. Personally-I could not care less about the difference between 2nd and 3rd wave-what I care about is impact. The Tumblr/Twitter/Reddit 3rd wave people act like cultists who eat anyone who acts remotely rational. Based on definitions given by people on the internet-people such as yourself: I have never encountered a 'real feminist'. Only people who snarl, attack, belittle everyone around who does not instantly fall in line. I would say-nobody should ever use Wikipedia as any form of definitive source. It is only pet topics and territorial crazies.

It was not a diatribe-though maybe you or I are mixing posts/replies?

To be clear, this is the comment I'm referring to. It appears, to me, as a diatribe, though I suppose you could take fault with my wording.

Reading over what the person said-they were not stating anything authoritarian-you were.

I never said he was being authoritarian, I said he was acting authoritative (without much of a base to stand on). What's more, I don't think asking for a bit of intellectual effort and honesty is at all authoritarian; if we were discussing any other topic and a user made as many errors or used as many vague platitutes as xthorgoldx, he'd be laughed off the bloody site. He was plainly incorrect on a few basic factual points, and he was intellectually lazy or wholly dishonest on those points up for debate (for instance, no, popular Internet feminism does not wholly represent contemporary third-wave feminism).

IMO it is all seeming to be a "No True Scottsman" scenario-"Tumblr =/= Feminism" and yet-they all claim to

definitions given by people on the internet-people such as yourself: I have never encountered a 'real feminist'

This is Reddit's favourite fallacy to trot out at any moments notice. If you look closely at any of my comments, you'll see I never once claimed that Tumblr feminists weren't "true" feminists, nor did I say they weren't feminists. What I said was more or less this: popular Internet feminism is only a small part of contemporary third-wave feminism (it might seem like a large part if, say, you're totally unfamiliar with feminist academia and activism, or if you spend hours perusing forums that examine the most ridiculous aspects of popular Internet feminism, however), so using your knowledge of, say, TumblrInAction to launch into a hasty condemnation of third-wave feminism on the whole is entirely dishonest.

If you want to critique Tumblr or aspects of popular internet feminism, go right ahead (even I disagree with some of the tactics or rhetoric of popular Internet feminism), but don't say you're attacking the whole of "third-wave feminism" when what you really mean to say is "I know nothing about feminism apart from what I've read on my GamerGate forums."

"Gay men are the ultimate misogynists because they won't have sex with women"-many laugh it off. But not all. The internet pattern seems to take eventually where the more psychotic one is-the louder a voice, the more power as well. The end result is people actually believing those statements as coded law. The same statements a few weeks ago were laughed at.

I'm not certain what you're getting at. In the ten years I've spent in and out of feminist publics, I've never once met anyone who believes something like "gay men are the ultimate misogynists." I suspect some people might think that, and I suspect if you go looking for them (in say, TiA), you'll probably find them, but they make up a very small and altogether inconsequential part of the broader feminist public.

The Tumblr/Twitter/Reddit 3rd wave people act like cultists who eat anyone who acts remotely rational.

Only people who snarl, attack, belittle everyone around who does not instantly fall in line.

One could say the same about the rabid anti-feminists one finds on the Internet. These people have a similarly religious skepticism of all things "SJW," and rarely trot out "rational" arguments against aspects of feminist thought or practice. The thing I've noted about most anti-feminists is that they'll call themselves "rational" without ever pointing towards, say, their mode of logic, or without ever providing anything resembling a rational argument. For these sorts of people, the words "rational" and "irrational" are arguments in and of themselves, and, of course, it's taken for granted that feminism represents "irrationality" (and, I mean, this shady rhetorical tactic of portraying feminists as innately irrational, hysterical, or over-emotional is as old as feminism itself -- early 1900s anti-feminists used the same sorts of discourse as contemporary anti-feminists -- so one suspects this rhetoric has less to do with the ideas proffered and more to do with gendered cultural markers). Just as an aside, I mean, a great deal of anti-"SJWs" take fault with the notion that men are generally more privileged than women, or that whites generally have more advantages than blacks (many take fault with the term "privilege" itself); but notions of male or white privilege are categorically true if you actually examine, say, those in positions of economic or political power, or if you look at domestic policy, or if you're even remotely familiar with the history of race and gender relations in most Western countries. I mean, from where I'm standing, I see plenty of irrational actors on "both" sides of this issue.

And, of course, on the flip side, I've had plenty of conversations with anti-feminists that've devolved into name-calling and petty jabs; does this mean all those who criticize feminism are somehow irrational lunatics? I'd say no, but by your logic, I suppose I'd have to say yes.

Bleh, this is an awkward conversion method. I think a good way to boil it: Identity politics has muddied the waters. When anti-s object or Pro-s make a statement: people take it as a personal attack on them. As if the statements true/false value somehow reflects on the individual: "If statement X is true/false that means I am wrong". It's religious thought. Everything can be updated and SHOULD be as new information comes available. But, when a group starts doing things such as the SJW's have in the name of feminism and equality that seem like they are more damaging to the causes in the long run.. There are deep issues there.

Ah, I thought replies were more compartmentalized. The reply I replied to was not the one you cite here.

I was saying the internet feminism is not some small thing-it is what most of the modern world encounters. For good or ill-it IS the face of feminism. As for encountering them-I can go to Twitter and do a quick search and find them in droves. It isn't something for TiA alone-it is even in Facebook Groups (Progressive pages) etc.. As for anti-feminists.. So? Feminism claims the high moral ground doesn't it? Aren't the Anti's supposed to be against equality and therefore evil anyway? However, it needs to be said that second to last paragraph is fraught with problems. For one-SJW is the term for fanatical Feminists, yes? last I knew anyway the term itself is a pejorative for those that abandon rationality for favor of emotional responses. Thought I have to say "Privilege" makes me giggle. If I am interpreting what you said correctly-I agree: In an overview "Privilege" works for a society. In other nations it would be other races or demographics-whichever are dominant in population or economic or whatever hold positions of privilege. There is nothing at all special in a world level of "White men". A simple off cuff example is the Ainu in Japan.

The irrational part.. Knee jerking is destructive no matter who does what. Some items that stand out is apologetics such as seen within the Je Suis Charlie campaign. Also the hipocracy and hyperbole: Actress has leaked photos? Literally raping her. Seth Rollins GF leaked photos? OMG! LOOK AT HIS PEEPEE!

Either people are adherents to equality-or they are for advancement of a preferred demographic/suppression of a disliked demographic. My great objection to the SJW mindset though is more abstract-it's the use of post-modernist thought and analysis. It is preposterous in almost everything it is applied to.

I was saying the internet feminism is not some small thing-it is what most of the modern world encounters. For good or ill-it IS the face of feminism.

Eh, and I'd wager much of it is far less extreme than you seem to think. Though if you're so averse to such basic, uncontroversial notions as privilege, I can see why you'd think most feminist publics are full of radical, irrational banshees.

For one-SJW is the term for fanatical Feminists, yes?

As I've seen it used, SJW doesn't represent "fanatical feminists"; rather, it represents "any feminist I happen to disagree with," which, in turn, represents anything from the most basic liberal feminism to the most extreme radical liberationist feminism. "SJW" itself doesn't mean anything, and it's often bandied about to deride any mildly progressive attitude.

I mean, people like Anita Sarkeesian (a fairly milquetoast liberal feminist who takes most of her cues from well-established and wholly uncontroversial feminist film and literature criticism) are labeled "SJW" or "radical" by masses of anti-feminists -- I think this suggests that SJW, like "hipster" or "neckbeard," is little more than a catch-all pejorative for some vague and amorphous group of people. I'm convinced the term SJW is more often used in an attempt to erode the basic foundations of feminist thought than it is to deride any legitimately "fanatical" feminists.

last I knew anyway the term itself is a pejorative for those that abandon rationality for favor of emotional responses

The irrational part.. Knee jerking is destructive no matter who does what.

Also the hipocracy and hyperbole

There's a lot of emotion, hypocrisy, and irrationality on both sides of this contemporary feminism debacle, so I think it's more than a little disingenuous to suggest that only the "feminist side" is fraught with high emotions or irrationality. Again, like I said, this is a rhetorical tactic dating back to the suffragette era. Feminism has always been linked with "irrationality" by its detractors, and I'd argue this link has far more to do with gendered cultural markers than it does with the actual arguments proffered.

With regards to hyperbole, like, my god, have you visited KotakuInAction(this is a rhetorical question)? These people literally think they're fighting a crusade, and discussions in the sub are filled with melodramatic speeches that rival the "freedom speech" in Braveheart (at least this was the case when I last checked in a month ago)

Thought I have to say "Privilege" makes me giggle. If I am interpreting what you said correctly-I agree: In an overview "Privilege" works for a society. In other nations it would be other races or demographics-whichever are dominant in population or economic or whatever hold positions of privilege. There is nothing at all special in a world level of "White men". A simple off cuff example is the Ainu in Japan.

Just a bit of preamble: privilege is not an examination of individual circumstances. It's a very general notion dealing principally with broad social, economic, and legal trends, and, what's more, it mostly addresses power structures in the West (you know, where most people who talk about privilege live). Just because someone is privileged in one way doesn't mean they won't be disadvantaged in another; sure, a rich black man will likely have more "overall" privilege than a very poor white man, but a white man still has white privilege, even if it doesn't amount to much in this particular instance. Conversely, assuming a white man and a black man born to identical circumstances, the white man will generally be more privileged than the black man. Keep in mind, this is all very general.

Now this section of your comment is sort of garbled, so I'm not certain I understand what you're getting at, but let me address a couple points. I'll start with, let's say, straight privilege (because you seem to post in r/ainbow, and might empathize more with this example).

Since I'm straight, I'm more privileged than a gay/lesbian person in a number of ways, and this pretty well generalizes across the globe. For instance, I can marry whomever I want, my relationships aren't thought of as "unnatural," I don't have to worry about being disowned or abused as a result of "coming out" (hell, I don't have to "come out" at all, because, by circumstance of birth, I was thrown into the "neutral" category), and I can show affection to my partner in public without risk of being leered at, insulted, or even injured or killed. And this scales down to smaller things like, say, my orientation isn't a common insult, I won't be criticized for "acting too straight," or I'm more likely to find empathetic and relatable characters of my orientation in popular media. These are all privileges gay people don't often have.

White privilege is similar, and I'll address it first with regards to the West (using America as an example) and then globally. For the purposes of concision, I'll literally be addressing this issue as if it were black and white. Just by circumstance of birth, a white American is generally going to be more privileged than a black American. Being born white means that you'll likely be born into a wealthier family (for instance, white people have never suffered economic racism to the extent black people have -- mortgage discrimination, redlining, white flight, ghettoization, disinvestment in black urban areas, etc. are all problems that have never plagued the white community, and what's more, many of these problems were still around just one generation ago -- and as a result, the white community is generally more wealthy than the black community), having a "white-sounding" name means I'll receive more callbacks on job applications, I'm not profiled by law enforcement, etc. And again, this scales down to smaller issues: white is "neutral," so to most people I'm just a "guy" not a "white guy," there generally aren't racist jokes at my expense, I'm far less likely to be followed around by store-owners, etc.

Globally, it's a similar situation; just being born white means you're more likely to be born into a wealthy country. It also means you're more likely to be born into a country with massive amounts of sway in global politics (America, and to a lesser extent, Canada, the UK, Australia, etc.). White people are still generally privileged when it comes to global affairs, even if they're not specifically privileged in, say, Japan or Zimbabwe. And to reiterate, the notion of privilege is principally a concept used to describe hierarchies in Western societies.

Either people are adherents to equality-or they are for advancement of a preferred demographic/suppression of a disliked demographic

This is a such a hackneyed platitude it's basically meaningless. Let's do a little thought experiment: person A has three apples, while person B has one. I give B two apples so as to catch him up to A; does this count as advancing B while suppressing A? One can treat people differently (or even focus on advancing one class of person) without innately suppressing the more powerful social class. Again, this whole "feminists are trying to put women above men" rhetoric has been around for over a century, and I suspect it has very little basis in reality.

My great objection to the SJW mindset though is more abstract-it's the use of post-modernist thought and analysis.

This, again, is vague to the point of near meaninglessness; this is like saying "third-wave feminism is evil." It doesn't mean a bloody thing, because postmodern thought, like third-wave feminism, is an extremely large, varied, and sometimes contradictory set of intellectual disciplines. Christ, I suspect you subscribe to a number of postmodern ideals and appreciate a number of postmodern cultural texts without even realizing it.

"Postmodernism," "third-wave feminism" and "SJW" are all bits of jargon used by modern anti-feminists, but I rarely see anyone actually sketch what they mean by these terms. More often they just seem to be scare words in the way "communist" was during the Cold War, and in the way "terrorist" is today. None of these terms really refer to a concrete or agreed upon meaning, they're just synonymous with "bad."

Postmodernism shouldn't be approached as gospel (and I suspect anyone actually familiar with postmodern thought would realize that it innately precludes any such an approach), but it's certainly a useful tool for criticizing or examining heterodox intellectual, legal, economic, political, cultural, etc. institutions.

But, when a group starts doing things such as the SJW's have in the name of feminism and equality that seem like they are more damaging to the causes in the long run..

I'm not defending whatever it is you think "SJWs" stand for. Frankly, I don't buy the notion that SJW stands for any concrete set of traits or ideas. I certainly agree that there are a number of vocal detractors to feminism within the movement, and I certainly disagree with some of the tactics employed within the more popular feminist publics, but I suspect the vast majority of contemporary feminists are nowhere near as raving or irrational as you seem to suggest. I suspect you note that they're using a different discourse (words like "privilege" and "patriarchy" seem to be anathema to you, even if you seem not to understand what they actually mean), and thereby assume they're incorrect or irrational based on your knee-jerk lay-understanding of feminist jargon; this seems ironically irrational to me.

That is a lot to respond to and Im wrapping work up. I will try and digest and reply. I am enjoying this conversation btw.

What's an astro engineer?

Do you make telescopes?

Astronautical engineer. Satellites, orbits, mission planning, etc.

[deleted]

It's pretty cool. I'm still in school, but we have a very hands-on program and an active space corps - you can train, qualify, and operate ground station terminals for a satellite as a freshman (guess where I spent 50 hours of my first semester?). So, don't really wake up with a smile, because goddamn thermodynamics.

On the other hand, we're doing flight tests for an L2 rocket's avionics tomorrow, which is pretty rad.

My experience has not led me to the belief that thir wave feminists are "sex-positive". While I agree that there is less "all PIV is rape", there is still the tendency to try to apply social standards to sexuality. They stop short of labeling widely-held fetishes as "misogyny" for the most part, but I get the feeling that is more of a "don't want to lose a shitload of support" kinda thing.

Feminism is pretty inherently transphobic. If you ask any academic (without ties to feminism, a la women's studies professors or something) they'll happily point out feminism has always been a white, middle class, privileged ethos (for example, the suffragettes were fighting for the right to work at a time where minorities and poor women's dream was to be able to not work, and just do the housework instead of having to run a full time job as well), and the by-product of that is homophobia and transphobia.

Really 'first-wave' feminism is the only good feminism. Since it can basically be summed up as liberal-feminism, "we believe in equality for women, all we want is for liberalism and 'equality' to be applied as it's defined, to everyone"

Second wave was the first stabs at experimentation, and you got absolutely moronic stuff like Gilligan and 'difference feminism', before 3W settled on "yeah it's the menz"

Ironically it's still pretty transphobic (which is why SJW exist), having managed to progress from "Human rights bill says rights for everyone? Cool, now lets address that 'women cant vote' shtick" to "Fucking shitlord patriarchy privilege cisman white prick die scum" while almost completely skimming over black feminism or any other minority. The sects cropped up, but barely ever drew the attention of the hegemonic white-middle classers.

Oh wow, so you just completely forgot all the work of black feminists (2nd and 3rd wave) as well as crip, queer and trans theory, which are all considered to be a part of modern feminism today? And have been at least since the 80's?

I am aware of the problems of white, middle class feminism, and rest assured that feminist theory has also been discussing them and making space for them.

It's also funny that you want to exclude from the discussion the only academics that actually have knowledge about this subject. Ofc, no biologist should ever comment on anything regarding biology, nor should any historian comment on history. Because, you know, they have ties to their fields.

completely forgot all the work of black feminists

Someone who clearly didn't read the 'skimming over black feminism' line I wrote.

are all considered to be a part of modern feminism today

Hahahahahahahahahaha,

Oh god, you're serious? fuuuck. Wow. Just no. 'modern' feminism is transphobic, so it doesn't 'consider' queer or trans feminism. 'Crip' is beyond offensive and only used by tumblr morons who 'associate' with the term, no one who is actually covered by the slur wants to be called 'crip', and black feminism is frequetly and blatantly ignored. Go look up the distinct difference in 'modern feminism's reaction to the little black girl who was being tortured and enslaved at the same time a celebrity wore a revealing dress.

I am aware of the problems of white, middle class feminism

Somehow I don't think you are, unless your first paragraph was satire

rest assured that feminist theory has also been discussing them and making space for them.

Oh boy, thank you mouth of feminism! Now I can rest easy knowing in your own little deluded world this has happened already! Can we get rid of feminism now because, 'rest assured', I am aware of the injustices and feel other groups can take care of it and make space for them?

exclude from the discussion the only academics

that are notably biased, opinionated and historically politically motivated. Yep. Given 'womans studies' academics don't actually require any real training other than a degree in woman's studies taught by someone with the exact same education, it's not remotely the same as historians or biologists.

additionally, an appropriate comparison would be excluding the biologists currently advocating creationism from commenting on the history and legitimacy of creationism. Not biologists from anything biology.

Okay, we obviously have very different viewpoints here. Since my references are from feminist-related queer theory, which you seem to think is biased, it would be pointless to continue arguing about this subject.

However, I'm interested in how you've formed your opinion and actually find it interesting that we differ so much in this. What feminism today ignores black feminism, and why do you think black feminism isn't part of feminism (which is, according to you, always white and middle class)? Who are the 'modern feminists' you write about? Why did you say SJW:s are not feminists? On what base do you say that no-one covered by 'crip theory' isn't okay with the term, since so many crip theorists are covered by it and are using it in their work? What feminism is blatantly transphobic - I am aware of only a few radfem groups who are?

Good point, but then again, I think feminism is leaps and bounds saner and way more supportable than the trans stuff.

Feminism is stuff like women not wanting to getting raped and having a productive career in STEM, or wanting people to evaluate their value as person by the content of their characters and not the ~~color~~ size of their ass. That I find fully supportable. It's serious, real-world stuff.

Trans-stuff is, to me, largely like people making a big deal of stuff like personal pronouns and making up new ones like zir and zur. I cannot take it seriously and it looks like just people being narcissistic on Tumblr.

This gets even weirder when SJW wanders into mental illness advocacy. I am always weirded out, like, I would call your argument crazy and unrealistic, but wait, you just admitted that you have a diagnosis that tells you precisely that, so what are you even doing in a rational debate?

So I find that kind of feminism most supportable that would exclude the fringe, weird, crazy SJW groups and focus on the feminism of serious, sane, hard-working STEMladies and suchlike.

Just my subjective opinion. Not meant to be objective.

Of course, I fully admit that this is a depiction of my own life experience and "privileges" so to speak, I have so much more experience with dedicated tough ladies (loving one, in fact) as with the mentally ill or trans people. And I am kinda okay that way. I really care more about 50% of humankind (women) than some really small fringe subcultures.

TIL Third Wave Feminism = posting on tumblr. You could not be less informed.

If only they stayed on tumblr and didn't try to fuck up the real world.

Looks like the brigade is out in force. Too bad Reddit's new rules won't stop SRS from going around and harassing people.

Yep. They always seem to get a pass.

Spooky scaRy Skeletons everywhere! Mods help!

Yeah, pretty much the level of discourse I expect from your side.

I'm not sure I understand. Complaints about brigading don't exactly leave much room for compelling intellectual discussion. These sorts of conversations always seem to happen, though.

Person 1: "[Whining about SRS, SJWs, AMAs, GIFs, NAFTAs, NASAs, etc. taking your internet points]"

Person 2: "[Some stupid throwaway gag at Person 1's expense]"

Person 1: "[Smug comment about Person 2's inability to participate in such lofty, erudite conversations as 'oh no, my upvotes!']"

Just calling out hypocrisy where I see it. No need to fly into hysterics over it.

hypocrisy

hysterics

Do you know what these words mean?

I'm talking to someone who's exhibiting a perfect example of them now, so yes.

See, I thought I understood what the words meant too, but maybe my dictionary is out-of-date. Could you explain the two words using examples from the three comments I've sent you?

If you think your dictionary is out of date, maybe you shouldn't argue things you don't understand on the internet.

I can't tell if you're missing the joke, or just buying further into it. In any case, I'm still waiting for you to show how I was being either hypocritical or hysterical.

If you're too dumb to see the obvious, pointing it out over and over again won't help.

pointing it out over and over again

You haven't pointed it out once, though. All you've said is "you're hysterical and hypocritical" without bothering to explain further. I don't think I'm asking too much for you to show me where I was being hysterical or hypocritical, as it's not evident to me that I was being either.

Come on, man, I mean, you're supposedly the master of intellectual discourse. Surely this basic request isn't beyond your capacities as an informed interlocutor.

Well here's the thing, I've seen people like you enter these threads before and you're not in it for heightened discourse, you're in it to last the longest and see who can keep the argument going longest. You'll immediately wave off anything anyone says, no matter how good their argument is simply because they aren't on your side.

This is an argument I've had tons of times on Reddit and it's never anything worthwhile because your type has never been open minded to those that disagree. You seem to take yourself way too seriously while at the same time acting like a child on the internet.

I think you've misunderstood my request. I didn't ask for some anecdotes about your experiences with "[my] type" (Christ man, why so dehumanizing?); I asked you to show how I (that's me, not some amorphous collective you imagine I perfectly align with, but the actual person you're conversing with right now) was either hypocritical or hysterical. I don't think this is that difficult a task; either show how I was hypocritical or hysterical, or take the high road and admit your accusations were baseless.

you're not in it for heightened discourse

A couple points: 1) I readily admitted my first response to you was a "stupid throwaway gag," but you have to admit, you didn't give me much to work with, and 2) I've actually got some "heightened discourse" going on elsewhere in this thread. I think it's possible to partake in cheap laughs and serious conversation simultaneously, and I also think, provided these comments are separate, neither of them have any bearing on the other.

your type has never been open minded to those that disagree

I could say the same thing, but it wouldn't get us anywhere, would it? One suspects a person who already argues as part of "a side" against another's "type" is far from open-minded.

This is an argument I've had tons of times

I'm not sure if you've noticed this, but we're not even arguing about anything substantial; I mean, we're not discussing feminist politics or theory or anything, and I'm certainly not trying to defend "my type" to you. I'm just asking you to show me how I was either hypocritical or hysterical.

I didn't ask you for your experience with my type

There has been no notable difference when I argue with your type in those subs, so you might as all well be the same to me.

Chris man, why so dehumanizing

There's some of those hysterics I was talking about. You are a type of person. People can have types. It's not dehumanizing.

admitted to a throwaway gag

Honestly, having alt accounts to "gag" people or to argue with them over gender politics seems a little crazy to me. To go through the effort of creating new accounts to do it just seems like the work of a crazy person with too much emotionally invested into this. I also wasn't looking to give you something to work with, just pointing out the obvious with your SJW/SRS brigade that always thinks they're on the high road when they're not.

i've got heightened discourse elsewhere in this thread

I didn't go check your profile to see what you've been posting. I've only been responding to the little orange envelope. After looking, I've seen nothing that I haven't seen a thousand times over (and disproven) while you make gratuitous use of a thesaurus to try and sounds smarter than you actually are.

no u are the one who is not open minded!

Again, I've had this argument with your type (Oops! Trigger warning!) And you're in this to just drag the thread out until whoever you're speaking to stops responding.

So you're hypocritical and hysterical for supporting a group of internet bullies that think they're on the moral high ground when they're not.

http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/2v39v2/what_popular_subreddit_has_a_really_toxic/coe8704

Why the fuck do you care so much about karma

like

let's assume SRS does have a vote brigade (it doesn't, and those who attempt get banned)

the worst that happens is...someone loses a few internet points.

Like, that's it. So fucking what?

Because they eventually censor out other people's opinions that they don't like and try to create some bandwagon form of discourse rather than actually addressing the issues.

Also: Here is SRS totally not brigading!

Those examples enough?

Oh wait, you need to be able to censor people, and we know that you do because it happens every time you get linked somewhere, yet you are never held accountable... shocking. You're in league with the admins and it's the only reason your sub hasn't been banned.

Because they eventually censor out other people's opinions that they don't like

Right, that's why "fuck off nigger" got thousands of upvotes and four helpings of reddit gold...

Even if what you're saying is true (it's not), I really don't give a shit if some bigot's comment goes into the negatives. Cry me a fucking river. You want to address issues? Then address the systematic racism and queerphobia that run rampant in this world. Stop crying about internet points.

Totally off topic, but hey if you're losing an argument, bringing up something totally irrelevant works, too.

"Wuh oh, he proved me wrong, better say he's off-topic! ;_;"

Yeah, that's pretty much what you did. Going sarcastic doesn't make you any less dumb.

Keep on crying about internet points, boo-boo.

Keep stupid, it's very entertaining to me. I totally proved that SRS is a brigading sub and gets away with it. You have to live with that reality.

I literally could not care less as I am a grown-up who cares about real problems and not internet points.

That's why you're still responding to me yet still not addressing the issues I brought up as well as the evidence that you're wrong, right?

A screenshot of three PMs is definitely evidence of a spoopy SRS-admin conspiracy. Said conspiracy definitely matters more than systematic oppression.

Those PMs were pretty condemning, no matter how much you try to downplay it. What do you want? An entire list of every time that's happened? Get a life, lady. By the way, you're not fighting oppression, you're just annoying normal people on the internet. Only a 15 year old girl woul think she's fighting oppression via internet comments.

Hooboy.

  • Either you're misogynistic by assuming I'm a woman despite my usage of "he" or illiterate because you apparently missed the "he" I used several comments up.

  • Those PMs weren't condemning at all unless you're tinfoil-hat level paranoid

  • Not once did I claim that I was "fighting oppression" by making fun of shitheads on the internet

You cannot be this stupid.

  • I missed your "he" comment and your name is mypussypops.

  • Those PMs are pretty condemning, and trying to make it seem like it's just some conspiracy nutter ranting isn't really an argument against that.

  • You brought up systematic oppression, which was pretty laughable in this context.

  • You missed it but somehow replied to it?

  • Better get out your tinfoil hat

  • Not really

  • you're a dumbass that can't argue.

Your tears are scrumptious.

Who's crying? Not me, I've dismantled everything you've sent at me and the only counter you had was to try to wave it off. You're either too stubborn or too stupid to see that I'm right. I'm betting on both.

You're now continuing to respond because you feel like if you get the last word in you'll have "won" the argument, but that's not how arguments work. Not that you'd know that.

Whoa bro, last time I checked this was a Reddit comment thread and not a formal, judged debate.

People still make points and counterpoints in comment threads. Again, I don't expect you to know this, but it's true.

Did I ever indicate that I was interested in anything beyond mocking you?

Look up the dunning- Kruger effect :)

You definitely indicated that earlier on.

The lack of self-awareness behind you sending me that second sentence is staggering.

You definitely indicated that earlier on.

Not intentionally. My apologies, then; I only intended to mock your histrionics.

The lack of self-awareness behind you sending me that second sentence is staggering.

:)

You did a really bad job of anything but embarrassing yourself.

u so salty brah

I love it, you came into this thread to defend SRS, got proven wrong, claimed (or are now trying to claim) to just be mocking people, and are now shit posting just to get the last word, just as I predicted you would.

Your three PMs definitely "prove me wrong". Yup.

It's all that I needed, plus the pictures of the vote swings.

Sigh, it looks like SRS is just as bad at trolling as they are at.... well everything else.

Wow, great comment. Thank you for taking the time to type that out and explain it. The question is now, who's agenda does 3WF benefit? Is that particular line of thinking a product of a nefariously engineered plot? Or is it simply perpetuated by shortsighted and bigoted individuals? To me the answer is both.

What I'm seeing is that modern propagandists have formulated a duality ethos.

If you're not with us (vindictive warmongers) you're against us (Terrorist).

If you support Darren Wilson, you are a racist.

If you support Michael Brown, you're a looting, animalistic nigger and a self-hating cracker.

If you support abortion, you are a murderer.

If you write about the corruption of GG, you're misogynist.

You're either Pro-vaxx or anti-vaxx.

Aside from the obvious, these all have something else very interesting in common. Much of how we view the world is based on symbols. Darren Wilson = "Police Officer;" Osama bin Laden = "Terrorist" Michael Brown = "Black Male." Propagandists are taking individual fringe cases and applying, through the use of symbols, vast generalizations about vast segments of our population. This has the profound effect of simultaneously homogenizing and polarizing the thoughts of population, and makes them easier targets for the more extreme propagandistic messages.

1.There is no gray area. 2.Debating the facts is pointless. 3.The media will tell you what you are supposed to believe, what to buy, and who to vote for.

[deleted]

I'm pretty sure its been said before. "Mankind is too smart for it's own good."

Mankind's technological advances have far surpassed it's social counterpart. In terms of doing the right thing and being excellent to each other, humanity is still in it's infancy. The internet is a hammer, the automotive industry is a razor blade, nuclear technology is a jar of pills. None of those things are inherently dangerous, but if you hand them to a baby the results are not going to be positive.

What we really need a quote about is how to channel our intelligence in a meaningful and constructive way. The fact that we are even having this conversation is a bizarre slice of reality in that even 50 years ago, nobody would have imagined us to be having it. Humanity needs foresight.

Personally, I think Hobbes was Right. Individuals are idiots, collectives of individuals are bigger idiots, but if you find a competent idiot and let them run things then you might live long enough to get smart.

Then again, I might be on the cynical side of things.

might live long enough to get smart

I don't see the cynicism in that and I'd like to think it's actually healthy line of thinking.

Thanks for the link. *I couldn't disagree with you more.

Oh, the cynicism is "Human individuals are fools who can't be trusted to think for themselves, until we're sure of our own safety the only way to survive is through vesting power in absolute dictators."

The modern notion of individualism and personal volition generally doesn't mesh well with the concept of totalitarian rule even if it's done with benevolent intent.

Note that I edited my comment above.

Well to me, much of the message (or at least by-product) that we get from the 3WF-type modern propaganda is exactly the same as your "cynical" view, and if what you said in the latter part of your comment about dictatorship could be held as a true belief, it would make absolutely no sense to not see that message or by-product as a means to an end. Hopefully you catch my drift.

We need to believe that we can "get smart."

We need to actively pursue "getting smart."

I think both conditions require embracing individualism.

*edit - And not individualism as it is sold to us in the media. Posting Katie Perry all over the media and using her and her likes as a symbol of individualism is complete double-speak (for lack of a better term).

[deleted]

For one thing, I think we already live in the form of government that you are envisioning. It doesn't matter what means or devices that the people in control use to get their message across, and given the right conditions the message will get across via any form of government. The message is simple: CONSUME, OBEY. It appears to me that current conditions are pretty darn perfect.

3WF propaganda is a self-fulfilling perpetual opportunity to fight for the right to be ignorant. Looking at the "people are stupid and therefore need to be told what to do" equation, wouldn't it make sense that parties - intent on telling people what to do - to find it in their best interests to create stupid people? Or at the very minimum, wouldn't they witness people getting stupider and stupider and just sit on the sidelines letting it happen?

Remember the Charlie Hebdo thing about month ago? People started spewing the most disgusting, bigoted, hateful shit about Muslims on the internet in and the media. We had a subreddit dedicated to drawings of Mohammed composed upon various crude dick and doo-doo jokes with thousands of posts and probably millions of upvotes. Why though? For solidarity with the media and the right to free speech, of course! There is no longer a differentiation between free speech and bigotry. If you criticize the bigots you hate free speech, plain and simple. It's doublethink.

Do you know what happens to people in cases of doublethink? When they hold two exclusive yet conflicting beliefs? They create fallacies to fit the realm of their perception. We're faced with thousands of cases of it every day. The result is that most of us are completely delusional, and the rest are delusional at least to some degree. Finally, people are no longer capable of making even the simplest decisions for themselves and turn to the media, corporations, politicians, and government for answers. The response is always the same. CONSUME, OBEY. Edward Bernays even talks about this in his aptly named Propaganda, right in the first chapter called Organizing Chaos. He basically states that people have “consented” (his words) to control and propaganda by an “invisible government” (I shit you not he said this) based on the sheer fact that those people are faced with conflict in coming to their own decisions.

Humanity is the most glorious and beautiful invention to ever grace the universe. It's also the most profoundly stupid and lost and fearful creation in the universe. In your view, you're only telling half of the story. Sadly it's what 99% of people believe. It's all a big lie. It creates a never-ending cycle of ignorance. It creates conditions where 99% of people consent to a "shadow government" by of and for the other 1%. A 1% of people that realize the duality in life and are able to establish rational gray areas, etc.

the modern feminist movement looks something more like ISIS.

The femcaliphate.

Yep thats a load of shit, you have no idea what you are talking about.

Also where did any of you get the idea that SRS supports "otherkin" and the like? Things like that take away from the movements to legitimize trans identity

Are you suggesting then, that you oppose addressing these issues?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-wave_feminism#Prominent_issues

Feminism is, itself, a good thing

i.e. No.

Feminism, being the idea of "genders should have equal rights and opportunities" and pursuing the issues listed in your link, is a good thing. Those issues do need to be addressed, it's a major problem.

However, feminism, being the label for the activism group, in its current state is as I've described it, coopted by radicals to the detriment of people who might agree with the actual issues but are turned off by the vocal minority.

Well this is the Wikipedia page for specifically "third-wave feminism", and the issues that seem to be central to the movement do not appear to be in any way polarizing.

Any good thing taken to an extreme can be detrimental, especially if one considers that the means rarely match with the ideals of the ends.

As a hyperbolic example, take a pro-choice activist. They might hold true that a women's right to choose is worth protecting - no argument there, good value. However, that person might conclude that the best way to protect those rights is to plow a truck into pro-life protesters. Regardless of whether or not their intentions are good (promoting the right to choose), the means by which they apply those intentions irreversibly corrupt the movement they're identifying with.

The same applies to feminism. Any of the goals listed in your link can be good but pursued poorly. I mentioned "lowering the bar, not meeting it" in my original post, and I think it applies particularly here: a lot of radical feminists seem content not to eliminate the problems, but rather "equalize" them. For example, gender violence - rather than attack the underlying social structures that promote intergender violence, in both directions, a lot of feminists are content to crack down on male-female violence. Presumably, this'll reduce the net amount of intergender violence, but it does nothing but cover up underlying issues while simultaneously spreading the seeds for further problems down the line (such as the aftereffects of the 2nd wave).

I learned way more than I thought I would from this post.

That guy has no idea what he's talking about.

He nailed it. You just don't like what he said.

Modern feminism has nothing to do with equality. That's why nearly everyone supports equality while rejecting the feminist label. Feminism is dying off because most people don't hate men.

Your entire account is a demonstration of how little you understand these concepts. Just because another idiot agrees with you doesn't make the two of you right.

I love how SJWs always fall back on this "you just don't understand true feminism" line.

It's not rocket science. Most people get what feminism is about now. That's why most reject it.

It's clearly far too difficult for you to grasp, but I suspect on this you're just willfully ignorant.

Ahahaha!

I love it when fundies pretend that the reason people don't agree with them is that they just don't understand the holy doctrine.

/everyone who gets what the Bible is saying is a Christian. If you can read it and disagree that only proves you don't understand it.

No, I'm saying that like a lot of young men, you judge your intelligence based on how much you disagree with what you see as the 'status quo'. You're entirely capable of understanding as it isn't complicated, you just choose not to since it doesn't fit your narrative.

Great armchair psychology there. Almost worth every penny.

In fact I disagree with feminism because at best they are silent on issues where men are suffering. Other times they call it privilege or benevolent sexism against even. And even worse they try to codify such discrimination in to law (like the Duluth model, various guilty until proven innocent laws, and opposition to shared custody just to name a few)

Modern feminism is obsessed with attacking men over trivial nonsense like "manspreading" while shouting down any attempt by men to address their own issues (see big red, pulling the fire alarm on various meetings, what about teh menz, etc).

I oppose modern feminism because it has become a toxic community of misandry that only works to create divisions where none would have existed.

As I said, everything you say is a clear demonstration that you have no idea what you are talking about.

You idiots really should stick to your circle jerk subs.

You clearly can't function in the wild.

/you likely don't even know what the Duluth model is.

Yes, I too remember that time feminists raped women and burned people alive while controlling a secret internet cult cabal that somehow didn't cotton onto this comment thread, allowing our darkest sekrets to be EXPOSED.

[deleted]

Yes clearly much better to get your facts about feminism from reactionary anti-feminists.

Who else could be asked?

There are no true feminists in existence.

Point one out and another will come along to inform you she doesn't really count.

[deleted]

This is the problem, you think all feminists are extremists.

[deleted]

Yep, those nice feminists who stay in the kitchen and don't disagree when the men are talking.

You are part of the problem. The fact that you can't see this doesn't change anything.

But do keep blaming everyone else for the toxicity of the feminist label leading to fewer and fewer women identifying as such with each passing generation.

That will definitely fix the problem.

'Fewer and fewer'? You're either spending way too much time in your echo chamber or you're too young to remember even 20-30 years ago.

While it's adorable that in your mind facts come from circle jerking I was referring to this.

The younger generations want nothing to do with your toxic hate group.

You really should try leaving the basement some time.

[deleted]

Encouraging them to leave the basement?

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

Yep that was for scobes. Not sure how that happened.

It was meant as very genuine advice. Look at the man's comment history and I think you will agree with me.

Pathetic.

It's clear why you gravitate to the circle jerk subs.

I really do mean that quite genuinely.

Notice how you are incapable of addressing any point I made?

Your circle jerk background has prepared you for making rather uninspired childish insults and not much else.

I don't know your physiological age but mentally you're in the early teens.

And that's not a good thing.

That's the best you could come up with?

Pathetic.

[deleted]

That's just sad. I feel bad for you.

They're brigading here really hard. Don't let the suspicious vote swings sway you.

Yeah, when they come in and comment and posts see huge vote swings, it's very hard to believe when they turn around and protest that they don't brigade. Reddit admins are to scared of a shit storm to actually enforce their own rules though so SRS gets a free pass

Hint: if someone, in the same comment, praises the second-wave while deriding the third-wave for being too radical, they have no idea what they're talking about.

Addendum: if someone uses Tumbler in Actions as a stand-in for all contemporary feminist thought and activism, they have no idea what they're talking about.

[deleted]

Yes, I'm partial to most feminist thought, and yes, the above user is very much not partial to most feminist thought; I'm not talking about "agendas" though, I'm talking about factual accuracy (hence "they have no idea what they're talking about"). If the user said "I don't like third-wave feminism and here's why: [insert well-reasoned arguments that display at least some familiarity with the history of feminist theory and activism here]," I wouldn't necessarily have a problem (Christ, I actually have lots of complaints about third-wave feminism, but they're, you know, based in reality). I mean, I'd still disagree with the user's opinions (I think third-wave feminism is generally a good thing), but I wouldn't dispute the accuracy of his comment.

The problem with the above user isn't that he's generally anti-feminist in the laziest and most disingenuous way possible ("I don't hate the dictionary definition of 'feminist,' I just hate X [where X stands for 'radicals' or 'third-wavers' or some ill-defined subset that espouses even the most basic feminist ideals" is such a cheap, hackneyed way of buying credibility in these sorts of conversations), it's that he's at simultaneously posturing as an authority on feminist thought while being totally misinformed about the topic at hand (no one even mildly familiar with second- and third-wave feminism would misconstrue the latter as more radical than the former, for instance, and no one even attempting to look impartial or informed would use TumblerInAction as their primary source as opposed to, say, thinkers like Judith Butler or Gloria Anzaldua -- or, God forbid, some sort of academically credible texts).

[deleted]

I don't like the bully the bullies atmosphere of the brigading subreddit that brought you here

how does the behavior of SJWs contribute to those ends

I'm going to try to respond to both of these here, but since SJW is an awfully amorphous term, I might not be able to give you an especially nuanced or specific answer.

I don't necessarily agree with vitriol as a tactic myself. I can see how it's useful as a means of venting and generating a sort of insular camaraderie, but I don't think it helps all too much with the "PR problem" feminism has had since its inception. I think much of it is meant to be sarcastic or satirical (much of SRS' rhetoric is meant as a parody of Reddit's treatment of minorities -- so it is interesting to see how angry Reddit gets when their insensitive jokes are turned back at them), but, again, sarcasm and satire don't work especially well online, and I'm not sure they're useful as a tactic.

Additionally, I imagine some people believe if a given movement is palatable to a mass audience, it's in danger of being swept up and co-opted by "powerful" groups (see what happened to "punk," for instance, or even take a look at popular "lifestyle" or lipstick feminism, which is now little more than a marketing tool), so I assume this has something to do with the inaccessible nature of groups like SRS.

What are the real goals of third wave modern feminism

This is going to be a very general answer, because second- and third-wave feminism are enormously diverse collections of thought.

Now, this is sort of difficult to answer, because, unlike first-wave feminism (which had a clear goal in mind -- that is, legal parity, specifically the right to vote), third-wave feminism, and second-wave feminism to lesser extent, is a very broad category of thought and action (one of the most common criticisms of third-wave feminism is that it's so disparate it lacks the cohesion necessary to affect legal, economic, social change).

Some third-wave feminism takes off from second-wave radicals, some of it takes off from second-wave Marxist feminists (so, for instance, we have modern, Neo-Marxist feminists), much of it broadens second-wave ideals to address issues of race, sexuality, gender (including men), economic class, etc., some of it latches onto the (poorly named) anti-globalization movement, some of it specifically addresses the status of women in economically-developing countries. Some of it is purely theoretical or philosophical (consider Haraway's Cyborg Manifesto), some of it is interested in the interplay of gender and technology, some of it is concerned principally with criticizing capitalist institutions. A lot of third-wave feminism is interested in language, and generally concerned with "informal" equality (as opposed to "formal" equality, that is: legal equality), because there's a well-noted chasm between equality-on-paper and equality-in-reality (take, for instance, the "War on Drugs," which is ostensibly neutral in the eyes of the law, but has the result of incarcerating far more black and latin men -- even though drug use is roughly equal between races; or consider that, despite the scarcity of legal barriers, men still make up the vast majority of economic and political elite). A lot of academic third-wave feminist thought attempts to examine the social barriers that prevent true equality.

I mean, it's such a broad area of thought that it's nearly impossible to 1) describe it concisely in a few paragraphs on Reddit, and 2) attribute to it some farcical and universal "man-hating" tendencies on the basis of something like Tumbler in Action. The ultimate "goals" of third-wave feminism (and of most schools of feminist thought, for that matter) are hard to summarize, because they're so diverse (and sometimes contradictory), and as a result, I'm generally skeptical of anyone who discusses "radical feminism" or "third-wave feminism" as some unified set of ideals and action.

I'm sorry if this is awfully garbled and tedious.

Look at this guy, he thinks he's intelligent and knows what he is talking about.

Brilliant, I love the people on Reddit who do this. You know, try and sound intelligent and educated and like they actually have a point worth considering. I like it even more when some other loser spends money to show how greatly he thinks of a post like this.

Reddit comments are just shit. They might be the worst, most ill-educated waste-of-the-minute-amount-of-server-space-they-take-up shit on the whole internet.

Stay in SRS please

Other human beings think Reddit is full of pieces of shit who are too stupid to form reasonable opinions too, you know that, right?

I mean, you cunts have been in the news and everything. Popular culture equates Reddit with loads of horrible, racist, sexist shit. It's not even an unpopular opinion.

Then why the fuck are you still on this site?

since even though it's about media corruption

lol

Can you explain why feminism and social justice are negative things to promote?

Animal welfare is not a bad thing. PETA is. Feminism or social justice is not a bad thing. SRS is. Its not so much about what they promote, but how they do it (authoritarianism, censorship, taking over subreddits).

Does anyone have any proof srs did this? I see a lot of posturing, but this boogeyman you all are complaining about doesnt seem to exist to me

They are strongly pro-censorship and will silence opposition through whatever methods they can utilise. Impossible to hold a discussion with.

SRS prime is a jerk sub. You aren't supposed to discuss things in it. It's a joke.

/r/srsdiscussion

The problem is not in the promotion of the core principals. But in the general way that this mindset tries to control those around it. The general public sees sjws as off putting pushy types. That go out of their way to get people fired for what they say.

Other communities do this too. Just on smaller scales. For example there are allegations that storm front is actively trying to influence r/pics and r/funny.

It isn't about the beliefs themselves, but more the attitude they have. Very, very closed-minded and exclusionary.

And the beliefs. I mean they do things like choose to raise kids genderless. Really odd things like that.

On a lot of subreddits (including many of the defaults) social justice is seen as some sort of corrupting conspiracy driven by extremely angry feminists who want to see all men burn, or something similar. This post is a pretty good example of how people are misinterpreting Reddit's changing social norms (more general acceptance that feminism isn't out to get you) as the realization of this evil conspiracy.

No, the problem is the pushing for control and preaching down to others.

Its not that feminism and social justice are bad per se...its just that the particular brands of feminism and social justice these people support have nothing to do with equality and have a heavy focus on thought control and domination of the moral high ground.

These types will occasionally try to tell you that you don't even have the requisite vocabulary to discuss these things because you don't use their words, or you don't accept their underlying worldview.

The issue is partially the extremists within those groups who are more interested in "social revenge" than "social justice" (ie the "white men are the root of all evil" mindset,) but the bigger problem is that the SRS crowd considers deleting/banning any ideas they find remotely offensive to be fair game- not just blatant racist/sexist shit, mind you, but anything that goes against their party line. Rule number one of SRS is literally "disagreeing with the circlejerk will get you banned."

They aren't negative things to promote. What people have an issue with is that the radicals have taken over the movements essentially. Modern vocal feminist will use the successes of their predecessors as a demand for people to respect their modern views, or to shame women into joining or staying in the club

If you followed all the women speaking out against feminism, it was usually responded to by feminists shaming them about not supporting the movement that gave them the right to vote and/or demanding they now give up that right if they choose not to support feminism. There's also labeling those who openly don't support or who disagree with them as anti-feminist women haters, or against equality. (This goes for both men and women who speak up)

Very socialyl and emotionally manipulative behavior and people feel more it's obssesive with control and hate rather than social progress.

Social justice is also fine to promote, no one is against social justice. People have an issue with Social Justice warriors. Which is the deragatory term for the fanatics in the social justice movement. SJW's are a branch off from Radical Feminism ideology(you can see obvious corralaries with obsessions of the patriarchy and other concepts they believe are social constructs)

It's unfortunate but both movements have just about been mostly coopted and controlled by these fanatical elements.

And the problem is that many feel their narrative is toxic to just about everyone. That they don't care about those they claim they're trying to help, but instead are trying to use minorities and victims as their martyrs to justify their unhealthy hatred.

As someone that has come from one of the groups they claim to want to help and protect. The best way I can describe these types of people would be as an emotionally abusive relationship.

Reddit use to be very left wing 4-5 years ago. Stormfront brigaded a lot during the Trayvon Martin controversy, which I think led to a lot of redditors from before that leave. All the while, reddit was getting more popular and regressing to the lowest common denominator. Now, those dummies see non-bigots and assume that they're trying to take over because they don't know what the site was like early on.

Not really. Reddit is still very left wing. They're just also very liberal. Which is why it has always had a disproportionate number of libertarian posters and a weird fetish for ron paul and owning guns.

Social Justice is very much in opposition to liberal leftists. I mean they've literally criticized the 1st amendment as being patriarchal. Think of the sjw's criticizing free speech after Charlie Hedbo, etc.

It really isn't a left vs right issue but a liberal vs authoritarian one. You can be far left and authoritarian, like stalin for an extreme example, or you can be libertarian and left... which would be more like certain forms of anarchism in it's most extreme. The right has the same thing, like Hitler vs anarcho-capitalism.

Are you high?

Now I see the cult-like aspect of you people. Hilarious delusions... A stormfront brigade made the liberal supermajority of Reddit disappear?

I can't even imagine what goes through your mind. Scary.

Anybody who doesn't agree with their way of thinking is a member of a neo nazi group that couldn't organize a field trip.

They're negative things to promote because they aren't equality or justice. Never have been, despite the desperate attempts to synonymise the terms.

Feminism is a meta-narrative. It's literally just a word, that refers to a very very broad spectrum of narratives sharing a core belief. That core belief is in the tenant of equality from a woman's perspective. (Much like Christianity is a meta narrative. It's a word that refers to a very broad spectrum of actual narratives, quaker/mormon/catholic/protestant/wbc etc, that share the core belief in god and jesus).

The abstract principle of equality is good. You'd be hard pressed to meet someone who doesn't agree with 'Equality'.

Feminism is not equality, it's a different concept, and in the past few decades has shifted away from the liberal-feminist ideals of the suffragettes and De Gouges ideology, to a point where radical-feminist ideologies are the prime hegemonic stance of the entire meta-narrative. It might not be a 'core' principle just yet, but I'd put good money on it having already reached critical mass, the only reason 'feminism' hasn't distinctly fractured into 'normal feminists' (liberals) and the rest (the vocal majority/radicals) is because everyone's doing such a persistent job of insisting feminism is literally the definition of Equality.

So, Feminism and Social Justice are, and are increasingly, negative things to promote. Equality is a great thing to promote, but Equality is an abstract on the same plane a 'Good' and 'Bad', not a definiton of feminism.

Disgusting amounts of smug self righteousness and when it's extreme becomes dangerous. These are the type of people who won't argue with you, they'll just say you're a terrible person and you should kill yourself. Fuck them.

In a world where millions of little girls are murdered or genitally mutilated, they care about "manspreading".

Feminist Terrorism:

https://archive.today/35NkQ

LOTS of info why:

http://check-your-privilege-feminists.tumblr.com/post/95979451581/i-dont-understand-how-are-you-not-a-feminist

they arent themselves, but there are people that think men are naturally rapists, white people are racist by default, women who dont like third wave feminism also dont like voting, etc. its the twisting of these two words which makes them bad. when these people use them, equality and logic arent the main selling points.

"page not found" OP was banned from this sub by SRS.

No, he got shadowbanned

No, he got shadowbanned by SRS

Going to voat.co Screw reddit. When you hire toxic admins this is what happens.
People need to stop coming here (myself included) or it will stay the same.

They likely already have a presence on Voat.

Maybe, but Voat is harder to manipulate.

How? I've checked the site out a little bit myself, what are the big differences?

It limits downvoting. Very little admin interference. can't just make sock puppets and downcote brigades

GET the FUCK out already! I don't understand people like you if you fucking hate this place so much leave. You won't be missed and no one is going to notice when your gone.

Man, sounds like a group I've heard of before...hm...Republicans?

Go fuck yourself. I'll do as I like. Hard to just leave a website you visit everyday, that creates a habit. Habits are hard to break. So, go fuck yourself.

Someone tried to best of this but a bot removed it. Unfortunate because I'd like this to get some more attention. It's also on depthhub and there's a vote battle happening on it so it also probably wont get more attention there.

http://www.reddit.com/r/DepthHub/comments/2v44i6/umetaredditcancer_explains_why_rshitredditsays/

http://www.reddit.com/r/bestof/comments/2v45cw/redditor_explains_in_detail_why_srs_should_be/?submit_url=http%3A%2F%2Fnp.reddit.com%2Fr%2FAskReddit%2Fcomments%2F2v39v2%2Fwhat_popular_subreddit_has_a_really_toxic%2Fcoe8704&already_submitted=true

Well they regularly don't allow default subs to be featured in /r/bestof

They stopped that a while back but yeah its a bot so imnot that suspicious

You guys care about this shit too much.

It sounds inane, and I agree to a point, however, as reddit has blown up in popularity effects taken here do affect the mainstream. It sort of how say Wikipedia was nothing but a dull encyclopedia but now has the power to influence whole social movements and governments battle it out for denying or publishing their knowledge there.

There are actually people on Reddit who wants to do other things than post pictures of their pets and memes they made. It is an important forum for people.

And posting 1000 word tin-foil-level conspiracy theories contributes to the growth of this site in what way exactly?

tin-foil-level conspiracy theories

How is it a conspiracy theory to point out that some subreddits are being controlled by SRS? That you people still try to deny that is ridiculous.

contributes to the growth of this site in what way exactly?

So everything that happens on this site must be made to contribute to the growth of this site? Great argument mate.

You yourself implied that this is supposed to be some meaningful discussion that differs from the usual "pictures of pets and memes" that you mentioned. Except it's just the typical ridiculous "le evil feminazi SJWs are comin for mah freedommmss!" masquerading as something insightful.

He was responding to /u/-Arkennon's comment:

You guys care about this shit too much.

...in which some might seen an implied, un-stated subtext.

"You guys care about this shit too much. (After all, it's only Reddit.)"

i.e. "Who cares if a few people are trying to control some subs, or push some agenda... because it's just reddit."

Perhaps that was not the original intent, but I can certainly see how someone would get the impression that it was. That's how I interpreted it.

In such a context, /u/that_nagger_guy's comment makes more sense:

There are actually people on Reddit who wants to do other things than post pictures of their pets and memes they made. It is an important forum for people.

i.e. "It's not just Reddit... Reddit is important.."

Reading comprehension-- It's a Thing.

please, go back to 4chan

How is it a conspiracy theory to point out that some subreddits are being controlled by SRS?

Because the OP points to absolutely no substantial evidence that any of this is happening

Just because something is a conspiracy theory doesn't mean there aren't sources so that is a faulty argument you got there buddy. Also you might want to see this list of moderators of different subreddits that the OP linked somewhere below. They weaseled their way into moderator positions of subreddits and now ban anyone who have "bad opinions" which pretty much is any opinion that they don't like. I mean you could have looked harder and found that there's a subreddit for it which the OP linked in his comment. In a subreddit that shouldn't have anything to do with SRS, people get banned for the smallest thing like simply commenting out how they have taken it over. Bottom line is SRS ruins subreddits for anyone but their own kind and even if one of these subreddits is your favourite place on the internet you should be quiet because calling out the obvious makes you a loser conspiracy theorist.

what the fuck is that last link? A guy either got banned and blamed SRS because a third party told him to, or somebody who 'only posted there once' somehow knows that SRS took over the sub?

Like I'd honestly like to see some compelling evidence that this is happening, but the shit I see linked around is really flimsy stuff.

what the fuck is that last link? A guy either got banned and blamed SRS because a third party told him to, or somebody who 'only posted there once' somehow knows that SRS took over the sub?

I really don't know what you are trying to say. Who is the third party you are referring to and who said someone only posted there once.

Yes, like letting stormfront take over reddit, which glorious fuhrer over here and his friends at /r/conspiracy have been trying to do for a while now. All it took kamen was a new username so he could bitch about the right people without being pointed out as a crazy.

It's a free speech issue, or the illusion of free speech on Reddit.

SJWs have now infiltrated the legislative process and are going to create laws against racist jokes and talking about false rape accusations? Because otherwise calling this a 'free speech issue' makes you sound like a fucking child.

And not understanding the concept of "free speech" makes you look like an imbecile.

Tell me how censorship on a privately owned website has anything to do with 'free speech.'

You have no right to free speech on reddit, you have a right to free speech in the United States. Your right to free speech protects you from legal action taken against you for having a dissenting opinion, it doesn't protect you from the owners and administrators of a private website denying you service for your opinion.

Ignorant, insular bullshit.

Quit confusing "free speech" with the FIRST AMENDMENT.

So what is your fucking point then? This is a privately owned site, the owners have the right to do with it as they please. Why do you think you have any right to free speech on here? It's not a free speech issue if your employer fires you for using a racial slur in the workplace, that's their right to do.

What is your fucking point? Why do you think you have any right to free speech on reddit?

Maybe because reddit has actually come out and said they support free speech?

FFS do you even reddit, bro? No one is saying they have a right to it here. You're putting words in people's mouths, and frankly coming off as an immature, uneducated douche.

No, banning people because you don't like their politics is the free speech issue genius.

I upvoted you. Then I nearly posted "This!", but I stopped and scolded myself. Now I'm typing this message out as a long form way of saying"I totally agree with what you just said".

Just how fucking dumb are you

Are you seriously going through my post history? I'd already forgotten about you buddy...

Jamator knows

Thanks buddy. I wasn't feeling much love.

It scares me man. I've been watching the reddit collapse for some time. There is even a sjw, femenist moderator took control over at /r/foreveralone. She is a bluepiller, giving bans to people for disagreeing with what she says.

Here a woman with an agenda has taken over a sub of mostly men, and now is banning them for disagreeing with her, or saying about women exactly what she has said about men.

how the fuck did she take over your sub? That's the thing I dont understand.

How do you know that her motivation is because she's a "bluepiller" and a "femenist"? And not that she's just an asshole?

EDIT: please don't downvote me for asking a genuine question

Because she brigades with their sub.

Those damn bluepillers.

[deleted]

[deleted]

It's not about one group being better than the other. It's about one group with a chip on its shoulder being in power and making a good community into a bad experience for users because of their personal agenda, that also happens to be hard-line and sometimes just batshit insane.

Considering that I havent run into a pedophile or a transphobe on Reddit....and that racism and misogyny are dealt with when they appear, I would say that SRS/SRD and their daily conformity brigades are much more prolific and much more detrimental to the "free thought/free speech" of this site.

50 people? Who are you talking about. Nobody believes that SRS only has 50 people. Nobody is arguing that SRS is the only subreddit that is full of SJWs who specialize in forced-conformity, sock-puppets, vote fixing, and doxxing. There are much more than 50 people...and a larger than necessary percentage of those types in "power" positions with Reddit.

Reddit knows that SRS is famous for these negative actions....Reddit knows that they are unpopular and the first subreddit "voted off the island".....but Reddit removes others for little or no reason while allowing SRS to openly operate.

"Poking fun" is also quite the reach. All of those SJW sites have been caught vote fixing so much that they have to warn their users not to "poop on the popcorn" and other well known code words for the things that Reddit would ban other users for doing once.

So I will calm down, gurl.....and I will not "retaliate against your gender-based put down, shitlord".

Considering that I havent run into a pedophile or a transphobe on Reddit....and that racism and misogyny are dealt with when they appear,

I've seen a ton of paedo-apologia and transphobia on reddit. And racism and misogyny are extremely common across the site.

Sounds like you go around looking for it.

creepers aren't the problem, the people calling them (and the like) out are? lol

.

They sure can. And if enough people leave because of it and they permanently damage their reputation they'll have nobody to blame but themselves.

[deleted]

I doubt that it does, but here you go.

Edit 3: Update 01:01 GMT+1

They actually deleted all these comments for a short time.

mirror backup archive

in case anyone needs to ctrl + f

Any evidence that they actually deleted them? It doesn't make sense that they'd delete the comments, only to bring them back.

Different moderators having different opinions, I guess. AFAIK moderators can see all deletions in a subreddit.

https://www.reddit.com/r/metaredditcancer/comments/2v43i3/plese_read_those_of_you_who_come_here_from/

https://www.reddit.com/r/metaredditcancer/comments/2v43i3/plese_read_those_of_you_who_come_here_from/coe9ulu

[deleted]

To be fair, I think he deserved it. He did sledge every single mod of several subs... Even if he didn't mention names, we know who he was referring to.

[deleted]

It's clear that there is no conspiracy. It's obviously just all in his head.

You're wise to want to archive this. The user was shadowbanned shortly after his post.

[deleted]

fuck it. I'll risk my account. post the mirror with the comments to /r/undelete

[deleted]

You can always throw it up using a throwaway from behind a vpn

[deleted]

elsewhere is fine but I'm 90% sure they don't control undelete yet.

But definitely post it in multiple places.

[deleted]

Oh shit. admins, not mods. ya ok.

He seems to have been shadowbanned. His user page is gone.

Cabal

Fucking Comcast!!

actually, we prefer coven.

You can prefer whatever you want; despite your best efforts, your not one of them.

Yeah I remember once I was on SRS talking the real talk trying to gain some genuine insight into what they believed and users were actually SCARED to answer me in earnest for fear of getting banned. They even warned that I may get banned too if I continued to question their logic which was very obviously flawed.

It's much easier for them to ban discussion they don't like and brand it sexist.

Don't they have a meta subreddit for those kind of questions though?

Yeah they kept claiming it had all the answers but like a Book of Scientology all it was fill of was misdirection an equivocation. So I just wanted some straight forward discussion and got nothing.

It's because you were in the wrong sub for discussion. Try looking at the sidebar?

Like I said. I browsed their meta thread filled with their doctrines and it was filled with double speak and bullshit. They just kept saying my question was already answered even tho what they meant was "the question had been addressed before and answered with flawed logic and equivocation"

Because all of the theory that goes behind SRS hasn't been developing academically for over a century /s (feminism, critical theory). Don't fear what you don't understand, and what you refuse to research yourself. It isn't anybody's job to explain it to you.

edit: to clarify, I'm not saying that the idea of critical theory is to create a subreddit showcasing awful opinions on reddit, but that critical theory and feminism were the impetus to create it. It isn't so scary if you spend a couple hours reading into the basics of those two ideas.

and yet with all that critical theory and research they couldn't explain how a woman crossing the street to avoid a black man was racist while a woman crossing the street to avoid a white man wasn't sexist if we assume both were making judgments of the person's character based on traits the two were born with.

Well, then you have some reading to do! It isn't some stranger's job to explain to you what you misunderstand. It's your responsibility.

With those situations alone with no other context it's hard to extrapolate anything inherently problematic about anyone's actions there. There's no context.

Its a flawed theory like aryan ubermensch science or creationism you can read up 1000 hours on it and it won't get any clearer. You can't expect someone to reasearch hours and hours before they believe in something.

For instance how many lunar rotations and celestial charts did you study before you believed in the moon's existence?

Ok. You have an unwillingness to learn, and you make wild, inaccurate comparisons and statements about what you are unwilling to learn about. Again, that's no one else's problem. Feminism is not made to be cryptic and hard to understand, it is for everyone. It is highly accessible. This is why I believe the only thing keeping you from understand/accepting is you.

lol you are one to talk about "wild, inaccurate comparisons and statements" when that is essential ALL of what SRS consisted of. Even look at feminism in THEORY it is about gender equality but in PRACTICE it is more about female exceptionalism.

Look at the glass cieling for instance. The idea is that there is an evil alliance of nasty men that refuse to pay woman "EQUAL PAY FOR EQUAL WORK" as they say... an admirable goal no doubt and one that appeals to the pathos of the layman.

But take a moment to think what causes people to earn more money?

Well, in the beginning, your salary will be set by what you agree to during an interview. Then you'll seek out raises. If you don't get a raise you want, you'll switch to another company. However, your boss isn't going to just give you as much money as they can - they want to stay as profitable as possible. You need to rock the boat and be very upfront about want better wages, higher raises, and you need to be willing to switch jobs. All of this is very risky behaviour, and you fear rejection.

Biologically, men are more likely to take this risks, and thus will obtain better raises and better salaries than women. This is because the male sex hormone, testosterone, leads to risk-taking. This is also partially why so many more men end up in jail than women, they simply take more risks in an effort to secure financial success.

So what on the surface looks like a discriminatory practise is actually just a correlation coinciding to the natural difference to female and male biology.

I dont care (and I'm not reading that shit). I'm not an SRSer, I'm not even strictly a feminist. I'm just saying from personal experience you are wrong about that subreddit, and feminism in general. You refuse to educate yourself, then try and argue about something you know nothing about. A++

Hey now how can you claim IM wrong if YOU aren't even a part of the sub reddit maybe YOU should spend 100+ hours browsing the sub before you try to make wild generalizations you know absolutely about I can't believe people try to think they know something about ANYTHING before they write nothing short of a research paper on the subject the ignorance is astounding.

I am not generalizing. I have only been talking about you. You really don't get it. And you have such a polarized, dichotomous view of things.

Oh you mean about SRS. Honestly I've been there, and spent time there, and have read the rules and even contributed. Its not normal for me though. You must think understanding SRS is very difficult.

I understand them pretty clearly. The use misleading data and equivocal spin language to push a far leaning left and SJW agenda. Its actually quite simple.

I can't imagine what it's like being you.

That's your comback? After all that talk about about peer reviewed studies and tangible hard evidence to prove your points you just use the same tactic you are claiming to be better than? Jesus Christ just stop responding now and save yourself the embarrassment.

Nope, never said anything about peer-reviewed studies. I just said there is a large area of study, and that there has been for well over a century, in those areas.

I said that "comeback" because I can't understand why you feel so strongly, the way you do. It wasn't really meant to be an insult, but honestly how I felt at the moment. It just sounds like you have an unhealthy perspective of women, especially feminists.

edit: LOL research used as a verb, not a noun. you have to go physically read about feminism to have a better understanding of it. What are you getting caught up on, it is a simple concept. Just do what you did in school growing up when they asked you to write a research paper, but with none of the writing.

Yeah, it's pretty insane. I would always recommend going to /r/ainbow and just skipping /r/lgbt entirely if you are LGBT and looking for some support or just a relevant sub. /r/LGBT is a truly toxic environment run by some of the most hateful people I have ever encountered on Reddit. And it gives a bad name to people who are actually victims of legit oppression and discrimination. Ironically they have probably done more damage to the trans community online than those who are actually out to get them.

Did I just read a manifesto?

Almost. Usually a stronger call to action in these sorts of things.

I didn't believe you about /r/creepypms but I just got banned for saying "putting a ':D' after every text probably didn't help the situation at all." in this thread: NSFW http://www.reddit.com/r/creepyPMs/comments/2uzbex/so_my_friend_got_drunk_recently/

deleted for 'victim blaming.' LOL.

That link is NSFW.

Forgot to add the tag, thanks!

This man has been banned and submissions to his subreddit are no longer possible

Disgraceful

Holy shit dude. Go outside.

It's the saddest thing I've ever seen, and the conspiracy vibes are so strong I wouldn't be surprised if they have actual mental illness like paranoid schizophrenia or are in a manic bipolar phase.

Holy shit dude. Go outside.

Everything you had no idea that you needed to know about, all in one place.

He got shadowbanned for it too.

Reddit is SERIOUS BUSINESS.

/r/braveryjerk

What fucking crack are you smoking

They mod subreddits like /r/news

I am the highest-ranked mod at /r/news and you can see that most of my posts are about football, and if you dig back far enough what political ones you'll find arent SJW-like at all. I can assure you we aren't run by some sort of feminist cabal.

SRS likes to bitch about reddit. People who have been on reddit long enough to moderate big subreddits come to want to bitch about it. This is why you sometimes see people like us who mod big subs and participate in meta-reddit friendly with people who post on SRS. Not because we all agree with them or SRS secretly runs all of reddit or something.

Pretty sure he just listed subreddits where he saw moderators delete offensive posts, and just assumed that those subreddits were co-opted by the cabal.

I'm a mod on ELI5. We delete racist stuff, but no one AFAIK is part of the "fempire".

It's especially hilarious because he also listed /r/worldnews as a sub 'co-opted by the cabal', one of the most racist default subs around.

People who have been on reddit long enough to moderate big subreddits come to want to bitch about it.

I've been on reddit for a long time. Why can't I moderate a big sub. Did I miss an invite or something? I'll check my spam folder.

you sound like you wear a cape to school

It's horrible how so many people don't think that control of a huge social site like reddit is a very bad thing if it's in the hands of only a few people with a big agenda.

The Gay Theists don't have any agenda. They aren't capable of allowing their not being despised to be dependant on anything.

oh

I like you. Also you forgot lots of subreddits which they control such as /r/Openbroke and they also seem to have a strong presence in /r/Circlejerk. I also noticed how /r/explainlikeimfive, /r/offmychest and /r/changemyview have gotten much more SRSish by time but /r/creepyPMs is downright SRS controlled.

This makes me a little happy knowing that a majority of this site actually may not have the autistic mindset of sjws and feminists and it's just a few of these worthless assholes doing this

i take it you really like the word "cabal"

It's a fucking PR firm, these aren't real people. Well, the employees are real.

Who can influence the media, evade reddit bans while breaking every rule and be on the web 365 days a year with an endless array of sockpuppets?

How can anyone be that retarded and productive? How can anyone be around these cancerous people and then think, yeah, they would be great to serioulsy interview on NPR.?

Quick! Go to /r/tumblrinaction before it gets banned!

Can anyone TL;DR?

SRS use vote brigading and tacit support from Reddit admins to control content within other subs, take them over, and silence views they don't agree with, all while playing the victim card.

And the user who spoke out against them is now shadowbanned, an action that only admins can take.

And srs is trying to take control of his sub via reddit request

Looks like the only request is from a gamergater, don't make assumptions too hastily.

What a massive surprise to absolutely no-one.

How can he say that when he has 2,295 upvotes and several golds? And it seems like anti-srs rants end up on the front page of all the main subs all the while?

...it's a satire sub with about 50 active members. It's openly a circlejerk subreddit. A ton of the subscribers are hate-subscribed.

It used to be a lot more popular. But since they've infest other subs they can branch out. A lot of the core players are now in /r/GamerGhazi (and that's where most of their activity currently lies, since they view /r/KotakuInAction as a threat). And they use /r/SubredditDrama as an SRS-lite. If you haven't been subscribed there you'll notice everyone talking about how much the sub has gone to shit in the last couple years. That's SRS taking over.

Also if you catch them in the right mood, they freely admit all of this and even gloat about it.

And they use /r/SubredditDrama as an SRS-lite.

Drink!

Ive been an active member (under different accounts) at SRD and SRS for years. None of those fringe subreddits have a huge userbase. SRD has its swings to topics it hates and loves, it still has nasty little threads and targets.

SRS gloats forever about ruling Reddit...because it's a satire/circlejerk sub. Even in off-site chats it's still a big, funny joke Reddit thinks that at all. The biggest user base in SRS is still white men, just like Reddit.

"b-b-b-but SRS is l-l-l-literally hitler-r-r-r"

Redditeurs actually believe SRS is worse than TRP....

why are you typing like that?

u tell me, buddy boy

As someone with a speech impediment I'm offended by your mocking.

As someone with a high school diploma I'm offended by your inability to spell 'you.'

Like omg check your speech privilege! Not everyone has lips or a tongue you insensitive, ableist shitlord! /s

You really think SRS is better than TRP. As someone banned from both I'd like to say hahaha no. SRS Is light years worse

SRS is a circlejerk

The boys at TRP actually believe what they're saying.

They're out doing harm in the real world.

Srs is real. It's not satire it's not simply a circle jerk. They are out there causing all sorts of trouble in the world. SRS style people are the same behind the yes means yes campaigns.

What's more while many in the TRP are raged filled morons, frankly most of what they say is accurate.

They are out there causing all sorts of trouble in the world

Please provide evidence without mentioning that creep violentacrez.

SRS style people are the same behind the yes means yes campaigns.

Uhhh...ok? What's wrong with having proper consent between partners?

Why are most redditeurs offended by consent?

What's more while many in the TRP are raged filled morons

true

frankly most of what they say is accurate.

Most of what SRS is accurate too.

Srs doesn't actually say anything. Other than "woe is me and all non white non males"

Consent is fine, but pretending that two drunk people having sex is two counts of rape is fucking insane. Truly terrifying, and effects more than women. I'd hate to have a boy in this world.

White males have plenty to say, though.

Mostly about the world is out to get them, apparently.

It's so fucking funny. It's so illogical and paranoid and weird.

Remember when /user/unidan got banned for upvoting his comment from 5 separate accounts? Even if there are 50 active members at a time, their constant vote brigading is being willingly unnoticed by the reddit admins, whereas unidan is shadow-banned.

An admin has, in the past, said that SRS doesn't noticeably brigade. It certainly doesn't brigade as much as other metasubs.

They have at least 2 reddit admins in their pocket

Which ones? And how?

Oh come on...

What?

We bring them to a hotel and give them kisses.

Even if there are 50 active members at a time, their constant vote brigading is being willingly unnoticed by the reddit admins,

h'ok

Waaaahhhhh wahhhhh! Fuck off back to your bigoted cult of intolerance that masquerades itself as "social justice" you ignorant moron. You'd have to be either retarded or lying to say SRS doesn't brigade. Youre little cult of freaks is a cancer on reddit. Funny how you say it's satire, yet I got got "benned" (heheh how cute, benned) for pointing out blatant racist hypocrisy because it was anti white, which is totally cool because uhhh...something retarded like "prejudice+power=racism" or whatever the fuck you idiots tell yourselves to make you feel like you're not racists.

H'ok

About the answer I'd expect from someone incapable of critical thinking.

...it's a satire sub with about 50 active members

Found the SRS legbeard.

The meanie weeinie ESS-JAY-DUBBAWOOS hurt my feelings when I talk about how much I hate women, the blacks and the gays :( :( : ( :( :( :( :( :( :( :(

Why is being a white male so hard?

I second that request.

[deleted]

I loved /r/offmychest and complained about it being ruined by SJWs. Got a lot of downvotes and "stop being paranoid xD" replies. Looks like I was right.

My thumb has carpal tunnel from scrolling through this.

I've gotten A's on papers shorter than this comment.

I feel like this is one of those moments where the teacher would've given him a B for being too "wordy"

I think a large portion if teachers would get bored halfway, and settle on an A-/B+

They're so powerful that the second highest rated comment on the top post in Askreddit is them getting dissed.

They're so powerful that the second highest rated comment on the top post in Askreddit is ~~them getting dissed.~~ from someone that was just shadowbanned by an admin.

FTFY

And.....he's unbanned despite clearly being in violation of rule 5 in the sidebar.

His account is gone.

http://www.reddit.com/user/metaredditcancer

"The page you requested does not exist" is the message I'm now getting when I go to his user page.

Someone who has a history of getting shadowbanned for being a witchhunter.

Do you have any evidence to back up that statement?

Metaredditcancer is Kamen, which is easy to tell by his writing style, the ways he writes his walls of text, his fascination in meta subreddits, the fact that he calls their members "cancer", and his specific conspiracy theory that he's used for eternity. Kamen has always tried to "bring down the metacancer" and has always resorted to witchhunting and harassing mods, he's had to make a few accounts before this due to shadowbans, and this time he seems to have been chucked from repetitive offense.

I don't even know who Kamen is. I obviously need to budget my time more wisely so that I can follow the fascinating soap opera that is reddit a bit better.

Not too valuable of information unless a shitstorm starts up. I only know this because I used to be on /r/conspiratard a lot, and kamen really hated us.

And yet the poster who got multiple gold for the post gets shadowbanned by the admins for laying out a SRS smackdown. But you are right, they have no sway right?

And.....he's unbanned despite clearly being in violation of rule 5 in the sidebar.

Unbanned? He is shadowbanned, aka they banned his entire account from all of reddit.

Does your user page disappear when you get shadowbanned? (Because I'm not seeing his.)

Yes, that is one way to tell that it is a shadowban, especially with his name still showing up. If he would of deleted his account his name wouldn't show up in places he posted.

He forgot to mention that it happened to somethingawful and cracked, too. It's a group of self-appointed censors literally trying to eradicate freedom of speech.

So what all is known about the censorship that's going to go down

There's a lot of discussion about it on www.voat.co. They're a little more open minded than Reddit, although their site is sparsely populated. I wouldn't say it's worth switching over to it completely, but it's worth checking out.

So let me get this straight. Are they a cabal?

You could probably build a house from this wall of text.

The two worst communites on the web are SJW communities...and conspiracy communities^1. So while I agree with you in some aspects that they are kinda cultish, I am really skeptical that they actually have taken significant amounts of power over reddit. Maybe some. Not really most or much.

That is ludicrous, because mainstream reddit is so against their mentality. It wouldn't even really work.

They mod subreddits like /r/news[3] , /r/politics[4] , /r/worldnews[5] , /r/Subredditdrama[6] , /r/creepyPMs[7] , /r/offmychest[8] , /r/TIFU[9] , /r/explainlikeimfive[10] , /r/changemyview[11] , /r/LGBT[12] , and numerous other subreddits where they have managed to worm their way into moderator positions over the years and then go on to have total control over the type of discussion that goes on in their subreddits.

I'm only a mod of one of those subreddits (eli5) and I really don't see what you're talking about. In what specific way has ELI5 been taken over by aradical feminist agenda? We don't really control the discussion at all and are actually really (hell, too) lenient. And I find it really difficult to believe tehy control /r/worldnews (which is racism central) and /r/changemyview, which is literally people just spouting off racist, sexist, etc shit all day. That is completely counter to that ideology.

It seems like you chose those subreddits...entirely because thy're popular? Or maybe because you perceive a tone that's different from your political views, so you assume that that is enforced from the mods? I don't know. What is your specific reason for grouping these specific subreddits in?

Not meant to be aggressive. I just wonder if you actually have any real basis for this.

^1: For maximum pissing-people-offness, I'd say the five worst types of community on the internet are 1. sjw, 2. conspiracy, 3. tea partiers 4. MRA and 5. socialist/communist. But really, there's so many.

They can't respond to you, they were shadowbanned for that post.

Funny. He called out /r/politics as being infected and you scoff. Then you go on to list conspiracy and tea parties as two of your 'worst'. What I notice is any 3rd rate website link that praises the tptb and/or knock conservatives is allowed on politics... yet you have a legit link questioning tptb and its relegated to conspiracy.

.

I don't think its to the level the OP states, but to act like mods don't take dissenting opinions into account when moving threads/banning members is laughable.

tptb

Had to google this, The Powers That Be.

What I notice is any 3rd rate website link that praises the tptb and/or knock conservatives is allowed on politics

I don't pay enough attention to notice if they remove links that criticize liberals. I do know reddit has a liberal bias in voting patterns.

I'm not sure why you are so keen on defending conspiracy, since they do not understand the foundamentals of rational, skeptical thinking, or the tea party, since they are sorta racist, classist assholes.

socialist/communist.

??

why?

As a mod of /r/changemyview, I will say that we do end up removing a ton of MRA-style posts, which gets us called nazis quite often. Of course, we're called nazis by just about every side of every possible argument.

A lot of people don't like it when their attempt to spread their views is restrained, even (or maybe especially?) in a subreddit with explicit rules against spreading of any views. CMV is a place to change your views, not those of others.

I really don't know why, but SRS types don't often seem to come to CMV and try to post submissions in an attempt to change other people's views. If you look at our topics, almost all of the gender-based ones are on the opposite side from SRS.

Either that, or if you prefer to believe in conspiracies, the mods are incredibly effective at removing SRS views, which kind of defeats the argument.

I just wonder if you actually have any real basis for this.

The answer is no.

The idea of /r/worldnews as SJW central is hilarious. One of the most racist default subs around as SJW central? My fucking sides.

? You're nuts

World news is one of the shittiest subs on this forum.

Racists go to world news, ethno centric western news get's promoted.

ISIS bad, Murica and freedom good. So good we will bomb you to force and kill your children to force it on you.

Yes it's racist. It's a white man's burden SJW's dream sub. Not that I have a problem with modern Western values, but I do have problem with valuing them over human life.

ISIS is bad, though. And large swaths of the Middle East are hellholes. And in comparison, most of the western world, including America, is good, and not hellhole-ish.

Like, seriously, do I need to link you some beheadings? Because I feel I may need to link you some beheadings. And before you post back some drone strike statistics, imma point out that we don't go out of our way to hit civilians with bombs. ISIS does indeed go out of their way to torture and kill civilians for the express purpose of spreading terror and attracting new members.

Just to clear that up...

You think that anti-racism isnt a crime = SJW baby bombing straight GayTheist faghag.

Can't tell if Poe

Or just batshit crazy

/r/gamerghazi ?

There was a group on digg known as the bury brigade related to /r/conspiratard who like mocking /r/conspiracy .

I've seen a couple of users active in both /r/ conspiratard and /r/subredditdrama usually covering antisemitism. One if them run the sub /r/isrconspiracyracist

This is some unfortunate shit right here

This is hilarious.

K

Reddit is a powerful propaganda platform. Bankers and big corporations pay a lot of money for this level of influence.

Fun example: Try discussing Monsanto GMO food in a negative light and see what happens. Then try discussing M0ns4nt0 GM0 food. Note the difference.

MEtaredditcancer is banned.... SRS confirmed

Jesus fucking Christ, take a breath once in a while

Wow you pretty much explained the /r/history subs like /r/badhistory and /r/askhistorians.

They ban 20 users every weekend without warning, especially people who don't agree with "their" history/information.

/thread

What's this Digg migration you speak of?

this subreddit has been banned

most likely this was done automatically by our spam filtering program. the program is still learning and may even have some bugs, so if you feel the ban was a mistake, please submit a link to our request a subreddit listing and be sure to include the exact name of the subreddit.

/r/metaredditcancer

The beast awakens.

Shadowbanned.

Can Confirm.

http://www.culteducation.com/warningsigns.html

So now that metaredditcancer is banned, what do we do?

Edit: do not did

what a fuckin cuck

Jesus.

/r/circlejerk is 'metacancer'? Have you ever been on that sub? Most of the time it's nonsensical shitposting for karma, not an SJW cabal.

The only sub I noticed that has become SRS lite is Subredditdrama.

It makes sense, the nature of the sub is similar.

Don't you think it may be telling that two separate subreddits both continually point out the bigotry spouted by people on reddit? Might it not be "SJW"s taking over the subs but rather a reflection on what reddit looks like when you take a step back and stop being dickheads.

You care way too much about reddit

I foresee this post quoted in a youtube comment section by a troll with a fedora avatar.

If you read that entire thing.....

You the real mvp

That escalated quickly.

Apparently the current SJW movement started on SomethingAwful.com a few years ago. The Internet really is serious business.

goons are literally one of the main causes of grief on the internet.

They are, but there is something different this time. I don't think they could keep up the act this long without the rest of the Internet figuring it out. I don't think as SJWs they would be able to interrupt a meeting in 2nd Life using flying dildos without worrying about triggering somebody.

What is their end game?

dont forget that this cabal goes around shadow banning people all over the site who they disagree with, which means none of your posts will show up anywhere on reddit and you will not know it. to you, it will look like everything is normal and your posts will show up, but no one will actually see your posts.

Congrats kamen. Despite numerous shadowbans, you finally got reddit to eat up your /r/conspiracy bullshit.

the subreddit created as a watchdog for this sort of thing - /r/SubredditDrama

Lol what? Man you're a crazy person. SRD is for highlighting arguments and drama on reddit and madly circlejerking about it. Always has been. SRD has never had any stated goal beyond "lol look at these guys taking stupid shit way too seriously."

It really isn't. They brigade almost as hard as SRS.

Please go outside

Tell that to SRS as well.

I've never been a user to any of these other sites you mentioned, have played around on 4chan for celebrity nudes but thats about it, can you somehow explain to me like I'm 5 what exactly is the problem with Shitredditsays ?

I never heard of this subreddit before but after seeing everyone bashing it here I got curious and checked it out, I don't understand what the uproar is about ...

[deleted]

This makes so much more sense than that essay the other person wrote, thank you!

HI KAMEN! I LOVE YOU BABY!

lol

Your life is so sad and empty that you decided to dedicate the time to write out this pseudo-intellectual novel about a fucking Internet forum? I feel bad for you

http://i.imgur.com/V4IqBdR.gif

hm, yes, but tell us how you really feel.

Fuck man you have a lot of time on your hands

sounds like you could use /r/outside tbh

/r/braveryjerk? But Snoop is a mod there!!

I solemnly swear that they shall never take over /r/tapirs! I swear as a mod!

Ready yourselves reddit.

DUDE The subs banned, wtf?

No clue why TIFU is mentioned, I'm a part of that mod staff and we're pretty layed back.

I read all of it, and man, thanks for the laughs hahaha

Also, 24 'cabal', daamn

Oh my fucking god you're adorable.

Bro, I think you're overthinking it.

Yes, and the reddit.com staff are aware of this, and are actually supportive of the SRS/SJW movement.

I'm just glad that I have a life and don't really care about any of this stupid shit. :)

Censorship isn't a big deal until it happens to you.

My goodness, you're right. . . it's like. . . it's like reddit isn't a safe space for bigots anymore! This is awful.

Also Digg's demise had nothing to do with power users, it was all about Kevin Rose burning the site down for the insurance money.

I'd rather suffer the occasional, easily ignored bigot than be told what I can and can't think by a bunch of censorious, militant mods that ban anyone they disagree with.

Watch out man, they're in your head. They're reading your thoughts Right. Fucking. Now.

told what I can and can't think

has this ever really happened to you?

example: you gonna be banned and banned again for this question.

This would be indirect way to tell you what you could and couldn't think.

this has nothing to do with what you think, this has to do with specific rules to a particular sub, just like you can't go into /r/science and spout off about the falsehoods of climate change or going to /r/conservative and talk about basic income, you can't go into other subs and spout off about things they have decided are facts and/or rules pertaining to their ideology.

don't like it, don't post in their sub. simple.

This is indirect way to tell you what to think. There is difference in being downvoted into oblivion and be outright banned and I don't think that /r/science or /r/conservative are right in doing so.

Of course, links should be theme related to these subs, but comments and opinion are other things.

If reddit would make site-wide rule about NOT talking about other subreddits on other subreddits for, well, for peace sake? Yeah, I can see how people would be infuriated by that. Good intentions, bad methods.

There is difference in being downvoted into oblivion and be outright banned and I don't think that /r/science[1] or /r/conservative[2] are right in doing so.

they don't want their subs cluttered up with a bunch of crap degrading the quality conversations and they are right in doing so. Have you seen the posts in /r/science that are put up late at night when the mods aren't so active? They are filled with complete BS from top to bottom, literally a hundred or more comments that are deleted in the morning. If these were let to stand it would be impossible to find the quality, the sub would lose credibility and people would stop going to the sub all together. There is a reason for quality control in particular subs but making a site wide rule would stifle the entire site and that's just ridiculous to even suggest since there is any reason to have any quality control in subs like /r/WTF or /r/ImGoingToHellForThis.

That's the usual false dichotomy. You're either with us, or you're a _____

Context, man. In this instance "us" seems to be every subreddit that this guy disagrees with and believes is a part of some sort of massive evil conspiracy. You put all those people together in a room and I doubt they'd describe themselves as "us".

You wanna talk about reducing complex situations into unfair dichotomies, how about some anti-feminist weirdo deciding that anyone who isn't as nutty as him is all part of some evil "SJW" conspiracy against him and the rest of Reddit.

Do people from SRS get shadowbanned often for speaking out against anti-SJW's?

I don't really think bullying people on the internet is an effective way to stop bullying people on the internet, do you?

Shadowbanned for speaking out against SJWs

I'm sure that's just how it went down. You've got a great grasp on things. Better look out, the big mean conspiracy that goes all the way to the admins is coming for you next!

So what were they shadowbanned for?

I wish you guys would calm down with the ad hominem bullshit already. You like using big words, but you can't help yourself from arguing like a child, can you? Big scary shitlord coming to blow your house down! LULS!!!

I get it though, when you think you are better and smarter than everyone it's easy to start condescending down to the level you've created for them, isn't it? I must be some kind of conspiratard, I disagree with you!!!!!

I think all of the SJW movement is largely an over-reaction, kind of similar to the US's reaction to 9/11. There is a vocal minority of people who truly hate women, and /srs thinks that they need to censor everyone to protect us from a few bigots. I am an adult and I don't need a bunch of people telling me what is sexist/racist/bigoted and what isn't.

So what were they shadowbanned for?

Who fucking knows? Go check his subreddit though, check the mod list, dude made 8 alts for himself, presumably expecting that he'd get himself shadowbanned. I'm not much for bettin' but if I were, I'd say he pulled an Unidan and didn't behave himself with all those alts and tried to give his own posts an artificial boost - you'd better believe that's a shadowbannin'!

I must be some kind of conspiratard, I disagree with you!!!!!

No, you must be a conspiratard becauses you're literally jumping at shadows and seeing evil conspiracies all around you just because lots of people happen to hold different opinions than you do. Buddy I don't know if you're smoking too much weed or not enough, but figure out which it is and fix that so you're either not so paranoid or at least nice and mellowed out.

"It's not because I'm a sexist asshole that this is happening, it must be all those SJW feminazi fascists!!"

Everyone should learn from this.

This is what happens to you when the general culture starts to shift away from your views, but you can’t grasp that other people might hold those beliefs legitimately.

You suddenly start noticing that your own viewpoint isn’t the “popular one” it always was, but why not? It could be that culture at large is just shifting and you’ve just never noticed it until it penetrated your bubble... but if you dismiss that, what other explanation could there be? From here, it can be surprisingly easy to fall into the trap of thinking that it must be because of some nefarious group pushing their agenda. You start to look for it explicitly, and hey, you find it! I guess somehow its surprising that people with different views express those views and tend to hang out and talk about those things in multiple places. And you find that, indeed they do, and now you've had your hypothesis validated! Look! These views are suddenly popping up all over the place all at once, it must be a coordinated assault by a nebulous group with an agenda, right?

  • Your kids aren’t the devout and respectful angels you remember – Must be all that damn Rock-and-Roll music with subconscious satanic messages!

  • Suddenly people are becoming more tolerant of homosexuals, especially the young'uns! – The gay agenda must be subverting culture at large, especially in the schools!

  • Walmart greeters are saying “happy holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas” – It’s an outright war on Christmas!

  • People are starting to speak out against blatantly offensive speech and even just mildly distasteful jokes – Its political correctness gone mad!

And of course, on Reddit, it must be the Admins, or the Mods, or the Feminazis, or even just the SJWs. It couldn’t be that culture is just changing, shifting, or evolving. Its got to be those SJWs! And it can’t just be that more and more people are speaking out in ways that seem to support “social justice”, its got to be a small group of powerful privileged insiders spreading the message to indoctrinate others. Because if it wasn’t a negligible minority pushing their own nefarious agenda, then you might have to face the fact that its just a bunch of people who disagree with you because the culture changes whether you want it to or not.

Don’t laugh too hard. Our parents encountered it, some of us are encountering it now, and others of us will likely encounter it sometime in the future. Just remember what it looks like from the outside so that you can stop yourself for a second and think, “does it really make sense that this cultural shift is being entirely controlled and perpetrated by a small cabal of powerful insiders? Or is it possible that these are just people whom I disagree with?”

I'm very much pro-LGBT, definitely not racist, certainly more concerned with stuff like sexism in games than with corruption - in other words, I'm very much on the side of the 'SJWers'. The problem is, I care about freedom of speech just as much, and I've seen a lot of hints of what this guy is saying. I've seen users shadow banned for disagreeing with me or others, I've seen whole sides of comment trains deleting leaving only one view, I've seen mods filtering submissions, I've seen changes in a lot of those subs over time. I'm not saying he's right about all of it, but he's definitely right about some of it.

Yeah I got about a paragraph into the huge comment before it started sounding like some kind of unhinged conspiracy-copypasta.

Oh noes, some people that aren't ones I like are apparently taking over subreddits in a "cabal", it's the end of the world!

It's only a fucking website, if you don't like the direction the "cabal" is taking it, you're not obliged to stay, it's not like they're taking over a country.

If the people that agree with my agenda are mods, no conspiracy. If some mods have different beliefs then me then its a conspiracy and it needs to be stopped.

Oh yes. It must be because someone is afraid of the "status quo", someone who just can't get with the times. Hate to burst your bubble, but the status quo is that scientists get dragged through the mud over a tshirt, and that the media and twitter collectively will double down on their stunning lack of both scientific appreciation and empathy in the name of progress. They're a bunch of special snowflakes raised on kool-aid who have abandoned the values they are supposed to uphold.

More bubble bursting: there is nothing, nothing new about all this latest handwringing over feminism, third wave/intersectional or not. It's all just media hype, taking academic ideas from the 70s, 80s and 90s and giving them a make over, with a star like Beyoncé or Emma Watson pushing it. Actual sociological research shows gender roles do not go away with more personal and professional freedom, it's called the Norwegian Gender Paradox.

What I've heard is that the OPs story is not only generally correct, but that the group of people in question have a long history from their SomethingAwful days, which wouldn't be the first time that name comes up with regards to certain radfems' histories. They're roping in a lot of well-meaning by standers of course, who genuinely believe they are helping fight "harassment" with their patreon bucks.

There was also this interesting leak about reddit admins and moderators running wild and being corrupt: https://soundcloud.com/user613982511/recording-xm-2014

Wow. Ain't that some shit.

I was the person who noticed a pattern of posting by former power-mod and game journalist SolInvictus and spent way too many hours researching his posts and real world job, finding his alt account (which was the name of an editor for a large news site), and gathering proof of his blatant spamming and removal of posts that competed with his. I posted the info in /r/reportthespammers and felt that it was ignored. So then I started posting the information in various large subs. Unfortunately, Solinvictus was a moderator of, like, everything so a lot of my posts were removed and I was banned from a few subs. Luckily some other mods took notice and removed the bans and seemed to kind of know that he was a shit. Then I got shadowbanned. I finally got an answer from an admin about why I was shadowbanned, and it was because I had put the Twitter account of SolInvictus in my comments, and his real name was on his Twitter account. So posting his Twitter account was personal information which resulted in my shadowban. After I promised to never ever post a Twitter account again (I'm being a little sarcastic here), they were kind enough to remove the ban.

Fast forward a few months, and I got a message one morning from a very cool mod at reportthespammers just saying "thanks". Well it turns out that the admins discovered SolInvictus was a shill that had been gaming reddit for years. Shocking.

How did you get so smart about this stuff?

I wouldn’t say that I’m “smart” about this, but I have had a good amount of self-reflection and introspection about my own changing views. It forced me to examine and think about why I held those views, and what biases, blindnesses and mental hangups kept me in the positions at the time.

Its also easy to come across as the “wise moderate” when you can recognize, relate, and even empathize with a certain position, while still recognizing that it was incorrect, helping to examine why your view is different. It forces you to answer the question, “what would I have told myself if I had the chance to go back and have that discussion”.

The popularity of this post and other posts in this thread and the downvoting of your own post seem to contradict your theory that social justice is just the new normal...

and claiming downvote brigades, vote-rigging admins/mods, and/or misogynists would be pretty ironic btw.

You’ll notice that I absolutely didn’t claim vote-rigging and agree that would be ironic.

You’ll find that Reddit is pretty heterogeneous and that different groups and communities obviously have different proclivities towards up/down-voting different positions.

I’m merely pointing out that its disingenuous to claim that such differing opinions are the result of an agenda simply because some subs have similar positions or shared moderators (except within subs that explicitly enforce ideological purity through bans).

You claim that my being downvoted here proves something, but at best it shows that one side is slightly more popular in this community - you’ll notice this is the *top comment under “controversial” even still, so given the massive number of total votes being passed to produce a small net downvote, its nearly 51:49% at worst.

Furthermore, if you take your own claim about the implication of up/down votes seriously, lets use it to examine whether the original claim about subredditdrama is correct – If it is just “srs mods taking over there”, does that mean that posts pointing out this problem should be positive in that community?

*edit: Or it was for a long time, looks like its a few down now.

hmm, I'd disagree with reddit being heterogeneous. It's probably far more homogeneous than general american culture is. Definitely a left/libertarian lean. Mostly white, mostly male, mostly atheist, mostly young.

There really is no way to know how many votes your comment has gotten. The parent comment being as highly upvoted as it is is more telling as it's more visible.

From what I remember posts in that community against srs were more visible once upon a time. After the mod and sub changes the normal posters left, now it has become a majority srs sub, but it wasn't prior to that. It's sort of a which came first, the biased moderation, or the community sort of thing. Once a sub get's co-opted by a minority via moderator takeover the makeup of the community changes. Reddit overall is still quite anti-srs and the SJW agenda.

Well, Reddit is far more polarized on some issues and much less on others (I wonder what the general public’s ideological split on “Anita Sarkeesian” is - I’ll bet not much).

While Reddit is definitely highly stilted towards the demographics you quoted, but I’ll bet that is slowly changing as well. In fact, since those demographics are relatively small compared to the larger society, you would expect some level of cultural shift as Reddit grows to encompass more groups.

SRD has changed tone a bit, though less than many believe (IMHO). And it certainly hasn’t been because a small group of mods has been pushing a given “agenda” from what I’ve seen. More recently, I think it looks like the sub has changed because the community is rather fractured over recent issues (GG in particular), causing people who previously assumed that most everyone agreed with them to wonder, “wth, when did the sjw's gain such a footing?”, when in reality, the ideological tone has remained relatively consistent (though moving slowly), but with few issues that bring up the divisiveness which is suddenly more apparent.

Come to think of it, if you want to see the spread of a cultural movement in particular, just look at the rise of the very term and idea of SJWs. That was something that started out on and around TIA to describe the most radical and pants-on-head crazy ramblings on tumbler, but it has slowly been adopted as the accepted language (for some) to describe practically anyone that doesn’t fit a certain ideological bent that, as you point out, seems to comprise much of the “Reddit majority” within the default subs. It actually wouldn’t surprise me if the genuine feeling many users have of an attacking and expanding “SJW” subset of users is actually due to the rapid expansion of that term to describe a wider and wider group of people, who always had their own various shades of nuance on given issues, but are now lumped together as a single monolithic entity that looks much larger when suddenly all defined and viewed together.

The general public doesn't really know enough about Anita Sarkeesian to have an ideological split. When you ask someone uniformed on the issue their opinion you're basically asking them if they're pro-equality and women. Which would most likely lead to a very heavy pro-sarkeesian lean. Ask the more informed and it'd start to move the other way. Which is why reddit seems at odd with the general public's opinion on her.

You'd expect that if the general public was composed of more SJW types than reddit is, but reddit leans left compared to society at large. SJW is basically authoritarian far-left, left of the liberal more moderate left of most redditors. If anything you'd expect reddit to become more conservative as it grew.

I quit SRD around the time agentlame drama with /r/technology was happening. That's when the srs bias became too much for me. They were also doing things to limit srd posts about srs by making a different sub for it or making a megapost where all the srs drama would go. I do think the op is a bit insane. Some of the stuff he claims like the admin's being friends with srs and that sort of thing is well known and scary and I do think srd was compromised but a lot of the subs he lists haven't.

I haven't really seen the term "sjw"s meaning shift like you have. It's a bit of a misnomer because no one is really against social justice generally on reddit. It's pretty much always been used to make fun of irrational extreme types of social justice and the more authoritarian left. The political correctness of the authoritarian left isn't really new either or something we've been on a steady march towards either. It's waxed and waned for a long time. Early 90s saw a lot. Other non-american places have had it grow and decline in popularity too over the years. Censorship as a tool to steer a culture's beliefs and values is an old hat.

/r/BluePill is metareddit cancer? I thought all they did was oppose /r/TheRedPill.

Also, I'm slightly pissed that SRD, SRS, and CircleBroke were conspiring to take over reddit and didn't invite me to their secret meetings. That sounds like so much fun.

Everyone with a life is meta reddit cancer according to this guy.

You need another hobby or something. Or like maybe just go for a walk.

Damn. Who is the cult creator again here?

Continue...

Yep, SRD went completely insane.

get a fucking life

Seconded. Jesus fuck but do some people take the internet far too seriously.

You need to get a fucking life.

Top kek.

Want to bring down reddit? Convince as many people as possible that there's a shadowy group trying to tear down reddit and watch them all do the job for you while they try to find it.

Oh wow, and you're shadowbanned for your troubles already!

I have 10 bucks on the SRS mods paying off the admins so they can be around without getting banned.

[deleted]

Lol dude. Just fucking lol.

There's a tinfoil hat in the mail.

Wait.../r/Braveryjerk is part of the SRS cabal? Are you sure?

[deleted]

Downvotes for this comment, really? Dude, if I see you posting dank maymays is BJ, I'll gib you uprons or whatever we're calling them now to make up for it!

ahahaha look at what we made you post