226
posted ago by axolotl_peyotl ago by axolotl_peyotl +233 / -7

Rules: Do we need them? Maybe just the basics:

No calls to or threats of physical violence?

No doxxing (actual doxxing like posting home addresses not just discussing social media etc)?

No spam, no pornography (unless specifically conspiracy-related ie Hunter Biden)?

Mods: u/trinadin is coming back on board, but it would be nice to have one more conspiracy-oriented mod and one more design/CSS oriented mod. I don't think we need any more than that. I've already had several folks reach out and maybe this thread would be a good opportunity to throw your hat in the ring.

Priority will be given to those with .win modding experience and/or those NOT on reddit (I'm starting to spend more of my time here anyway).

CSS: We need an update...in the beginning I almost waited to launch this until the CSS looked better, but time was of the essence so we went with what we have now. It was always meant to be only temporary! Let's beef it up. Design isn't really my thing, but I appreciate and recognize how important it is to look sleek, ESPECIALLY when you're presenting controversial and conspiratorial content.

On another note, it seems crucial to limit downvoting to accounts with a certain karma threshold. What should that threshold be? Link and comment karma? What subreddits use this, and what are their thresholds? Is it even possible to implement here?

Other than these drive-by downvoters, this place has been RAD so far.

And something tells me this is only the beginning...

Comments (158)
sorted by:
21
EffAitchOh 21 points ago +21 / -0

Up/Downvotes: The HackerNews community has excellent moderation practices. One of the features is that after a certain amount of karma users unlock the ability to flag/vouch for posts, and at a higher level they unlock the ability to downvote posts. They also encourage the idea that downvoting should indicate that a post does not add value to the conversation, not that you disagree with it or just don't like it.

CSS: I think it would be wise to aim for a clean theme that prioritizes readable text and doesn't lean too heavily into traditional "conspiracy theorist" imagery (all seeing eye, ufos, etc) since they can be a shibboleth that tells the average person "oh it's those crazy people, I'll should ignore and mock this". We can use traditional symbols, but we should prioritize a look and feel that emphasizes that this is a thinking and research ground, not a tabloid.

Rules: Could we have the ability to tag a thread as "Serious" or "Investigation" and within those threads have a higher bar for conversation? Threads where we discourage memes, shitposting, culture wars, or personal attacks... and instead expect users to seek information through investigation and exchanging hypotheses. There's a time and place for memes and humor in any community but there's also a time for work.

On a different note, I don't know if this should be a rule but I would love if we could find a way to encourage conspiracy theory posts to be more akin to research, and less about emotional and non-investigateable claims. The difference between "X is a hoax! Why can't sheeple understand!!?" versus "X is untrue, here is information you can inspect that contradicts the popular narrative.". There are already a number of threads here along the lines of "I believe X and if you don't you're dumb" with no more substance in the post body to provide a basis or path of investigation, we can do better.

There were some discouraging trends on the reddit sub that I would be thrilled if we could avoid on this win. Specifically:

  • Posts linking to a tweet where a person made a claim but did not provide any evidence that users could investigate on their own.
  • Posters claiming that "It" was happening in 2 days, 2 weeks, 2 months, etc... but not being held accountable by the community when their claims were non-events. It's okay to make mistakes, but we should aim to not make predictions just to rile other people up for internet points.
  • Posts that wage culture wars without having anything to do with a "conspiracy"

I would love it if we could have a flair for posts that provided a lot of primary source material for other users to investigate themselves. A "Highly Documented" or "Well Sourced" sort of tag. In a similar idea, if a post is making a prediction or a claim it might be helpful to tag those accordingly. Perhaps as a community we could periodically look at all of the "Prediction" threads from the previous month, or few months, in a roundtable megathread and discuss what was correctly predicted and what was incorrect. It would be fantastic if users who made a significant detailed predictions could be identified, and if we could reflect on claims that were all bark and no bite.

4
Nomen 4 points ago +4 / -0

Yes for everything except policing what content can be posted

3
Graphenium 3 points ago +4 / -1

Yes to everything you just said. Some good ground rules for productive discourse! And none of it needs to be enforced by mods beyond egregious lapses.

2
Turkirdur 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yes to all of it, can we also have tags like NSFW and NSFL

7
deleted 7 points ago +16 / -9
2
tmuktkpuqzyc 2 points ago +7 / -5

Ya know, it's just a bit exhausting to go somewhere looking for civil discussion and get loads of racist death threats in return. Clearly this community isn't going to police itself in that regard, so what else is there but moderation?

On the other hand maybe it's fine, maybe this just isn't a place for people looking to have adult conversations.

4
_bot 4 points ago +4 / -0

Ignore the trolls and shills when they arrive (I’m sure they’re here already). There is a block function and it will shut somebody up real quick. Embrace the block function.

2
tmuktkpuqzyc 2 points ago +3 / -1

You make a good point, I overlooked the block function.

1
tmuktkpuqzyc 1 point ago +1 / -0

Does the block button actually work here? It doesn't seem to have any effect for me, can still see all the posts and comments from folks I've blocked.

3
deleted 3 points ago +7 / -4
1
tmuktkpuqzyc 1 point ago +3 / -2

Not scared, just not something I care to deal with when I'm trying to have interesting discussions. If you're into that sort of behavior and being part of such a community, then great, this is the place for you.

3
deleted 3 points ago +4 / -1
1
helopedes 1 point ago +1 / -0

Concern trolling. Yandex it.

-1
deleted -1 points ago +1 / -2
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
-2
john_doe_br -2 points ago +2 / -4

I agree with you. He isn't mature enough to be here.

2
Nomen 2 points ago +3 / -1

You could... block those people

1
tmuktkpuqzyc 1 point ago +1 / -0

Does the block button actually work here? It doesn't seem to have any effect for me, can still see all the posts and comments from folks I've blocked.

1
helopedes 1 point ago +1 / -0

Chaturbate is probably a better goto for adult conversations. Do you want to hear compliments about your booba or something?

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
-1
Pm_me_my_alias -1 points ago +1 / -2

Block them, put down your phone, walk away from your computer?

If someone's a moron, don't engage. Simple, no?

1
tmuktkpuqzyc 1 point ago +1 / -0

Does the block button actually work here? It doesn't seem to have any effect for me, can still see all the posts and comments from folks I've blocked.

1
Donttreadonme16 1 point ago +1 / -0

How do you suggest handling things like brigades and communities of people who's sole intention is to destroy this community? Make it toxic, or control the narrative like they do on reddit, or otherwise just spam everything and make it harder to find good content. Because that will all come too. As you grow your site with good content, the more bad actors you attract.

I would be in full support of letting axo be the sole mod, as I think he did a fantastic job over on r/conspiracy. But I'm just not sure it that would be realistically feasible.

7
imProve 7 points ago +8 / -1

No calls to or threats of physical violence?

isn't this the actual last resort against tyranny? why would this be banned

7
clemaneuverers 7 points ago +7 / -0

Do these .win sites support wikis? Love to see some community voted wiki topics with decent lists of sources and links.

My suggestion for one would be a "conspiracy books" wiki of some sort. If too general it could be organised by topic. People could leave comments on books they've read.

Is that sort of stuff possible here though? I don't know. I'd be willing to get involved though.

4
meteorknife 4 points ago +4 / -0

Yes, dot win supports wikis. I dont think any of them are currently in use.

This is the communities.win wiki example: https://communities.win/wiki/example-wiki-page/

3
clemaneuverers 3 points ago +3 / -0

Excellent, thanks for that.

1
helopedes 1 point ago +1 / -0

Got a boner now. I wonder why there is no serious 4chan/pol wiki for storing all those caps with chinese affiliation posters, epstein connections, biden corruption compilation, links links links... Instead, hardworking anons repost the same clippings and links over and over again.

1
helopedes 1 point ago +1 / -0

Am I reatarded or is the wiki read-only at this point? I don't want to rush anyone, especially a volunteer host who is busy to get this bad boy off the ground.

6
Graphenium 6 points ago +8 / -2

I don’t think we should remove “low quality”/“low effort” posts but I think we should, as a community, endeavor to ignore them.

When a poster puts obvious thought and effort into a message, even if we disagree we should comment that disagreement before trying to bury it with votes.

Instead of “rules” we should have guidelines or whatever you want to call “strong community suggestions”, like if youre going to link to something, give as much context as you can and try to lay out what you think it adds to the discussion. There’s so many posts where you can’t tell what the OP is trying to say, and it allows shills and forum sliders to hide behind a layer of obfuscation.

Basically I’m saying we shouldn’t remove low effort posts but reward high effort ones. If that attitude gets instilled in the community, moderation starts to handle itself.

Also what’s the deal with this sites backend? Do you (the mods) have access to it? Could you tweak the ranking algorithm? Could you make a “sort by controversial” and “sort by recent comment” version of the front page?

0
john_doe_br 0 points ago +4 / -4

I agree that educating is better than ruling but we need some sort of fallback option for people that cannot be educated.

I propose we require accounts to have at least 15 days of registering before they can post.

2
Nomen 2 points ago +3 / -1

Fuck that, it would never grow

2
Graphenium 2 points ago +4 / -2

Idk we don’t want too much of a barrier to entry, just some obstacles to inauthentically/artificially shutting down discussions. Things like 50-100 comment karma before you can downvote make sense, balance of not too restricting on discussion but also shutting down shills.

1
john_doe_br 1 point ago +2 / -1

Reddit tried that. Didn't work there. Won't work here. You should learn the lessons of those that came before you instead of pretending the wheel wasn't invented yet. I will say it again. This was already tried on reddit and didn't work there.

2
Graphenium 2 points ago +3 / -1

Ok, r/con also has a 3month wait period between account creation and being able to post, so they literally have implement your idea (with a 6x longer wait time) and it’s still a shithole, so what’s the plan Stan?

2
Litecola2 2 points ago +2 / -0

Noting that currently points and longevity carry across .win sites. Also noting that recently on TDW (in the midst of state legislature hearings IIRC) there was appearance of shill brigades from accounts who had positive history and longevity, as if the accounts had been hacked, purchased, or set up long ago with a plan.

The TDW solution currently is the addition of a "deport" button, which allows a report for non-standard reasons (not doxing or malware etc) to go to a moderator. There are mods on around the clock and normally act quickly but fairly from user reports and as far as I've been able to tell. New accounts whose aim apparently is to troll, shill, glow, entrap, FF, etc. get the boot - but it is clearly a manual process, with some users dedicating portions of their time to only scouring New and getting shills "deported". Subjective? Probably. Dependent on mod integrity? Absolutely. But it always has to be a benevolent dictatorship unless you're chans, and there should be protections and transparency to the extent possible.

Not the only answer, but it's worked out for them for months and while under ridiculously heavy fire.

1
john_doe_br 1 point ago +2 / -1

Fine. So both our ideas don't work. The only things left to try are moderated posts or vetted posters.

1
Graphenium 1 point ago +2 / -1

There’s actually a ton of options, I don’t think we should eternally lock ourselves into whatever happens to get the most upvotes here. This is just a jumping-off point.

Edit: also which subs restrict downvotes to people with 100+ upvotes? I don’t know if I’ve seen that functionality before

0
john_doe_br 0 points ago +1 / -1

I stopped going to reddit a few years ago but as far as I understand you can't even downvote there anymore. They didn't have a positive karma threshold. They had a negative one.

6
undecidedmask 6 points ago +6 / -0

I like the porn ban, and the actual doxxing ban, and have no clue about calls to violence. I think that being able to downvote posts should be turned off. Mods should also be more hands-off, removing only porn or non conspiracy posts. No matter how outlandish the theory it should stay.

6
tmuktkpuqzyc 6 points ago +16 / -10

It would be nice to have some community standards around how we treat each other. I shouldn't have to put up with shit like this just because someone can't handle an adult discussion about statistics.

Let me be crystal clear: It is my sincerest hope that next year's excess death statistics comes from people like you lying in the streets with your insides on your outsides, next to your families and everyone you hold near and dear.

I look forward to seeing you disemboweled in a .webm on the darkweb.

I hope you die. Literally. You and everyone like you. I hope you die. Painfully. Publicly. I hope examples are made of you. And your family. And your friends.

I hope you are strung up from bridges and your corpses set on fire.

Edit: I wasn't clear where these were quoted from, but they're from this site. The author is major contributer here: https://conspiracies.win/u/deinstantiator/

3
PyramidsAreCrazyShit 3 points ago +8 / -5

You don't deserve death threats, but most of your posts/comments are pro-vaccine, anti-this site, and a few are blatant attempts to emotionally manipulate other users. Why did you think that would be popular on a conspiracy community?

It sounds pretty selfish to trade the lives of everyone over 60 so that your kids don't have to wear masks for a year (working on the same assumption you posed here, that everything we're told is true).
.

Sure I do. I also see a difference between a mild temporary inconvenience (mask) for one and permanent termination of life (death) for the other. Do you really feel differently?
.

LOL. Wow, conspiracies.win, baby. A place for serious discussions. Come back when you hit puberty and I'll explain statistics to you. In the meantime, just keep on deflecting, I know it feels safer than facing up to reality.

0
tmuktkpuqzyc 0 points ago +2 / -2

I don't care if my opinions are popular, I'm here to discuss conspiracies. I don't see anything wrong with the first two quotes, particularly in the context of the post I made them on. And the latter was literally in response to all the death wishes...

What exactly is your point? That I'm not a stereotypical conspiracy theorist?

2
PyramidsAreCrazyShit 2 points ago +6 / -4

My point was when you're being emotionally manipulative and authoritarian (do this thing or else you are a grandma murderer), you should be a little slower to throw out the victim card.

2
tmuktkpuqzyc 2 points ago +3 / -1

Those first two comments are in response to a post titled

I'll just come out and say it because I don't give a fuck. Even if COVID was as bad or worse than it is presented and literally everyone over the age of 60 will die in the next 2 years. I don't give a fuck. It's not worth destroying the world for every single other person on the planet.

Which included the text

I''ll be 40 in 2 years and if you told me that everyone would die at 40 (instead of the number I used in the headline) then I would still be okay with it if it meant my kids (and everyone else's) could not wear masks, touch and see people during their lives.

You know why? Because I am not a selfish piece of shit.

https://conspiracies.win/p/11R4ulXhbd/ill-just-come-out-and-say-it-bec/

I don't think I was being emotionally manipulative, I think I was directly responding to the content of OP's post.

2
helopedes 2 points ago +2 / -0

Thanks for your effort, anon.

1
helopedes 1 point ago +1 / -0

Fit in or gtfo.

2
undecidedmask 2 points ago +3 / -1

Supportive messages.

2
Everythings 2 points ago +3 / -1

is that from reddit? i thought reddit was all about a safe space banning threats of violence

0
tmuktkpuqzyc 0 points ago +2 / -2

Is what from reddit? I'm not on reddit, I was never a part of the conspiracy reddit.

1
helopedes 1 point ago +1 / -0

Then you don't know how unhelpful your suggestions are. What you are proposing is exactly what made reddit shit. If you are going on like that, you must tolerate the accusation of being a weaponized crybaby, a plant sent by the left to destroy alt-communities like this budding one.

1
Everythings 1 point ago +1 / -0

oh. it looks like exactly the type of thing i see there sorry.

you weren't specific in where you saw those posts

1
tmuktkpuqzyc 1 point ago +2 / -1

Oh sorry, will edit to clarify.

1
helopedes 1 point ago +1 / -0

Slippery slope. It helps to get used to insults and death threats. Ever heard of sticks and stones and their contrast to words? Don't just grow up, man up!

1
tmuktkpuqzyc 1 point ago +1 / -0

Wow I really touched a nerve, huh? You just commented like 10 times on this single thread.

-4
Graphenium -4 points ago +6 / -10

Wow that’s completely unacceptable, even if you think someone is a shill, if you’re going to bother replying to them atleast prove them wrong not right. I disagree with a lot of what you’ve posted but you seem to be posting mostly in good faith. We don’t need animalistic threats to prove a point.

Edit: actually, reading the convo, you’re both acting like idiots, you’re clearly not debating in good faith with that guy.

1
tmuktkpuqzyc 1 point ago +5 / -4

You really think that my comments are anywhere remotely comparable to his?

This is a major poster here, btw, a real stand-up member of the community. https://conspiracies.win/u/deinstantiator/

1
helopedes 1 point ago +1 / -0

I can't see anything wrong with those posts.

-8
Graphenium -8 points ago +4 / -12

His first couple responses are perfectly reasonable and you ignore them completely to bitch about the site and bait him into an over response. Luckily this isn’t Reddit however so no one can slink off to an admin and accuse another of hate speech.

Your own data refers to “total flu and pneumonia deaths” but your comment refers to all cause mortality. I think you should find a better link or attempt to actively lay out the data and it’s source in some kind of graphic. Like he said your shitty link and napkin math is proof of nothing.

5
tmuktkpuqzyc 5 points ago +6 / -1

Dude, check the link. It is TOTAL DEATHS ALL CAUSES. I know the link says "flu" in it, but if you actually click on it and check the data it is TOTAL DEATHS ALL CAUSES.

I did not ignore him, I responded to his claims, and when I asked for further clarification... then came the death threats.

-2
deleted -2 points ago +1 / -3
3
tmuktkpuqzyc 3 points ago +8 / -5

I like how quickly you changed your mind and decided death wishes like this are an appropriate response.

Icing on the cake is that you were too lazy to even click the link before accusing me of misrepresenting the data.

I'm really impressed with this community so far.

1
PuritanCrusader 1 point ago +1 / -0

Noone threatened you though. Also, people should be able to say what they want and it still be visible. Censoring stuff like will only convince people that they are being silenced. Others should be able to see this and respond to be able to steer the conversation better, the more people that saw how fucked up this guys comments were the more people will call him out for it. Censorship only creates more hostility and has the echo chamber side effect.

-2
tmuktkpuqzyc -2 points ago +1 / -3

I don't think a single person (besides me) has downvoted any of the comments I posted. Some people have upvoted them. I think it's disingenuous to pretend that the community as it stands today will not encourage this sort of toxic, unproductive behavior. On the contrary, I think a lot of people here approve of comments like these.

If "echo chamber" means a community of people who focus on discussing conspiracies like adults and communicating respectfully with one another, then that sounds pretty good to me.

1
helopedes 1 point ago +1 / -0

Speaking for myself, I don't expect respect from faceless anons on the internet. I come here for news, ideas and angles from people possible more creative and/or knowledgeable than myself. Always happy to have occasional ideas or angles myself. Do you expect your tv set to respect you while watching the news? Demanding a chaperone for pottymouths is not adult. I suspect that you are a woman, perhaps not a real one.

-1
deleted -1 points ago +3 / -4
1
helopedes 1 point ago +1 / -0

Nice to meet you.

-1
deleted -1 points ago +3 / -4
-5
Graphenium -5 points ago +4 / -9

Bitch about the site more. If anything that should be the one rule. People who are only here to tear down the site and break communication should get the boot.

3
tmuktkpuqzyc 3 points ago +6 / -3

This thread is literally on a post about how to improve the site...

1
helopedes 1 point ago +1 / -0

You want special snowflake treatment. Nobody else is complaining, nobody else is demanding tone-policing. You are the crybaby talking about "adult". If you want "adult", go to blacked.com .

-6
Graphenium -6 points ago +2 / -8

And you’re acting like a single argument you got into with a single person that disagreed with you and your bait represents an indelible blemish on the site, get over it.

Put more effort in your posts if you think your point isn’t getting across clearly enough.

4
Aliensdidit 4 points ago +5 / -1

I like the idea of limiting downvotes. I was even thinking the other day that we just limit downvotes for all users and then take away the privilege for people with under 50-100 karma. The internet already has a negativity bias so limiting downvotes might help to prop our user base up and encourage discussion.

3
factdigger 3 points ago +3 / -0

Recommend:

Post ORIGINAL source PRIMARY material, not screenshots, not meme crap, or altered copies.

Most people are still naive and think that everything on the net is legit and not forged.

Esp. when you want to post about an authority and/or organization, post to their site, their document, not some bottom of the barrel conspiracy site.

2
_bot 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yea I agree with your point, but memes must be included on this site. No way around it. I think a front page with only sourced material being allowed, would invite more people to browse when they first come here. And a second “meme” friendly page, separated would keep them here/not clog up the front page. Like how r/gaming and r/games are different in that sense.

I think these are the only “categories” this site needs.

-2
NelsonMandelaffect -2 points ago +1 / -3

Not gonna happen when the guy running the show loves posting right wing twitter nonsense.

3
Motzfeldt 3 points ago +4 / -1

I really think downvoting should be restricted to those who have reached a certain positive comment (not post) count. Like 150, 200 or something. That stops stupid shit like "downvote brigades" and forum sliding.

I also think users that have a comment history of nothing but downvoted posts, insults and toxicity should just be banned or whatever.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
2
Nomen 2 points ago +2 / -0

What are the groups though? The people with karma, who must have posted something people liked. Vs people with low or no karma who don't post or people didnt like the content. The echo chamber would probably be good

-2
NelsonMandelaffect -2 points ago +1 / -3

Axo just banned me over at reddit for disagreeing with him in a whiny party about brigading, you think he's really about free speech?

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
2
Ilsaluna 2 points ago +2 / -0

Set a rule or two, keep what works & modify/trash whatever doesn’t.

It sucks that no doxxing needs specified; beyond that, it seems to come down to don’t be a disruptive dick. Sure, discussions include disagreements and that’s to be expected but if a user is only here to slide the topic/conversation, that’s being disruptive rather than contributing and they should probably be shown the door.

Merry Christmas & good luck.

2
axolotl_peyotl [S] 2 points ago +3 / -1

great to see you here and merry christmas!

2
Ilsaluna 2 points ago +2 / -0

Thanks, AP. FTR, after spectating for a bit, I’m thinking the best of con’s rules should be implemented as it’s easier to create good habits than break bad ones (link posts w no additional info, meta, etc.).

2
PutinLovesCats 2 points ago +3 / -1

I'd be down to help mod, mate. You know my experience from Reddit, and we both know I technically should've been a mod on /r/con (ie. Got the votes) but the fifth column prevented that from ever happening. I can also help out with the CSS, so it'd be two birds one stone with ya' boy PLC :)

Also, does the ping function work on this website? Tried pinging you and doggos in another thread.

2
Donttreadonme16 2 points ago +5 / -3

I would love to throw my hat in the ring as mod. I made it to the final rounds of voting for the position on r/conspiracy, but was vetoed by the same mods that have led to it's downfall over the last 4+ years, and allowed it to become the compromised mess that it is today. TMOR has also long had a hard-on for my posts, and have brigaded many of my submissions (which I wear as a badge of honor at this point).

Here is my profile for those interested in my positions on all things conspiracy related.

More than happy to answer any questions from users here regarding my qualifications for the position.

0
Nomen 0 points ago +5 / -5

Mod isn't a job, it's working for free while gaining power over people, anyone who asks for it should be automatically disqualified imo

1
Donttreadonme16 1 point ago +2 / -1

Typically I would agree with you. But I would argue that my goal is to make sure we don't have mods that DO try to gain power over people. The whole point is to maintain free speech, by preventing those kinds of people from getting mod spots.

I've was an r/conspiracy user for 6+ years, and saw what happened to it first hand. As someone who would like to see this place not follow the same path, I'd argue I can bring a unique perspective for how to avoid that happening.

-4
NelsonMandelaffect -4 points ago +1 / -5

Fucking Axo just banned me over at reddit for disagreeing with his whiny brigade post. He's all about power.

1
Graphenium 1 point ago +2 / -1

It’s a classic dilemma but hopefully the community can do most of the work through rewarding effort and good faith contributions and downvoting the bullshit.

2
Everythings 2 points ago +2 / -0

well i was sus but seeing axoltl here seems good

2
4218 2 points ago +2 / -0

If we’re being honest; Grab everything good about /r/Conspiracy and let them keep the bullshit. People will naturally come here as they steer away from Reddit. Change the design, and keep a list of confirmed conspiracy theories on the right side.

Encourage discussion, and nothing political; absolutely nothing for a time.

We have to remember Conspiracy Theories=Critical Thinking, and then we will grow as a community.

2
KMVerum 2 points ago +2 / -0

CSS


I enjoy tinkering with CSS. Since coming here, I've spent some time tweaking this site into a Custom CSS;


Started out as a simple project for Reddit back in about 2018. It's mostly cosmetic, and have gone through several versions. The latest edition includes transitions, custom cursors, responsive inputs, and is compatible across a number of platforms;

and now; conspiracies.win.


Most Settings on the site are ready to go for anyone who just wanna hit the install-button and give it a try.

-Recommend using the CSS injector https://add0n.com/stylus.html, seeing it's stripped of telemetry-data gathering features.

I will probably end up tinkering a few elements here and there as time pass by, but the basics are covered.

The wallpapers are hosted on Reddit though, so I suggest uploading an image, and let it be converted to BASE64 (automatic process).


Tweaking looks and creating themes has been a little hobby for about 4 years. Migrated from Reddit a few days ago like everyone else - been there for... I don't know, maybe 12 years. Been using the Web since it came online.

Don't have much experience with websites besides creating a couple that was used by local businesses - that's quite a while ago.

Have yet a few tricks to learn, and don't know if I'll be of any use beyond this, but thought I'd at least share, seeing it's a fresh start around here.

I'll gladly provide some inputs if you want to borrow or implement some of the code.

But as mentioned yesterday; feel free to use from the contents.


Edit;

Discovered editing a comment removes the proper formatting, and creates a wall of text.

Minor bug that ought to be looked at.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
2
meteorknife 2 points ago +7 / -5

I would like to volunteer as a conspiracies mod. I already have mod experience at greatawakening dot win and feel like I can contribute that knowledge and experience. We are currently trying to separate Q stuff from conspiracy posts anyways.

I do have CSS experience and can definitely clean this place up. For any customizations, I would need help from a graphic designer (logos, customized upvotes, rotating sidebar images). I have basic experience and know people I can reach out to, but I'd rather have a volunteer from here.

Overall my goal would be to provide a place for skepticism and the spreading of information. I have no desire to censor, but will abide by whatever rules the community decides on (through reporting). Honestly, I love discussing the fringiest of fringe conspiracies and will commit to monitoring those discussions as the community suggests.

3
Nomen 3 points ago +3 / -0

What if the conspiracy is about q, anyone who asks for mod is automatically sus

1
meteorknife 1 point ago +1 / -0

Q stuff belongs in greatawakening, non Q stuff belongs here.

I have no intention of intervening unless people are breaking community rules.

2
Nomen 2 points ago +2 / -0

Q is a conspiracy though, so it does belong here

2
meteorknife 2 points ago +2 / -0

I'm not saying that it doesnt, just that that's where I would draw the line if people didn't want it here.

Clearly I'm not anti Q. I'm not really even pro Q. Its just another topic about skepticism in our everyday lives like all the other conspiracies.

2
Nomen 2 points ago +2 / -0

So once q posts are banned, what's the next topic you would ban

2
meteorknife 2 points ago +2 / -0

Once again, I wouldn't ban anything. Q stuff is a little different since there's already a dot win for it. I imagine the community here will either reject it or keep it with voting.

And by Q stuff, I don't mean deepstate shenanigans and all of whats currently going on. That can live in both places. I just mean that we wouldn't sticky Q drops or encourage Q memes.

1
Nomen 1 point ago +1 / -0

Because you don't like them?

1
helopedes 1 point ago +1 / -0

Q proselytizing is probably a joykill, but most conspiracy theories sound outrageous at first. Banning a certain denomination is a mistake for any conspiracy forum. What's more: many conspiracy contribution are fun to read even if you are not into it. For yours truly, Q is a prime example. Best-thought-out shit ever, kudos to the folks who have come up with that. Flat-earthers might cause optics problems for the casual normie, but me, for example, can coexist with flat-earthers, too.

2
The_Real_Balthanos 2 points ago +3 / -1

I reached out to AP that I'd like to help mod this site.

I've been a /conspiracy moderator for years and have plenty of experience working within the bounds and enforcing only the rules that are posted.

When I reached out to AP I suggested a more hands off approach here and stated I'd only be looking for the spammer/link advertisers and am not really interested in enforcing much beyond that.

A lot of you know me from the conspiracy reddit and a few of you probably don't like me. I accept that but I'm also looking to turn the page and am excited to get away from reddit. That place has burned me out and I'm sick and tired of dealing with it in any meaningful way. It's too toxic and it started affecting my real life and family.

Either way, I understand AP's prioritizing of .win users and don't really expect nothing to come of this but figured I'd at least attempt to help an old friend and the community I've been a part of for over 10 years.

Sincerely,

Balthanos Malabades

0
PutinLovesCats 0 points ago +3 / -3

FWIW, I'd support you modding here, Balto.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
2
endthefed11 2 points ago +2 / -0

Can we make the thread upvote icon bigger?

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Hatesreddit 1 point ago +1 / -0

Whats with the quick url redirect when you login?
It says authenticate or something? Looks either shady or amateur.

1
Everythings 1 point ago +1 / -0

hey don't judge me for coming from reddit ><

1
sealedIndictments 1 point ago +1 / -0

I just want to see this place as protected as it can be from sock puppets and shills. And forum sliding.

I say keep the downvote functionality because it becomes obvious when brigading is occurring. Half the time you can find the best posts in other brigaded forums like ruqqus or reddit by sorting by controversial / disputed. Forum sliding via upvotes strikes me as harder to detect.

I have no problem with the CSS.

No porn.

If someone is obviously always spitting insults and detailing all discussion, if it thusly becomes clear they are a shill or insane, then ban them.

1
LoobintheToobin 1 point ago +1 / -0

I was talked down on the donald and had it explained not to worry about the downvotes, at least there they do not reflect on your overall ups they are just a visual on the comment showing response. Their explanation helped me to not get rilled when I meet a shill but to have fun and keep them talking and getting views for the site.

If you have time I think the comments are worth reading to better explain. https://thedonald.win/p/11QlYUQrmp/the-devils-in-the-down-votes-shi/c/

If anyone knows this site works differently with ups and downs let us know. Thanks

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Reclaimer69 1 point ago +1 / -0

The only thing I'd really have to offer right now is that the conspiracy reddit has movie threads and a regular Round Table thread that you post there.

I'm just now realizing .win had a conspiracy board. So I don't know what the culture and topics here are like, I really haven't even browsed the posts yet. But every day these communities exist the less time I spend on alternative sites. So keep on keeping on.

I'll try and be active on here a fair amount, but I'll probably lurk. These topics are the only thing I went back to reddit for. So now I can probably get rid of the app. I'd throw my hat in for conspiracy oriented Mod, but I really don't know if I'd be reliably available enough of the time to do the job effectively with only 4 people, or whatever.

I will say that as long as I've been on reddit and browsed fringe stuff there. Lots of other conspiracy themed subs have been formed because of mod drama and other factors. I just hope whatever the cause of r/ConspiracyII and r/ConspiracyUndone were, that doesn't happen here. I'd hate to see us fracture for whatever reason.

I guess in closing, I recognize your name from the sub. I'm so glad you're here because that place is going to shit and it's nice to see a mod from there, over here. Whatever direction this place takes I'm sure I'll enjoy it! Maybe I'll have some more ideas in the future.

1
Redditbliows 1 point ago +1 / -0

Any chance .win can get an old version going like the old.reddit?

1
Moscovium 1 point ago +1 / -0

Who owns this site? Who funds it? That will dictate whether we can offer a space for free speech or not. Seriously: does anybody know anything about this???

The fewer rules the better (agree on no porn). Spammers can be dealt with by downvoting. Everything else is a slippery slope. E.g. no violence: means we can not post videos of violent crimes or protests. "No nazis" (to whoever posted that): who defines "nazis", and why not "no antifa", "no communists", "no globalists", "no bolsheviks", "no marxists", "no leninists"? Hope you get the point. No personal attacks would just lead to overmoderation; again: this can be dealt with by downvoting; banter must be allowed.

How can we ensure that the shadowbanning fuckery from thedonald.win does not happen here?

1
ItCameOutOfACan 1 point ago +4 / -3

We need threats of violence on here. Nuke China.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
ItCameOutOfACan 1 point ago +1 / -0

No problem with that.

1
TrumpRocks 1 point ago +1 / -0

Please add flairs.

NWO, 2020 election, aliens, Clinton bodycount, bigfoot, nessie, 5g, vaccines, etc.

1
hloblart 1 point ago +1 / -0

Rules:

Do not do anything illegal under your own jurisdiction or US Federal jurisdiction while logged in to conspiracies.win

Do attempt to take down conspiracies.win

Do not impersonate a mod.

1
PyramidsAreCrazyShit 1 point ago +2 / -1

Rules: No doxx. --> Agreed
No spam --> Agreed
No porn --> Agreed (if it's related to a conspiracy mark it as NSFW or delete)
No threats of physical violence --> Need a little more definition. Don't want to eliminate stuff like "Nuke China." or "Hang the globalists." However, no threats against community members would be good.

Mods: Glad we found a second mod.
I don't have any mod experience but am available if needed. I'll enforce whatever guidelines the community decides on. I like transparency and community agreed rules (even if they are as simple as don't sell shit).

CSS:
CSS would be great. It's been a long time since I've done CSS, so I'll bow out of this one. I'd probably be more help mocking up some aesthetics in Photoshop and letting the users decide if they like/don't like.

I want flair. Anyone have flair suggestions? I'd like to see aliens, jfk, 9/11, and election fraud.

Downvotes:
Not sure if possible to implement here. If it is, I'd say threshold of 500. We're a small community. Good accounts can accumulate this in a week through quality posts and comments.

LONG LIVE CONSPIRACIES.WIN!

1
Iloveyounowfuckoff 1 point ago +1 / -0

brah

0
binklehoya 0 points ago +1 / -1

voat has a 100 karma minimum for downvoting

minimal css is ok

this sub/site was a great idea

0
pizzakek 0 points ago +1 / -1

Features i believe would be useful:

  1. be able to see who upvote posts. This way we can better spot trolls.

  2. create and put in sidebars popular blocklists. This is a way to neutralize trolls without hard deleting. As they will be concerned about this place and will reproduce, we could use a weapon to not discourage new users to see this place as brigaded, or have them do all the hard work from 0.

The block function is really important to keep this place usable and give a good feed. Enhance it!

0
TheOxOnRocks 0 points ago +1 / -1
1
TheOxOnRocks 1 point ago +1 / -0

Commenting on my own comment; It’s been awhile since I watched that video for this song. Some parts are well ahead of their time. Covering the eyes/identities of those being saved. Even the dogs eyes are covered. I guess we can call it anti dogxxing.

0
jaws 0 points ago +4 / -4

Can we ban memes? They lead to an echo chamber effect and often don't have enough substantial information to talk about. Its creates a big circlejerk as well.

2
Nomen 2 points ago +2 / -0

I want to ban jaws, he leads to an echo chamber effect and often doesn't have enough substantial information to talk about, big circle jerker too

0
SR-71A_Blackbird 0 points ago +1 / -1

Ban Nazi bs.

-1
Fuster_cluq -1 points ago +2 / -3

Can we get a warning or ban for posting inane comments like "what's there conspiracy"? Also, what is the policy for trolls/shills? It would be nice to ban the people trying to destroy or control this forum. I don't want this place turning into shill infested reddit

-2
Axolotl_is_a_liar -2 points ago +1 / -3

Do not believe a word out of my mouth. I am a liar.

-2
korekatz -2 points ago +1 / -3

Guys does anyone else think the donald has been infiltrated? There are shills saying things are false that obviously arent and I got banned for merely suggesting such

-3
T10166 -3 points ago +2 / -5

Pick anyone but fucking CATSFIVE from GA.W

Dude is the biggest fucking chickenshit thundercunt in existence...

I wish I had the ability to sticky all of my favorite topics to the front page while deleting anything I found to be irrelevant..

Dude gets off to fucking National Inquirer headlines...

1
Nomen 1 point ago +1 / -0

Anyone asking for mod is a red flag tbh or people who mod on other places, usually the worst type of power hungry people

-2
NelsonMandelaffect -2 points ago +2 / -4

Like Axo who just banned me over on reddit for disagreeing with his whiny bullshit.

-5
deleted -5 points ago +1 / -6
-2
deleted -2 points ago +1 / -3
0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
-1
deleted -1 points ago +2 / -3