Current Reddit r/conspiracy mods compromised? You be the judge

posted 2 years ago by meme_kat 2 years ago by meme_kat +43 / -3

Update: March 22, 2022

Stating or implying that a 'transgender woman is a biological male' will result in a perm ban from r/conspiracy as it appears the mod team considers this a TOS violation.

Human biology and science is to be classified as 'hate speech'.

It also appears you will be banned for submissions or discussion of

CIS women that feel disenfranchised by transgender women receiving women's awards or competing in women's sports

The mods will not clarify whether discussing LGBTQ topics results in a ban, but by the evasive nature and continuous gaslighting it seems someone on the mod team does not want civil debate or any discussion on controversial topics.

Instead the mod prefers to run a honeypot permanently banning users that make submissions or discuss topics on a mod's private blacklist.

No matter of compromise would appease the lead mod who appeared to be putting on theater display.

Asking for clarification on blacklisted topics to prevent future misunderstanding and bans for wrongthink received additional evasive responses and gaslighting.

Suggesting mods should be open and honest with users about banned topics makes you a TMOR shill that wants the sub banned.

I did manage to get one honest reply.

Updated PM appeal:

short update:
https://files.catbox.moe/aqtt5j.png
[archive]

Full PM chain updated:
https://files.catbox.moe/0v3wxe.png
[archive]

Seems like there are a lot of old mods here and I remember u/axolotl_peyotl being pushed out under strange circumstance.

Summary:

Perm banned from r/conspiracy about 4 days ago

I asked why I was perm banned and what specifically in my submission and submission statement was a TOS violation for 'hate speech'.

I was never contacted or sanctioned by Admin.

This was 100% mod action..

To be honest I never anticipated the mod team Orwellian newspeak, mental gymnastics, dodging, projection, and gaslighting. I never once got a clear honest answer to what specifically in my submission or submission statement was a TOS violation.

Presumably if you engage in civil debate on r/conspiracy you will be perm banned if you raise the question of CIS women potentially being disenfranchised by biological men identifying as transgender women in awards and competitions .

The old public modlog is also offline, for how long who knows, but it seems like the mods over there currently in charge have two sets of rules (public, private) and do not like transparency.

A small passage from the pm

I repeatedly stated I was willing to compromise and post within the confines of a sandbox. I just asked what are blacklisted topics or how my submission was in violation something you refuse to respond to. You say use nuance, but then don't define what that means. You can't say follow the rules, when rules are unstated, unspecified, or ambiguous especially with respect to hidden blacklists.

PM chain appeal: LONG

https://files.catbox.moe/qybjve.png
[archive]

Submission:

https://old.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/tfgmpv/women_of_the_year/
https://i.redd.it/h8llggn7pqn81.png

Submission statement:

USA (Today) announced their women of the year.

Included in the list was Biden's Ast. Sec HHS Rachel Levine. As more and more awards for women continue to be handed to biological men, you have to wonder at what point women begin to feel disenfranchised by a rigged system.

Tweet:
https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1503747553669623818
https://twitter.com/realDailyWire/status/1504004683639111682

USA Today column
https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/opinion/2022/03/13/rachel-levine-honoree-usa-today-women-of-the-year/6600134001/

91 comments

91 comments share save hide report block hide replies

You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.

Comments (91)

sorted by:

▲ 0 ▼

– SuicideTruthbomber 0 points 2 years ago +1 / -1

I see no reason to further continue responding to you if you are going to evade my questions, gaslight me, and not engage in honest discussion.

Your long responses show that effort was spent and therefore out of respect for you I am responding back despite your writing being full of poor logic and enough gratuitous transphobia for me to think you're trolling or crazy. I'm not even sure you know what gaslighting is, as anyone looking at this thread can see I have in no way done that. Ironically, you seem to be trying to gaslight us.

You will find no issue with this post

I don't know where you get off deciding what it is I personally disagree with. To answer your question more directly: Firstly, in my opinion it is not on topic. Conspiracy forums are about conspiracies and not social commentary from South Park or your own personal crusades. Secondly, it almost surely violates Reddit's Content Policy, which I have linked and quoted for you earlier in this thread.

(In case anyone else is actually reading this, demanding answers to some long list of questions before discussion can continue is called a gish gallop. That's a red flag that you're being trolled.)

Ok so you are against the Babylon Bee being locked out of their Twitter account until they delete a tweet naming Rachel Levine as Babylon Bee's Man of the Year?

Yes, I am against that, not that Twitter is relevant to what we are talking about. I'm trying to explain to you why your behavior was bannable.

You would also be against Twitter recently locking the account of @TuckerCarlson until he deletes a tweet in support of Babylon Bee and for recent segments raising debate about biological males in women's competitions?

Yes.

And you would also be against Twitter locking the account of the Babylon Bee's editor

Yes.

Nice dodge of my questions and comments in the parent comment. Where have I seen this before?

I didn't dodge anything and it doesn't matter where you have seen it before. I hope you aren't still holding on to the delusion that I myself am actually a r/conspiracy moderator. And would you please stop with the questions?

What is the TOS violation? Is it because the topic is simply LGBTQ, and controversial? Is it reporting that USA Today gave Rachel Levine a women of the year award? Is it stating that Rachel Levine is a biological man identifying as a woman? Is it stating that transgender women are biological males? Is it asking if CIS women feel disenfranchised by a biological male receiving a woman's award? Is it by raising any question it might unintentionally raise awareness that the LGBTQ lobby have been repeatedly trying to erase and censor 200+ years of human biology, psychology, medicine, and the field of science itself?

You are working with a group of people in an attempt to harm the r/conspiracy subreddit. We know this because you were caught trying to bait people into violating the Reddit Content Policy. It is not plausible that you have a psychological need to remind transgender people about how they were born and you believe that conspiracy forums are the place to do that. Now you are trying to harm the reputation of that subreddit. It would not surprise me if your responses in this thread were a group effort.

Again where have I seen this before?

Irrelevant. I am going to guess that you have seen it in your very long discussion with the r/conspiracy mods. I am not one of those people.

I really am getting the distinct impression you are a mod of r/conspiracy trolling here to defend running a honeypot while issuing perm bans using private blacklists for wrongthink...Did you really think coming here anonymously to peddle the same nonsense and defend your actions was going to look convincing?

I don't know what to tell you; I did not create an account here to wait for people like you.

I hope that was all of your questions; you sometimes leave out the question mark.

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 2 ▼

– meme_kat [S] 2 points 2 years ago +2 / -0

Your long responses show that effort was spent and therefore out of respect for you I am responding back

Maybe just maybe I might actually get honest civil debate free of insults and trolling that answers questions without evasion or gaslighting.

despite your writing being full of poor logic and enough gratuitous transphobia for me to think you're trolling or crazy.

lol I guess it was too much to ask

Ironically, you seem to be trying to gaslight us.

Who would this us be? I've been transparent.

To answer your question more directly: Firstly, in my opinion it is not on topic. Conspiracy forums are about conspiracies and not social commentary from South Park or your own personal crusades.

Biological males receiving women's awards and competing in women's sports is a conspiracy.

The LGBTQ lobby has positioned itself within social media and intimidated, bullied, threatened, and canceled anyone that might say that a biological male is a transgender woman or question whether CIS women feel disenfranchised by biological males receiving women's awards and competing in women's competitions.

Biological Women are being abused and treated unfairly

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFl88Wkz6eI

That was the essence of the South Park 'social commentary'. Joe Rogan has discussed this as have many other comedians and public commentators.

This topic is not going away so long as biological males identifying as women seek to enter women's competitions, receive women's awards, be permitted in women's locker rooms and bathrooms et. al.

https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1506359042838446083
https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1506641917299232771

I didn't dodge anything

sure lol

I hope you aren't still holding on to the delusion that I myself am actually a r/conspiracy moderator.

sure lol

What is the TOS violation? Is it because the topic is simply LGBTQ, and controversial? Is it reporting that USA Today gave Rachel Levine a women of the year award? Is it stating that Rachel Levine is a biological man identifying as a woman? Is it stating that transgender women are biological males? Is it asking if CIS women feel disenfranchised by a biological male receiving a woman's award? Is it by raising any question it might unintentionally raise awareness that the LGBTQ lobby have been repeatedly trying to erase and censor 200+ years of human biology, psychology, medicine, and the field of science itself? None of these topics or questions are 'hate speech' or inciting violence.

You are working with a group of people in an attempt to harm the r/conspiracy subreddit. We know this because you were caught trying to bait people into violating the Reddit Content Policy. It is not plausible that you have a psychological need to remind transgender people about how they were born and you believe that conspiracy forums are the place to do that. Now you are trying to harm the reputation of that subreddit. It would not surprise me if your responses in this thread were a group effort.

And more dodging lol

You really appear incapable of engaging in honest discussion.

To restate:

I did not incite anyone to hate or promote violence against transgender people.

Posting a picture of Biden Assistant HHS secretary Rachel Levine winning USA Today 'women of the year' award and in the submission statement politely raising the question asking if CIS women feel disenfranchised by biological males identifying as transgender women when permitted to compete in awards and sports competitions is not promoting hate or inciting violence.

That is called debate.

Biological males have XY chromosomes in their DNA and are born with male physical characteristics. You can't simply wish this away even if you call yourself a woman.

The argument is based on human biology.

Also to repeat

I really am getting the distinct impression you are a mod of r/conspiracy trolling here to defend running a honeypot while issuing perm bans using private blacklists for wrongthink.

I am no part of SPLC or TMOR, but your motives are fairly transparent here. Did you really think coming here anonymously to peddle the same nonsense and defend your actions was going to look convincing?

I repeatedly stated I was willing to post within a sandbox and asked for a list of banned topics in r/conspiracy to prevent further misunderstanding. Mods refused to answer.

I compromised and communicated that in the future I would not state in r/conspiracy that a 'biological male is a transgender woman'

That was not good enough for the mod. They wanted me to bend the knee, grovel, and conform to their world view that saying or implying that a 'biological male is a transgender woman' is 'hate speech' and a TOS violation. As stated, I can agree not to discuss a list of banned topics in r/conspiracy, but will not be bullied into saying this is 'hate speech' and disregarding human biology.

If they would have said, please refrain from discussing LGBTQ as it could subject the sub to reprisal from Admin, I would have honored the request.

Irrelevant. I am going to guess that you have seen it in your very long discussion with the r/conspiracy mods. I am not one of those people.

sure lol

I hope that was all of your questions; you sometimes leave out the question mark.

You dodged all the relevant questions so again...

I see no reason to further continue responding to you if you are going to evade my questions, gaslight me, and not engage in honest discussion.