Patriots.win admits to shadowbanning users
(media.conspiracies.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (29)
sorted by:
That's the thing, the post showed up on their feed but it was removed from public NEW feed.. that screenshot is from the post thread as he was talking to the moderator who admits they removed it. The Post was visible on the poster's feed. but nowhere else..
Go in there and post something about Organizing as a show of strength against the deep state .. Watch what happens , check your post an hour later on the public NEW feed .. Something very screwy with the PDW mods.
Well sorry, I though it was a comment that was removed. If a post is removed, you wont see a message saying so in the feed, but you will see an entry in the modlogs. Patriots.win are a bunch of losers and have disabled public viewing of their modlogs. But anyway if you click on that entry in the modlog it's a link to the removed post (try it in our modlogs). So technically not a shadow ban either, just a straight post removal. Although it basically functions like a shadow ban since they have their modlogs hidden. You can however at least access their ban list here, since they can't disable access to that:
https://communities.win/c/TheDonald/ban-logs
LOL half those names are my alter-ego accounts. Proud of my ability to get banned so easily on PDW. And I'm not even spamming. Just posting the same lit content I always do that makes a CUCKservative reeeeeeeeee
I hate you got banned. You and a couple others. I knew you were, but I had not seen the logs.
Impaling Muslims = Cheered
Impaling Jews - REEEEEeeeee
Both are Semites. LOL This one made them seethe https://patriots.win/p/15HvLAxdB5/when-jews-and-muslims-get-along/c/
Of course they would delete such an obvious fedpost.
It is true. THey've done it to me.
Also, they can modify the date your new post was posted and basically bury it so no one easily finds it.
Yeah, all of them do that. If you go to your user page, all of your posts or comments which were silently deleted are still there. But if you go to the respective pages in question to find them inline with other comments, they’ll be missing.
That’s not shadowbanning. It’s goddamned annoying that we aren’t given a “this post/comment was deleted” notification (we aren’t given one because C knows we would just repost it immediately), but this setup is actually a tiny bit better than full deletion of content because at least YOU can still access it after the fact.
What if against others represents a weakness for the sustenance of self? What if resisting the temptations suggested by others represents the growth of strength?
FWOC, he means killing the people killing us, not just resisting their propaganda. To not be “against others” in that situation is literal suicide.
a) PROP'AGATE, verb (Latin propago; to set or thrust in) - "to continue or multiply the kind by generation or successive production". The process of dying represents the generator; those living within represent the reactors "resisting".
The parasitic few suggest propagandism (orders to follow) to tempt the many to ignore perceivable propagation (the natural order to resist).
Your choice to fight those who suggest propagandism represents your choice to ignore resisting propagation. The few parasitically exploit your ignorance of perceivable (reality) with suggestion (fiction).
b) nobody can offer reality because everything perceivable is already offered to each one perceiving it; yet...everyone can be tempted to ignore perceivable (need) for the suggestions (want) by others. This temptation needs to be resisted by choosing need (perceivable inspiration) over want (suggested information).
c) as choice one exists within perceivable balance (need/want) aka in-between perceivable and suggested aka inside the perceivable process of dying and among the suggestions of the living. The many ignore this for the suggested imbalance (want vs not want) by the few.
d) one cannot consent to an us (want) vs them (not want) conflict without ignoring the need to sustain oneself. One cannot consent to any conflict (imbalance) without ignoring ones response-ability (choice) to struggle (balance). One cannot consent to another one without ignoring oneself within all. Choice cannot consent to suggested choices without ignoring perceivable balance.
a) flow (inception towards death) kills form (life)...it also generates it. The generated form (living) represents the reactor within generating flow (process of dying).
b) KILL, verb - "to deprive of life by any means"...nothing deprives the living faster than ignoring to resist the temptation of dying, and consenting to any suggestion represents ignorance.
c) DEPRIVE, verb - "to take from; to bereave of something possessed"...others cannot take perceivable reality from one and one cannot posses perceivable reality. It's the choice of want (suggested) over need (perceivable) which allows those who suggest to exploit those who want suggested. Only then can the suggested be reclaimed; repossessed and taken from those who want it.
d) while the many are fighting each other over suggested values; the few suggest them price-tags for everything perceivable. Consenting to those suggested prices restricts the many from accessing perceivable. All of this represents willing self destruction...not getting killed by others.
e) the ignorance of the many tempts the parasitic response of the few. Killing the few doesn't prevent the ignorance of the many; it strengthens the few; because the many can shirk response-ability (choice) onto the choices of the few aka the ELITE (selection; choice).
As long as each one of the many ignores response-ability (choice) within perceivable (balance) for the suggested choices by the few; so long will the few represent the "chosen ones".
a) you are already against yourself by consenting to suggested "not be" aka not being aka suggested nothing over being within perceivable everything.
b) the "to" represents towards which implies being (life) within what moves forwards (inception towards death).
c) choice can only exist at the center of balance, so only if choices chooses to ignore being within balance; can choice experience imbalance (conflict). Where is the conflict (against) for one living within the process of dying; for form (life) within flow (inception towards death); for choice within balance; for reaction within enacting; for the partial within the whole?
a) "need" sustains living; "want" tempts dying...both coexist as balance for ones choice at the center.
b) the few suggest suicide under the umbrella of moralism (want) vs immorality (not want) to tempt the many to ignore response-ability (choice) of the living (resistance) within the process of dying (temptation).
To reason over wanting or not wanting to live; tempts one to ignore being alive; hence already doing what's needed to be alive aka adaptation to perceivable need (breathing; quenching thirst; stilling hunger; sheltering).
To be implies out of; within and in response to perceivable origin...however others choose to be represents the temptation to ignore what you are. Killing doesn't solve problems...living represents the temporary problem within the ongoing solution (process of dying). Every problem will be solved.