I have a theory that u/JosephGoebbel5 has only just recently 'joined' our forum because he heard there's no active moderation and is spamming the board, using it as his own little soap box. (It's not) I also think by his overuse of posting and disregard for others he is probably trying to bury our theorizing in varied topics because we are on to some things.
Comments (91)
sorted by:
What has he posted that has been incorrect? Conversely, what has TheImpossible1 posted that has not been incorrect?
(I thought it was two words but I guess it's only one) soapbox: a rough wooden box or any raised, temporary surface for people to stand on while making informal public speeches
Answer the question. Stop deflecting.
I don't look at most of your posts because the spammy nature of them is distasteful to me. So I wouldn't know.
So why are you kvetching? Block and move on.
I love how you make me and only me to be the bad guy...
It's just something I'm noticing.
You didn't notice impossible1's two alts show up around the same time and turn near every thread into imp vs jg5 flame wars?
Stop noticing, goy!
They both follow/instigate eachother, this post is about one person.
The post is only about half the problem, in other words. And who exactly is he supposed to be conspiring with?
Conspiring can be done independently. Yes there are other problems going on, this is the one I'm focusing on now.
You need at least two people to conspire, by definition.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/conspiring
Well 'the Offspring' led me to believe there can be a conspiracy of one.
Two counting the one I'm currently replying to.
Based 🤣
You forgot u/EveryoneWhoHadToPutUpWithYourBullshitOnKIA2.
Trying to gaslight*
FTFY
That's rich coming from you.
If you have an issue about another user, I would repeat by saying, you both instigate eachother and this is not the community for slap fights.
This post is about you being a conspiracy against this forum.
What do you call this post if not a slap fight?
It's a meta conspiracy post that's relevant and I don't think it breaks the rules.
Funny I thought you like wild west style..
This isn't even close to WildWest, your entire endgame is censorship. Posing this meta post as a conspiracy is obviously fake and gay.
My goal is forum preservation. You are acting against the purposes of this forum and now I think you're conspiring against the truth seekers here.
The rule is about excessive, unnecessary, or bullying meta posts, not about single responsible neutral meta posts.
Would you like to know who is responsible for the most excessive, unnecessary, or bullying meta posts?
The one crying about Natalism, we know.
Either me, him or u/DresdenFirebomber.
But I counter with the fact that he's obviously botting and the main c/meta doesn't give a fuck.
The first sentence is dead-on established by evidence.
There's not a lot of value in his motive being burial, but your more generic reference to breaking up the power of building unity is backed by evidence.
Those who want to advance the discussion are very capable of avoiding the sliding and distraction. I suppose infiltrators might believe analysis might show that spamming is "good enough" to dissuade lurkers from first impressions of a board and also confuses the larger middle enough not to concentrate on (and contribute to) the critical mass of advancing discussion. So it's a theory.
Occasionally u/JosephGoebbel5, like prior accounts in that name, will post a meme that is not collectivist and can spark conversation. If "no collectivism" were a rule here he would lose the majority of his posts (not speaking of changing rules here, just of his treatment in fora that do have that rule). Of the minority, some are not really about conspiracy, but some are balanced enough for questioning cabal behavior (most often Jewish via his selectivity).
Sometimes he's shown ability to adjust style to get continuing permission to post, but he's also got a sort of inevitability cloud about him that it's not a matter of if but when he breaks the rules. Game theory indicates to me that the best approach is to continue very patiently applauding what's within the lines and (if we have a mod) quietly and professionally deleting what isn't. Then the community will have given him benefit of the doubt as far as it could stand.
Also, u/Thisisnotanexit, since he is calling my pinging spam I don't need to ping him anymore. (My thoughts would be that comments with no beneficial value that contain disrespect, attack, bad report, exceptionally low quality, disruption, evidence of stalking, repeated unsolicited matter, misleading statement, violence, or abuse would be deleted by the mod(s); so such a comment is obviously a bad report (and disruptive via its repetition), as it reports a comment that has effort and value.) But if he posts something for public comment I continue to reserve the right to take such a post as a solicitation. At that point I might get to tell him some changes that might get him in better stead with the community. As it stands, it seems there's no need to interact with most of his contribs, or even to downvote them (because he may be claiming cash value from the downvotes), similarly as with other problematic accounts, if I'm upvoting the things around them for contrast. But that's all with the theory that we might attempt for a time to see a moderated community with a committed neo-Nazi that actually has the guts to be honest about having his fascism tested and to work toward being the best Nazi he can be instead of some larper. God can redeem anyone, even Nazis.
"Trust but verify" means even as we extend as much grace as we can we also prepare for the worst. In this case there's not much to worry about. Admin acts fast if there are true issues (the Indian-larping accounts do not seem to have resurfaced); we can presumably get consensus on moderation and admin approval; the community rolls with the punches and, despite having lots of anarchs, doesn't have serious fragmentation. There are bursts of 100 comments in 1-2 hours, which I grant does make it hard to scan comment feed; that's the worst of the inconveniences of this inconsideration. Ordinary moderation is equal to these. With the forum goal being fair transparent future I don't think the present problems or the future potential problems are too serious that they will overcome that goal. But I probably should respond to less bait so as to help quiet things down.
I think most of his posting is soap boxing and overuse looks like spam.
But not the domestic terrorist calling for violence with every post...
I would like to remove calls to violence, yeah. I would like you to either work with this community to actually theorize conspiracies or get out. I have a thinking I'll be saying that again, hopefully not to you.
I think you have an inferiority complex and are fighting to regain relevance. I really don't give a shit what you think, go be a cool wine aunt somewhere else.
Stop deflecting. Post actual theories in moderate amount, please? How does anyone even interact when you're in so many places at once?
This sub is called Conspiracies, not ConspiracyTheories, fatso.
https://files.catbox.moe/enzoxy.jpg
Go feed your cats, Karen.
Obviously you do to kiss her ass like that 🤣
Yeah, they're going to run away together. Totally.
u/WeedleTLiar u/RealWildRanter
Ping them like a man, zippertits.
We aren't throwing others into this.
u/Sayori check out the subversive kike trying to (((shut it down))) 😂
🤣👍
Hm, can't talk to me on your own?
You're sucking up to a woman 🤣😂
My conspiracy theory is against the one I named.
That is not how I do things.
There's no evidence that anyone else would be continuing the problem described in OP. u/RealWildRanter is a sincere Catholic and his support is accordant. u/WeedleTLiar is new to me but balanced at least as often as not.
If the community were to look for others that back up problematic lead accounts, I daresay there would be more evidence of the likelihood of others causing the same problem as the lead. But I'm a bit lazy about getting numbers to back up my impression right now.
If I have a problem with a person I take it directly to that person.
Atheists majorly supported Che Guvera and stalin. China's gov't today is composed of athiests. But suuure, "that's just a CoiNciDeNce, bigot!!!!1!"