I have no idea who you are, but I hope you are an honorable person capable of free and open discourse. Internet moderation has become a detestable weapon used against anyone that stands in opposition to the hive mind or in opposition to (Jewish) power. I hope you will take on this responsibility with the full seriousness it deserves and moderate only when absolutely necessary.

I've watched many decent platforms fall under the tyranny of moderation. Lack of free and open discourse is one of the major reasons humanity is in the current state of darkness and confusion. In short: Don't fuck it up.

:)

I had a thought about the ‘meta’ threads that are constantly made. The obvious option is to go back to deleting them, but eventually that results in banning the users doing it because they don’t seem to stop. Still, it’s a good idea. But...

What if we had a sticky to contain them all? Specifically ONE thread where each individual comment chain within can be where people whine impotently about a specific user? That way the venting gets done and the board isn’t cluttered with obvious spam?

𝟙𝟙 𝕄𝕠𝕟𝕥𝕙𝕤.

• ᵀʰᵃᵗ ᵗᵒᵒᵏ ᵃ ʷʰⁱˡᵉ.

From appointment on 2026-01-30 17:10:26 (GMT) through 2026-02-01 00:00:00, u/Thisisnotanexit engaged 360 mod actions. A few duplications, a single unspecified "other" action, and a handful of "ignores" that were appended to other actions, are not filtered out in the counts below, making them imperfect but sufficient totals.

Accounts listed with actions and counts [and percent adverse]:

amberscornful removed post 1 [100%]

Antero ignored reports on comment 1, removed comment 2 [67%]

BeefyBelisarius ignored reports on comment 1 [0%]

BuckeyePatr1ot ignored reports on post 1 [0%]

ChippingToe ignored reports on comment 1 [0%]

CrusaderPepe ignored reports on post 6, removed post 6 [50%]

defenderOfMontrocity ignored reports on post 1, removed post 1 [50%]

Dps1879 removed post 1 [100%]

Dregan_ya ignored reports on comment 1 [0%]

DresdenFirebomber approved comment 1, banned 1, ignored reports on comment 5, ignored reports on post 5, removed comment 53, removed post 9 [85%]

ErnestWorrell removed comment 1 [100%]

FallenNephilim ignored reports on post 1 [0%]

freedomlogic ignored reports on comment 1 [0%]

gaw-mods-are-gay approved comment 1, removed post 1 [50%]

Graphenium removed comment 2 [100%]

guywholikesDjtof2024 approved post 1, ignored reports on comment 4, ignored reports on post 7, other 1, removed post 7 [35%]

Halivxu ignored reports on post 1 [0%]

HangYourself banned 1, ignored reports on comment 14, removed comment 40 [75%]

hl65 removed post 1 [100%]

jamesbillison approved comment 4 [0%]

JosephGoebbel5 ignored reports on comment 2, ignored reports on post 9, removed comment 16, removed post 17 [75%]

JosephMalta banned 1, ignored reports on comment 1, ignored reports on post 1, removed comment 8 [82%]

KarlSumeran removed comment 1 [100%]

LastEvidence removed post 1 [100%]

lightupthesequence removed post 1 [100%]

LilyThread removed post 1 [100%]

Mindhunter removed post 1 [100%]

Mrexreturns ignored reports on post 1, removed comment 1 [50%]

Neo1 ignored reports on comment 3, removed comment 2 [40%]

newfunturistic ignored reports on post 2 [0%]

normandis removed post 1 [100%]

Psalm50 removed post 1 [100%]

qboro_nyc removed comment 1, removed post 2 [100%]

RealityWiener removed comment 3 [100%]

RealWildRanter ignored reports on comment 2, ignored reports on post 5, removed comment 4, removed post 5 [56%]

StolenCBSContent1 removed post 1 [100%]

SystemGayAlt ignored reports on comment 1, removed post 1 [50%]

TallestSkil ignored reports on comment 1, removed comment 2 [67%]

TCDforver ignored reports on comment 1, removed comment 2 [67%]

thatware removed post 1 [100%]

Theunpopular1 ignored reports on comment 1, removed comment 1 [50%]

Third-Eye-Vision removed post 1 [100%]

Thisisnotanexit ignored reports on post 1, stickied post 2 [0%]

TurnToGodNow approved comment 1, ignored reports on comment 31, ignored reports on post 3, removed comment 22, removed post 1 [40%]

Vlad_The_Impaler ignored reports on comment 1, removed comment 3, removed post 1 [80%]

WeedleTLiar ignored reports on comment 1, removed comment 1 [50%]

Xsaymoklash removed comment 1 [100%]

This suggests to me that (1) all accounts at 0%, 50%, or 100% are the result of very few actions and, when adverse, are likely minor points that the account holder learned from; (2) all accounts between 0% and 50% are likely to have been subject to reporting abuse; and (3) all accounts between 50% and 100% are likely to need to review the rules better. Reviewing the list with these categories in mind yields categorizations that objectively agree with the rough impressions I had previously formed of these accounts. Though others are free to disagree, this indicates objectively at a first pass that moderation is being conducted moderately, i.e. with thought and attention rather than reflexively. While each person's conception of rules is different, I'm at least gratified that my own are not too different from those implemented, suggesting that refusal to follow the rules as stated is indeed a choice that can be disciplined, not a misunderstanding.

I propose that the community uses objective tests such as analyses like the above to make decisions about Not Feeding The Trolls. In particular, I said at Meta that two accounts, u/DresdenFirebomber and u/JosephGoebbel5 (in that order) are the first and second most likely to post large numbers of objectionable contributions at once, triggering the antiabuse filter when someone attempts to downvote conscientiously and thereby annulling the downvotes. I propose that, when a community member identifies another as a trolling account by some formal definition, one should not interact at all with such a person except for downvotes, and possibly rare attempts to wake the person up from troll behavior. (Note that even "troll" is not the best word, because dehumanizing, but it does have technical applicability.) I don't know whether paid shills are receiving anything for downvotes, so I can't comment on whether downvoting or ignoring is better.

I said I'd comment separately on appeals people have made about the reasons for mod actions. This survey doesn't cover that but I haven't seen anything untoward. I'll probably handle that by general public questions and comments in specific places rather than in a compiled report.

Other note to TINAE: We're probably ready for rotating stickies now, I find about 1-4 new stickies per day at a set check-in time, with unstickying after 2-4 days' time, are pretty good rules of thumb. This allows viewers of the main page to go directly to the best content and has no adverse effects (other than the mod getting accused of favoritism!).

Good choice. You're one of the sane ones here.

About time. Site admins are incredibly slow to do anything. Hopefully posts will actually be about conspiracies now with less spam and vote manipulation.

Lol imagine not blocking the forum sliders. I'm just glad that one idiot that thinks a person in congress got them banned from reddit finally stopped making new accounts to circumvent the blocks.

Congratulations! Please feel free to make an example of me for abusing the report function. Otherwise I'll wait for smoke to clear.

Well that was nice that we got to take a vote or whatever.

No topics in /meta or /conspiracies about this, that doesnt seem shady as fuck.

I rarely do any of my posting here anymore, what do I care, basically just the same couple individuals on multiple accounts spamming the feed, and I dont expect anything to change because you were never really involved in this community that I seen until recently.

Weird how people are sucking dick so hard to moderate a dead board.

On rules, 2025-11-11. Edits included.

Seeing as the community appears to prefer to build its consensus more irregularly I'll try this one by putting my thoughts out first and taking the heat rather than trying to formalize the order of discussion.

[Rule 0:] This is a forum for free thinking and for discussing issues which have captured your imagination. Please respect other views and opinions, and keep an open mind. Our goal is to create a fairer and more transparent world for a better future.

Rule 1: Be respectful. Attack the argument, not the person.

Rule 2: Don't abuse the report function.

Rule 3: No excessive, unnecessary and/or bullying "meta" posts.

[Rules 4-10:] Disclaimer: Submissions/comments of exceptionally low quality, trolling, stalking, spam, and those submissions/comments determined to be intentionally misleading, calls to violence and/or abuse of other users here, may all be removed at moderator's discretion.

[...]

1. [Also 0.] Respect seems to have a simple objective test of no personal attack or namecalling. I've found it helpful to permit indirect concern (if there's a known rapist then speaking indirectly about rapists at least allows the level of respect to keep it at arm's length from attack and namecalling) and to be hard-line about direct statement ("you're a rapist", "you destroy community"). [Recommendation: Start only with the most objective namecalling, i.e. slurs.]

2. Straightforward, unless mods lie about reports, for which there is no beneficial reason. Reports must be credible and not just an attempt to punish another (or even to start a dialogue, which should be started through modmail instead).

3. This literally says any post whatsoever that is not about conspiracies directly but is about the forum itself (and for the most part we don't have established "conspiracies about the forum" so I wouldn't encourage the blurring of that line) can be deleted immediately if viewed as bullying or unnecessary; so any meta post should be extra respectful and objectively justifiable. (I see that while writing this I'm speaking about some things with two levels of indirection by comparing them to racism; I think that's passable for a meta.) Further, even if that's the case it must not be excessive meta, such as a couple times a day, because why in a non-emergency would people need to make several meta posts in a day? [Recommendation: No meta actions for a published transition period, e.g. 3 days, during which more objective definition of meta contribs can be published.]

4. Very low quality can be deleted freely; this would suggest to me, for instance, the meme with very little graphic improvement and very little title interest, as it's unlikely to provoke new conversation.

5. Trolling is vague, but I define it as disruption, behavior that doesn't fall in another category but is clearly uninterested in pursuing the community goal (rule 0) of fairness and transparency. Focusing on another user's past elsewhere on the forum, for instance, is not a matter for Conspiracies mods but for mods of the community where the behavior occurred; focusing on the past of this forum would only be submitted as a request for specific action from the mods, because complaining without an action plan is basically borderline disruptive. [Recommendation: Limit to objective acts of disruption initially.]

6. Stalking refers to continuing to interact with a person after the person has clearly indicated a request not to interact in a first page.

7. Spam generally means unsolicited, and in the Content Policy it includes consistent promotion of outside websites or of agendas (I did discuss this with a contributor in another forum, he knows who he is, so I'm not saying something new). (When I arrived at Scored I found from core mods that it was okay for me to inconsistently promote the website that has the same name as my handle.) We might draw a line between theory and agenda as relating to facts versus propaganda. [Recommendation: No spam actions other than monitoring ordinary levels objectively, and then wait until a clear outlier appears. I don't believe it's spam to repeat context many times if the context remains applicable each new repetition, e.g., if there is no change in the behavior contextualized. I'm getting tons of free advertising of my side forums, for instance.]

8. Intentional misleading allows mods to judge insincerity via demonstrations of illogic. I usually try to state the illogic publicly before taking action to see if the person responds positively, as it may just be a lapse rather than an intent. [Recommendation: No illogic actions without a post on classic fallacies.]

9. Calls to violence are easily handled. [Recommendation: Start with direct and indirect reference to suicide and dehumanization. Advocacy for the historical NSDAP (as opposed to historical research) might be considered by some as a call to violence, use judgment case by case. Advocacy for nazism in general need not be judged as a call to violence without specifics. Abuse of this recommendation is likely to be resolveable by reference to other rules.]

10. Abuse of others, although already handled under disrespect (including attack and namecalling), also includes categories like gaslighting.

These are simplified suggestions and I'm open to wording improvements. I propose that a minimal, objective adherence to baselines similar to the above should be the initial post-backlog transition stance, with lenience toward more debatable activities. If this, or a new rules thread, can be used as a community discussion, that should be beneficial to all. Essential to the transition will be transparency and openness to appeal, without the community overwhelming those anticipations of the mod team. I'll be commenting separately at a later time about individual backlog cases where there has been some question. I have no official status so am merely sharing views I think helpful for the community like anyone else.

1-30-26

1. Conspiracies.win: This is a forum for free thinking and for discussing issues which have captured your imagination.

Since I have quite the delightful plentiful Imagination : (best as I can recall, I think I only posted once recently) which was zero'd by disrespectful people, so why bother participating here?

2. Please respect other views & opinions, & keep an open mind.

my post's Subject (view nor opinion) was Not received with an "open mind." <-- Do people in social media know what an "Open mind" is, & how an Open mind respectfully functions ?

3. Rule 1: Be respectful. Attack the argument, not the person.

Maybe other people also do Not come to "argue" let alone "senselessly", but simply to SHARE HELPFUL IDEAS <-- is this not the place for such ?

4. Rule 3: No excessive, unnecessary and/or bullying ...

Why is any "bullying allowed at all here ?

5. PSA

does that mean "Public Service Announcement" ?

6. Our goal is to create a --> fairer & more transparent world for a better future. <--

What kind of Transparent discussions will you Tinae allow? - for example : as God's children : human Longevity, & human Potential, & so forth...

7. If anyone has questions or concerns please feel free to air them here.

Surely Tinae you have Noticed that with 2000 miles of mostly the South & EAST coast of the USA, iow 13+ states

• Dis-connected from Electricity, &

• sub-Zero temps = Freezing people, &

• much of the nation prevented from Interacting... on 'social-media', the participation & Contribution numbers have obviously Decreased. - So, do you Agree that positive & constructive posted discussions should be Allowed to stay & Shared ?

8. I'm grateful for my friends in this community and greatly appreciate your support.

Do you regard me as 1 of your "friends" Tinae ?

9. No changes to the banner, logo or sidebar meme unless discussed, I'm quite fond of them, myself.

Banner, & Logo ? <--- that space/Line is 100% BLACK from here, Until clicked on the "mod & ban-LOG" where I Noticed that in only 7 hours you already logged 13 pages.... SO, considering the nations WEATHER-conditions, plus what is going on here, will this "conspiracy"-group even have any participation in the near future, say into March & beyond?

10. To prevent forum sliding (what is that?), ... we want order for understanding our theories (edit: and facts). Clarity is key

Unfortunately, the longer... I was outright Bullied & Lied about in the "christianity"-forum, ->the more UNclear<-- I became in participating... & ONLY 2 conditions kept me continuing at all:

1. JESUS his ❤️ perfect & eternal ⭐ Love, & because of GOD :

2. my child-like ⭐ Intimacy with Him ensuring my healthy self-esteem & self-confidence

Will you Tinae respect & encourage people like myself ?

Thank you for your kind responses.

This board will return to the graveyard from whence it came.