From the sidebar:
Conspiracies.win: 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.
Community Rules: <click this link for a detailed explanation of the rules
(Rule 1: Be respectful. Attack the argument, not the person.
Rule 2: Don't abuse the report function.
Last updated 2 years ago by clemaneuverers)
Rule 1: Be respectful. Attack the argument, not the person.
⭐ Rule 1 means we can have conversations and disagreements and even suspicions without using derogatory (disrespectful) language. This also means that we can say some people in some people groups are bad but we recognize that not every one of any people group are all the same.
Rule 2: Don't abuse the report function.
⭐ Rule 2 means to use the report function for violations but not to overuse it for petty reasons.
Rule 3: No excessive, unnecessary and/or bullying "meta" posts.
⭐ Rule 3 means not to repeatedly post about other users and bully them but we might have to go total no meta posts because it is easily abused.
To prevent SPAM, posts from accounts younger than 4 days old, and/or with <50 points, wont appear in the feed until approved by a mod.
⭐ This means new accounts are unable to post until they have a comment score or a post score (from somewhere else) of 50 points. And you can use mod mail to ask the mod to look into it and approve.
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.
⭐ This means constant low effort posting with no conspiracy theory or fact will be deleted.
Submission statements are making a come back. It also means we are not tolerating calls to violence (death wishing) and verbal abuse or harassment.
And a reminder that resorting to ad hominem (along with all fallacies) often makes one look emoti(o)nal, desperate and out of actual answers or rebuttals, in other words, you've lost, at least keep your dignity and integrity and try again another time having hopefully learned something.
Spam is often a generalized term and there are differences to me regarding spam from bots and spam from humans, spam bots will immediately be removed and permabanned. For human spam I would consider that being repeating/parroted speech and mass posting in a short amount of time, which will be assumed as forum sliding. Those posts will be removed and the poster will be asked to stop, if it persists there will be reasonable ban action and hopes the behaviour stops.
These have been the same rules since the community's inception and it has been over a year since they were enforced so we've all gotten a little flabby and now we are shaping back up.
Please let me know if any of this is unclear or if any terminology needs to be defined.
You're confounding trolling with a regular post and using that to justify editorializing if content which is a nice way to say censorship.
At the very least a new rule should be made about editorializing so people can discuss that.
On a side note rules should be simple and not all encompassing so to eliminate ambiguous decisions.
PS: from now on autocorrect shall be known as autopajeetizer.
REMOVED FOR WRONGSPEAK!!!
REMOVED FOR WRONGTHINK!!!
Opinions, theories or facts can be included in a submission statement. Rage baiting posts are trolling.
Even something that seems to be on the surface rage baiting has an underlying conspiracy behind. Specially nowadays when some individuals conspicuously hide their machinat behind false dichotomies and rage bating. Censorship is never the answer. Conspiracies is mainly a brainstorming tool to fund the truth.
Then I suggest those theories or facts are briefly summarized and up for discussion and not rapid fire 'pilling'. Clarity is key to understanding.
First of all thanks for downvoting. Secondly, editorializing limits the scope of discussion thus defeating brainstorming as a tool.
I haven't downvoted you.
I don't think a short explanation of something you post defeats brainstorming, I believe in the power of our brains to think for ourselves.
Sure. Then you don't know how brainstorming works.
I do know actually and submitting a statement of your view isn't that.
Chiming users that have expressed interest in rule structure:
If I have missed someone please let me know.
u/Dps1879
u/guywholikesDjtof2024
u/JosephGoebbel5
u/RealWildRanter
u/Redsky
u/SwampRangers
u/TallestSkil
u/Theunpopular1
u/2rainbows
u/Vlad_The_Impaler
Buzz Buzz! Honeypot alert!
Who controls Scored? Why does it stay online despite the content on it? Why does admin drag its feet to kick off pedophiles while cracking down hard on perceived anti-semitism?
What's this about some kind of Goldberg law firm and a Charles Cassis? Something about pdw tied into a Patriots LLC? u/JosephGoebbel5, what kind of stuff did you find out?
u/Dps1879
u/guywholikesDjtof2024
u/JosephGoebbel5
u/RealWildRanter
u/Redsky
u/SwampRangers
u/TallestSkil
u/Theunpopular1
u/2rainbows
u/Vlad_The_Impaler
Don't know. I presume it's some conservatives who want to continue r/TheDonald energy but don't have an immediate new upbump for it after J6 and are investing millions in speculating that another takeoff will occur. I believe the "no racism" rule was already present at Reddit, so even if it plays into Jewish hands it wasn't original with this admin.
You know who they are... Admin alt.
No, I'm just a guy who came here after J6 representing SwampRangers.com, being a volunteer for Scott Lively. By God's grace I obtained a nice modship by being in the right place at the right time, and have had the same kind of contact with admins as anyone. What I said is my best guess based on everything I've seen revealed here. I appreciate your attributing me with being an admin alt, but they are just as mysterious with me as with anyone. Doggos reported that there are 4 owners with 24% and one with 4% to break ties, and I believe that, but I don't know who any of them are, and they were all well settled long before I approached this site to share the Swamp Rangers goals in 2021. What you've already posted is pretty well the extent of what I've seen, I couldn't add to what you've already seen.
Are you a lawyer too?
IANAL for all intents and purposes. However, I interpret the law as a sovereign human. But that's not legal advice. Pleased to meet you.
*There are 2 more users I will include after their short ban
Dox on, oh noble one!
We should be able to vote on if a "violating" comment should stay. If 3 people (or the majority of people) comment "YES" then the comment stays. If they comment NO, it gets removed.
Theyre all the same a.i.
🤣 that's funny
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DUBjgf1jVgk/
what
I'll take that as a compliment.
Big no to the 50 points thing. That has never been needed nor will be. Make it 0 again. Nobody wants a Reddit karma limit. You might even drive people away and kill the board.
This is a thought I haven't settled yet.
No, the filter needs to stay or else the pedo pajeet comes back
Yeah, probably. I do worry about new user difficulties tho.
Just check the queue now and then, their posts aren’t deleted just held for review. Not like “new users” is a problem communities.win suffers from anyways lmao
True, for now, I still have hope for revival.
But it is better to have the limit check in place, I'll try to get guy to understand.
Oof, good luck with that. Maybe start simple with shapes or colors or something.
Pucker up beta boi 😆
What a simp 🤣
😂
We can just use pedo the other word is a flaggable derogatory slur. I hope to not have to make a thread of what are derogation slurs and how they are flagged on the internet..
In a perfect world all the name calling would stop all together but I'm having to pick battles carefully.
Language policing titles of posts is one thing, and can be justified, but you’re only going to make your job impossible if you’re going to try to prevent people from saying words like “pajeet” in the comments, much less in the comments of posts that got deleted days ago
As you say, “pick your battles” is the wise approach here
If it's just posts and not comments that's hypocrisy tho. These terms are legitimately flagged perhaps I'll have to make a post about the conspiracy.
Language I'm unable to police would be words like retard, psycho, schizo, those are technical terms of brain damage or affliction.
N;gger and k;ke and cun7 (edit:holy fucking lmao) are all technical terms too
No, that’s called “picking your battles wisely”. Like the guys name is literally “the pedo pajeet”. You are physically incapable of convincing people to call that guy anything else. I strongly recommend you pick any other hill than this. We’re all grownups here. This isn’t the fagbag pRedditor hugbox nor the Facebook tranny safe space. This is the forum for all the people who got banned from those other ones.
The c word is technically correct it just sounds really improper to me..
The other ones are derogatory slang which are actively being flagged on the internet and also being used to discount actual truth sifters.
I'm really asking you to edit those first two slurs. I know it seems like a lot to overcome but the other mods did it and were successful.
What's the matter, afraid of a little woman are ya? 😉
Odd coming from the guy who still hasn’t posted - what part of my replies makes you say that?
I have more posts here than you do beta boi 😎
Open-mindedness is then the honor code.
Disrespect, collectivism: I'll reserve the right to report those gradually to the level I think fitting. Disrespect includes ad hominem, collectivism includes all dehumanizations.
Misuse: The logs will show if a particular user is getting overreported and people can then inquire if report misuse has occurred.
Hypermeta, low-quality, disruption, stalking, spam, misleading: Speak for themselves.
Violence: I'm glad people are steering clear of that.
Harassment: This one is loosely defined and abusable because anyone can report "feeling harassed". I presume this is limited to objective categories like gaslighting, excessive sarcasm, or illogic.
I'd suggest that briefly stated subcategories of rules, such as the one-word summaries above or the margin text, be added to the report function (using the Manage Rules page, aka /config/reports). The disclaimer should be broken into several report categories rather than left a single category. Currently you can only report for site rules or rule 1.
These are the report options I see available: https://files.catbox.moe/51s8qs.jpg
Right. Using the "Manage Rules" tool in the toolbox will allow you to add to the list that appears when you click the first category there (local rules). If you don't see that tool, pester admin to give you access!
Fixed! Thanks
Downvoters
Boards been dead buddy. Less than a dozen meatspace humans actually use this site and that's being generous.
Oh, come on. There’s at least 3 dozen, like genders.
Reads like copium. Everyone wants to believe everyone else is a bot.
This is all fucking strange as hell. OP gets appointed as mod without any consent or say from the regular members here and now they are going to pretend like they arent going to cherry pick rules for their own agenda and that we have a say now. Lol who the fuck are these people trying to fool. Judging by the mod logs there is already an attempt to paint the narrative. Why are we seeing so many removed comments from members who have been here for years. Funny how some of the only people not bitching are the recent ones who have been just posting the same hate spam day in and day out.
I went to check out said it, had been a few weeks. The site died at some point, fuck.
Come to my c/evidencefencingvs and we can have all sorts of exchanges. I am a big fan of free speech. You won't be censored there.
I'm cleaning up death wishing, derogation, and some platform misuse, a lot is being ignored and there is a very long back log. What specifically is your issue? I'm following the same moderation style we had before this last year.
And you're destroying quality along with it. If a comment is more good then bad (like 60% good or more), then leave it alone. You are throwing out so many babies with the bathwater.
I've asked for edits and have deleted what was ignored. Some people are reasonable and some aren't, not my fault.
So my advice still stands. Please do take it.