You’d think if that were the case you would have made atleast one post in the last two years on one of these subjects
You asked if your account is sketchy. On the line of accounts from
Proven shills - vote manipulation alts - reactivated sleeper accounts - lurkers - users who don’t post frequently - frequent posters - community builders
It’s pretty obvious where you fall, isn’t it?
I mean, what did you think the answer should be? “No, your reactivated sleeper account isn’t at all suspicious? Please tell us what we should think?”
LMFAO! dude he put green paint on top of a Google image of the vatican
I thought that post was fucking HILARIOUS(ly garbage-lot like flat earth in that respect I guess)
Now do “slippery slope fallacy”
You’ve made zero posts to this community in the year+ you’ve have an account. Why all the sudden interest in what gets posted or removed?
Is that statement wrong though?
Is it evidence or even an argument for the flat earth?
Oh, so flat eartherism is clearly delineable from those other conspiracies as being baseless.
Glad we agree.
Why start your paragraph with “to be fair” though? And why did you end it with a reference to the graviton? Not sure I follow
What, no response champ?
It does - however, personally, after my decade plus in the “community” allowing people who are wannabe priests of the cult of FE (note - NOT the honest, but misinformed seekers you describe) free reign results in more of those “lost souls” you mention turning away, never to return.
Is that at least plausible to you? That people could be turned off of the community because of the (undue, artificial, astroturfed even) prominence of certain voices?
Since when has censorship been anything but bad?
Since bad actors realized that people’s reflexive desire for the nebulous and undefined concept of “freedom” (“as long as it’s LEGAL!”) is a potent tool for muddying the waters of honest, good faith pursuit of truth.
So, uhhh, a while back now.
All that can be expressed, and in a far more intelligent, cohesive, and non-schitzophrenic manner by discussing, for example, Gödel’s proof of the incompleteness of any symbolic logic system.
Or by crafting a well made post on philosophy and world view, perhaps with a focus on alethiology and the pursuit of truth.
It doesnt require fabricating a metric fuckton of fake “proofs” and misinterpreted “evidence”, which is a fundamental prerequisite of FE, or “birds aren’t real” or any of the other goto forum slides out there.
ApparentlyImAHeretic 6 points 2 hours ago in my opinion this is the best arguments for banning flat earth for sure. I don't believe it's origins are sincere in the least. nevertheless I have had the misfortune of meeting real people in the wild who actually believe it.
Try to finish reading before you shit yourself and start smearing it everywhere dipshit
Wait, you’re calling the noticing of astroturfing and widespread subversion/manipulation which was literally admin endorsed “boogey men”? As if it wasn’t actually a problem?
Lmao
That guy has a better track record as a contributor than you, yet you accuse him of being a shill. Ergo you’re either a fucking retard or a shill yourself. Neither of those lend themselves to productive contributions
You mean... the site we all left because it was bursting at the seams with inauthentic “movements” and astroturfing from fake accounts?
Shut up, if you aren’t a shill all you’re doing is undermining the point of actual subversion by accusing everyone who disagrees with you.
Every single FE “proof” you could ever point to was debunked over a decade ago. Elsewhere.
There is no conspiracy.
The Great Pyramid is a scale model of the Northern Hemisphere
Maybe the goal isn’t some nebulous and undefinable “freedom” but instead fostering a place where generative, productive discussions can occur
/> user has never made a post on c/conspiracies
Fuck I need to start checking that before I respond.
Ehhhh - we all left r*ddit for, among other things, their carebear censorship policies (but I don’t think any of us left because of how Flat Earth was treated there) so I kind of feel we need some leniency on stuff like ending your sentence with “what are you, retarded”. Maybe I’m wrong on that.
But what I can see making sense is the removal (on a gradient obviously) of “one issue posters” - they do fly in the face of the principle of genuine good faith discussion.
I think I’ve seen you on KiA, so i mean someone like imp coming here and only posting his crazy shit about {women} being behind everything wrong with the world. Same for the people who blame their stubbed toe on the bankers, same for the people who derail conversations by trying to shoehorn FE into every single comment they make.
So to combine our points - if someone’s only contribution was derision and derailment, I think they’d do well with some kind of (community? Meta posts? Private? idk) talking to, moving up if they keep things up
But I agree, the approach of “should we ban this topic” seems to have had so many “potential“ drawbacks attached that the core matter got glossed over for a discussion on freedom of speech. However like 800 comments in the vote thread and easily another 200 across other threads shows these are important issues for many/all of us
Their opinion matters less than people actively trying to build the site and the community
It’s so obvious now! How could we “skeptics” and “non-mongoloids” have been so dumb!
Wahoo guys!!!! Bid, I mean Flerlf got 80 million votes!
What we should be doing is endeavoring to ban all bad faith discussion, which is a lot more difficult for sure.
Any ideas/suggestions?
Lots of “no”s - very few “here’s what could work instead”
mUh 6 bRaZiLiAn