That's why we need moderators to handle that problem!
Wouldn't you like someone to take care of that, so you can speak your mind freely?
P.S.: Someone downvoted you, so in case you think that's me, I will upvote you, because I actually agree with your statement.
But we need mods to help us clear this place from the shills. Also 4-5 shills is an infested forum... Who tf is allowing this?
If you make a family gathering with 4-5 people, who already hate your guts and will do anything to demolish you, then your entire family will be dead... 4-5 shills is way too much. Someone has to do something, wouldn't you agree?
Be more active to select the mods, please. If you're not convinced that we need them in times that there is no moderation and many mods, then let me know - I will convince you that we need proper mods! And your vote counts - we need PROPER mods.
Please make the effort to make this place better. We all need it. And the shills don't like that... So two birds with one stone, imo.
People, who want to make this place better than it already is - that's who cares.
And also, people who are fed up with nothing being done against the shills/trolls... Just downvoting works for a time, but they make a new account, and how can you be safe from them?
And currently there isn't even a light moderation - there's no moderation... I asked you about what moderation you've seen so far, you don't reply to that... Aren't those wonderful communication skills?
And if you want to know "who cares" - it's me and other people, who actually have been here for quite some time to notice that this place is going down. Probably your 65 days in here are not enough to make you care, but someone does care.
Perfect post!
I imagined it somewhat like this, but you did it way better!
I am definitely interested in this discussion and would vote with two hands on new moderators coming and fixing this place!
I am also fine with having more mods than we actually need. Perhaps some won't be available all the time, people need to sleep and get to work... Perhaps a new person would be unexperienced in being a mod, but can present good motivation so he can be active and learning... Perhaps some of the new mods won't be correct in their judgement and the won't learn... Who knows?
But for a boat without a captain - no wind is favorable... So I prefer a lot mediocre mods, than no mods at all. Just FYI, some of the names in here I know from conversations and I can confirm they are the good guys, the real good guys that want to make this place better. I won't say who they are, so you can make your own judgement first, but if voting comes - I will.
Just checked again and we're not on trending!
What DA fuck!
Is UP...
With that!
....................
I didn't raise that topic but someone from the list provided by OP's post did! It's an actual cencerning matter! Someone is silencing us, or in other words - shadowbanning... This is what a mod should primarily focus on, imo.
We are losing new people from joining because we're shadowbanned.
And how do you know which is true and which one isn't?
What is this post aimed at anyway? That a lot of satan's powers focus mostly on Christianity? That literally proves that Christianity is correct in comparison to all other religions...
Where are the major ones? Jesuits, Masons, Rosicrucians?
It's ok, I prefer a longer proper reply than a rushed one. I can wait, no problem.
Whatever is your experience, I would like to hear more of it. And if I am wrong about my whole world, then I would appreciate your full details on your position.
I'm here to learn the truth, and it doesn't matter if I don't like the truth... It matters only how much of the truth is facts, and how much is theory.
And I have only a theory on psychedelics... It is based on records of other people's experience and the common pattern, but if you have something ground-breaking, I will always consider that.
Sorry that you grew up in atheist family. My family was vary... slightly Christian. But I grew up as an atheist and mocked atheists along the way. Afterwards I have seen that the evil people are satanists and they hate Jesus, so that led me to believe that Christianity is the way. I read some from the Bible and it shows that's the only prophecy book that exists currently. The only one that's correct. I kept digging and if you want to know the end of my research, I can give you some documentaries, so you can prove to yourself that Christianity is the only way out of this satanic madness.
I would expect your reply on this then.
Yes, good idea to add u/Graphenium on this. Thank you!
I did, thank you for sharing!
But why is this not connected to the previous topics? We should get this thing in one post, and if there are any updates, then write "UPDATE: on previous post"... etc.
Not personally to you, just organization-wise...
All that shows me is that you're afraid to take a stand because you don't understand the subject.
If you were a mod, then a user, who never posted in 4 years, is easy task. And you're not that person.
You have:
About SwampRangers 13114 post score
And you are willing to be equal to:
About free-will-of-choice 0 post score (in 4 years years, same as you)
How would you recognize a shill?
Is any confusing comment worthy to be here, just because you don't understand it?
If you're truly trying to help people understand something, why wouldn't you post ever?
And if you're too soft on shills, then why would anyone need you in a conspiracy forum? The shills will mock us, if you're the mod and allow this...
If you stay with your beliefs and allow mods like this, then there's no value in you being a mod, is there?
Our enemy are the shills. And if you can't think of ways to defend this community from them, then what is your real goal?
Why didn't you stay silent and posted nothing in 4 years? Then I would've believed you... But you didn't.
If you truly defend this user, then delete all your posts so your score comes to 0. Then we'll talk.
I bet you can't do it. And the reason you can't is why this user is a shill... How are you blind to this?
I don't understand what you mean.
We're being silenced and you just say "our appstore agreements that were made", as if this is fine...
Can you share more details on that?
And you're replying to me, not u/Graphenium.
I primarily mean real life, plus whatever things I do choose to take time to comment on in my history. I put out a lot about black holes in comments last week and will do so again, maybe in post(s), but logistics exist.
That's another point - if you're busy in real life, then that's not blocking you from raising the topic, it's only delaying your replies.
Henry Robert is famous because Robert's Rules are the standard for how groups of people decide matters with relative fairness. It's based on Parliament and is used with slight changes by Congress. The point is any version of it can be and has been gamed. So we might have a surface consensus achieved by declaration of deliberative results, but it's only as good as its circumspection, and in Conspiracies we don't begin by taking any view for granted. Surface consensus is fine in most cases, and might work here, but the discussions are already demonstrating anarchy coding and less than serious attempts at consensus deliberation.
Sorry, but I never heard of Henry Robert until you mentioned him - not a valuable person. His thoughts have proven worthless. We need someone better than Henry Robert's ideas to decide what is worth debating and what is not.
If a person is not working towards a consensus deliberation, a mod has the power to mute them for several days. Remember that.
We have a goal. And if someone is blocking us from getting that goal, then they get the rough treatment. We can't make everyone happy and we shouldn't. Do you know how many shills infest this place? Are you going to work to make all the shills happy too? You shouldn't. We must exclude some users, so the rest are safe! Now, how do we do that is really tricky. But you can't make an omelette without breaking some eggs, goes the banal saying...
My mod style and its detractors are well-known. I wouldn't jump into a community to change its existing style, and unfortunately this one now has lots of anarchic style well established. So it's essential that those users who remember what it's been and want to keep that under new moderation are able to demonstrate that to the whole group of contributors, which is usually done by rough consensus even if Robert is totally ignored. And in the American Revolution decisive action by 3% can drive the rest and overcome forum-sliding and solipsism that manifest in larger percentages; but they did it by establishing consensus in pubs and churches.
They also killed some people, so just be reminded of that.
If you're not ready to take a strong action against those, who seriously stop our progress, then what is your purpose exactly? I'm not saying that you must do it, but if you should, would you do it?
The new mod team would here have great risk of censoring viewpoints while attempting only to regulate disruptive behavior. The rules are briefly (0) platform rules, (1) respect, (2) no tool abuse, (3) no sliding. (Note to new mod: Those need to be rightly reflected in options available when someone reports, a very easy fix.) We could squeeze a lot of speech and logic regulation into "respect" but it would probably need elaboration before long; and if there's no rule about NSFW content it might be asked about before long too. I think that longer rules make it easier for moderation to be circumspect and transparent, but I wouldn't want to change them without input from the past mod logs and from the current community. This week several people have complained about the behavior of one Communities contributor or another, often suggesting moderation; many of these cases press that risk of censorship and, in a free-speech forum, also have the risk of ongoing meta deliberation that detracts from the work of Theorizing.
You can't make everyone happy.
If you had to ban permanently someone, can you do it? And under what circumstances?
A mod can ban someone permanently. If you can't do that yourself, for any reason whatsoever, then admit that. You're tiptoeing. That's not a mod's behavior.
Where do you draw the line? That's the real question here.
I did mean math. Arrow's impossibility theorem says, if there are at least three alternatives for voting, then there is no social welfare function satisfying all of three proposed conditions of rational choice, and was anticipated by Condorcet. History shows its application to politics; but that basically means that, anytime a self-structuring community arises with high truth-seeking focus, there are easy, asymmetrical ways to shove it off its focus, and so a critical mass of focus renewal is important for longterm stability. If people stay focused on truth then consensus is easy; conversely, in a mixed, open-contribution society, staying focused only arises by grace and is preserved by voluntary self-regulation, which is not easy. Voting is sus, well, everywhere, and in this country since its founding; we accept the numbers but they don't mean much, and many recognize that rough consensus is stronger than impassive manipulated vote totals.
You're really pushing me here... I told you not to trigger me with math... One theorem doesn't make you understand math... And how can you prove this theorem is correct? Because someone said it?
That's not how math works.
Judging things with historical records only proves that someone hasn't learnt from the fact that "victors write history"...
What is being manipulated in an open vote? We're not the government... I don't have paid shills to promote my position... It's nothing like an actual vote.
I understand your point, but it's not applicable in a forum vote that is not controlled by the government, for the most part.
So, one math application is, if we are beasts and humans, how do we as anons work out how to exclude the beasts? Mathematically, it's a giant game of Amogus and greater than 1/3 ratio of "beasts" can win the game. That requires strategy and not everyone brings strategy to the table (but the "beasts" can be counted on to be doing so).
I am actually surprised by this part. True.
So, do you think of us as less than the beasts that we can't defeat them? Quite the opposite, we know their tactics, they are easy to beat - https://conspiracies.win/p/17tegZSGDy/friendly-reminder-on-how-to-spot/c/
Do you actually fear if the beasts are more than you? That only makes our win feels greater.
I tell you again - you can't please everyone. If you aim for that, you will lose. And I don't want you to lose. I want you to fight for the ones that are worth the trouble!
If you didn't follow about collectivism, it'll become obvious in due time, it doesn't need to clutter up the meta threads. And I'm not trying to be oblique but to prioritize topics. More important is your hope of "crush these topics through a debate". It's great to have high hopes for deliberation to result in peace. You are here because you resolved not to underestimate the enemy, though? I might meme: "You hope because deliberation is good, I hope because deliberation cannot ultimately be effectively used for evil, we are not the same." I absolutely affirm the idea that the Truth (which I believe to be Christianity as God-revealed) will conquer; but we are in a place among many who have many skepticisms about Truth, and we benefit by that. The uniting banner of Conspiracy Theorists is not known to be Christianity (it might be on Mars Hill), and it can be Truth ("out there") but that needs to be commonly conceived and not just "Truthy".
Never said that I would force my opinion onto others. I only said that if anyone has different opinion, I would crush them with facts.
If you're a true Christian, then remind me - did Jesus stay silent when his religion was questioned?
I'm not making myself to be a good Christian... I'm probably the worst Christian that ever existed. But what's my point?
-
Don't ban people for speaking against Christianity.
-
Offer facts to convince them that Christianity is correct.
-
And that has nothing to do with being a mod. A mod has to be impartial even about religion. Even if the religion is correct. A mod must assess who is insulting and not hearing the other side. And if the so-called-Christian does it - mute him for several days. But if the other side does it, would you still mute them?
The redemption of a community from anarchy to order is a noble and involved quest!
And that is being done right now! We're on the front lines of solving this problem with anarchy. You can hide yourself or push for the solution.
I hope you push for the solution!
Ok, I will try to explain the difference:
Ego-death can lead to one of two possible outcomes:
-
Humility - helping other humans, who also fight their own ego occasionally. Being immune to insults, while trying to correctly see their own problem, so they know that insults don't work, and they might see a helping person instead of an insulting one. Works with very few, but works.
-
Being one with dirt and tree, which is not correct, imo. Dirt and tree do not have free will, you can't be the same value as them. You can be made from them, but so is the wooden whistle, and the wooden wheel, yet we use them for different purposes.
So our misunderstanding comes from what comes after the ego death. Is it humility? Or being one with everything around you?
I have investigated a lot of cases, where psychedelics lead to "oneness with all", not true humility. Christianity leads to true humility. And you are forbidden from taking any drugs to experience true Christianity. Do you see my point now? Both ways exclude the other from themselves... So only one is correct.
Let's transfer this in effort. How much effort does it take to digest a mushroom, or whatever... in comparison to true Christian ways? What is harder?
Wouldn't the harder thing made the best outcome? Or the easy one can also do it?
That being said, can you share what psychedelics you've used and what was the outcome? I am very interested in this topic, and I want to learn more. And please use as much details as possible, even if you think "I don't have to mention that" - every detail would help me understand more, so please share them!
It's a topic about contribution.
If a user cannot contribute with a post, but brings these nonsensical comments, then they should be out of here, until they learn to communicate properly and contribute.
If you're going to defend the most obvious AI chatbot in here, then I suggest you bring your big guns, because I'm definitely bringing mine.
It has one advantage, namely priority on saying and doing more important things (than e.g. black holes).
Compared to what? There are many discussions currently for this day alone. If you think your topic deserves a better insight - go post it. There are some posts that hold no real value currently, so you're definitely not doing anyone any good by not discussing it... That was my point - if you want something discussed - open a discussion about this.
But if I misunderstood your point, what do you prioritize currently that blocks a discussion about black holes, as you want those answers? I think we can focus on priorities while we also discuss non-priority matters, that's my view.
I don't know about Henry Robert... In the little info from wiki he wrote some manual about his own poor performance, and the discussion rose to a conflict... If that's what you meant, then you're probably focusing on the angry users, who spew nothing but insults...
As a mod, you will be able to mute them. That's the solution.
If they don't know how to reply, then you set the tone and lead by example. And if someone is making it into a conflict - give him a strike and a message to remind him of a potentially normal answer that he might've given, contrasting to the current insult-fest that was provided.
I can write more, but I might be wrong about this Henry Robert example you gave and my 2-minute research might be all wrong...
Please give me more information on this topic, so I can understand it and write an appropriate reply.
Speaking very specifically of that, math has proven that communities cannot make meaningful decisions with more than two options.
You meant "history", not "math". I'm kinda touchy on the subject of math but I know what you meant.
Even so, should we change our own ways to accomodate the beasts? Or should the beasts accomodate to us? For me, there is no question that we must set the bar, and whoever goes over it, that's the people we need.
If some users can't deal with a simple vote, then what are they even worth?
I'd suggest we first start with status quo (Wild West, no active mods) vs. change (by default, petition for a moderator). During that discussion, consensus may well develop on a list of names without a vote, but a second vote on particular names might help frame consensus. But votes in general are ... sus.
I'm not sure I understand you perfectly here... I don't see how votes are "sus"... We're not the government... We won't abuse the voting system... Or do I misunderstand you completely?
I'm losing track of how many people have suggested themselves for mod (and how many in jest), and part of the rejuvenation will almost certainly involve a very important related community question, namely acceptance or rejection or agnosticism toward collectivism (to speak in code). If my code is unclear, check c/Conspiracies/new to see if there's a majority theme that keeps recurring here that might not be at all aligned with c/Conspiracies/top?sort=all and get back to me.
I'm sorry, I tried what you said, but I couldn't figure it out. "Acceptance, or rejection, or agnosticism toward collectivism" is not our problem, in my opinion. We can crush those topics through a debate. And a mod should be impartial to those topics, just making sure that a respectful discussion exists and it's following the topic.
Sorry, if I didn't understand you... I couldn't crack the code... You can write a personal message to me, if you fear something in open communication like that... I checked everything you said, but I don't connect that to any belief or agnosticism. Personally, I believe in Jesus, but I would never mute someone for talking against him, rather I would demolish him with facts. That's my opinion, if I understand you correctly, and I'm not sure I do. Please write me a message, or personal message, without a code, so the dumbess that I am could get it clearly. Sorry, I know it's frustrating to send a message and the other one to never understand it, but it's frustrating to me as well to read something and not get it. I hope you understand.
Wow, I expected a bigger discussion on this, but it somehow turned some users to share things that have nothing to do with the post itself... Wtf is going on?
I would like some round table discussion posts, as some others would too probably. After Axeotl left, we don't have any unified discussion, not to my knowledge at least.
And what could be the policy for people, who never post in 4 years, but only comment nonsense, so the discussion is confused to the maximum? Isn't that strange for conspiracy-minded people to never post in 4 years? We have some trolls in here, and nobody is doing anything about it... That's my opinion.
I would appreciate active moderation in this place. I would be glad to cast my vote for the users, who show most promise, in my opinion.
Also, why are we shadowbanned from trending on the communities platform (I haven't figured that out myself, but another user raised that as a topic, and it's concerning...)
Definitely there should be someone, or several people, dealing with those issues.
has no relation to accidentally sending a message twice
Accidentally?
That's how you wrote 2 different messages... Accidentally?
Nobody existing in the world is that stupid to believe this...
Also, you dodge your own topic with insults, which shows that you can't defend your nonsense.
You can still hope that there is another universe, where you make sense and you're not a crying snowflake, but it's not this one, buddy! :D
P.S.: You were calling me a faggot previously... Why "dumbass" all of a sudden? But it's nice to see your range of communication, when you lose an argument... :D See you next time when I expose you as a fraud - again, and again. :D
We’ve all heard of “ego death”, (but probably, mostly as linked to psychedelic drugs) - the thought that when we let our ego die, Truth comes knocking to fill the void, the Truth that Jesus came to share with us, kind of ties together a few “seemingly disconnected” threads in a way that makes a lot of sense.
Well, I know this example from my research (never actually tried psychedelics myself) but what they feel is intense love towards nature and intense emotions that most commonly makes them cry.
I think that would be a new sense of purpose towards loving nature, not exactly "ego death". A girl talked about being very focused on hugging a specific tree, which practically is the whole religion of northern Indians (and by Indians, I mean "How, white man." not "do not redeem" Indians...)
In my theory, those drugs let a demon possess the person, so they feel intense feelings to worship trees. Just to be clear, that's 100% not what I meant. I meant simple humility.
Just want to be really clear on this because I researched psychedelics and I don't recommend them to anyone. One person shared with me that he felt that "he was chased by demons" - his own words... And he will never try those drugs again.
I saw this video in a compilation about Mel Gibson... He is also a Catholic, and when I say Catholic, I mean fkin Jesuit pawn...
I am upvoting this post just for visibility on Mel Gibson, so others know he's 100% not a Christian. But I honestly hate this video and Mel Gibson, because he swindled me for a time to believe him when he was against the jews... It keeps on confirming that Psalm 118:8 is still correct to the letter.
Wow, that's true.
There's no post from c/Conspiracy in there, but there are trending posts with 1 upvote (and just some comments).
Shadowbanned again... :D Clearly, the mods of communities.win work against us...
Nice catch!
That's a mighty Community Roundtable, if you ask me...
You managed to invoke the bright minds to think in a single direction! Commendable!
And you're not even a mod to enforce that...
================
To answer your question in short: The Bible is the True guide.
If any religion, or denomination is against the Bible, then it is wrong. For example, Catholicism is against the Bible, as they worship Mary... Why would anyone think the mother of Jesus is the one to answer prayers, while God and Jesus are confirmed to be the ones that answer prayer?
That, and more, in documentaries that prove it...
Bottom line, if we want to understand the True Word of God, we need to investigate it. After Jesus showed us the way, the appostles were the ones to debate whether we need to be circumcised or not... They chosed not... Do you know why?
Through a debate. Great minds united to figure out the truth even at the cost of their own ego... So that is the cost of truth - ego.
Oh, really?
You mistook the edit for reply and didn't notice it... Sure, sure...
Convince yourself of that, but not me, buddy.
You were defending your "multi-dimensional idea", yet you obviously don't do it now... So yeah, you're absolutely triggered.
Can you write more o's and l's next time you write Lololol?
You're not making any sense.
You forgot to defend your favorite child's book theory.
Yeah, you're triggered.
Mocking you with facts is the little entertainment I have in here. So please, keep going!
Any more insults?
You called me a faggot, but now you turn it to "dumbass" and use caps lock for greater effect that never comes... :D
You're spiteful, you're vicious, and you can't accept that you've lost an argument.
Would that make you a... what's the word...