1
SwampRangers 1 point ago +1 / -0

Oh, I missed this one, written before you asked me to stop talking to you again. If you want proof that I and Swamp Rangers are not manipulating votes, you'll need to state what kind of proof you accept, because due to admin's high respect for privacy there is hardly any way anyone can offer proof of that assertion except via character based on public statement. So I don't know how I would "prove" it to you. You're free to drop the question (and join me in beginning a ceasefire) or to press it.

1
SwampRangers 1 point ago +1 / -0

You asked the community a question, I answered as a contributor to the community who had relevant answers. If you think that answering a community question is a mark of campaigning for moderation, I'm not disabusing you at this time.

I offered you terms of ceasefire and perhaps you didn't have them by the time of your latest question to me about 20 minutes ago. If you want me to treat you as accepting the terms of ceasefire, I will seek to remember not to respond to you at all (presuming you don't interact with or talk about me). I have nothing to add to your "exposure".

1
SwampRangers 1 point ago +1 / -0

That actually remains as a success story because the poster repented after my counseling and proved his repentance by not repeating the behavior. At the time I left him the option of deleting the content or not; now that you are the first person ever to bring it up, I suppose that after 3 years of inactivity (while still maintaining social media offline) the user might not object to deletion, but it would be good for a community question. I'll be happy to get on it. Do you think that my listening to and talking with people who want to say bad things in the hearing of others so as to get them to stop doing so is a bad thing?

1
SwampRangers 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes, I am part of an organization. I don't have and am not part of "an organization that upvotes my posts and downvotes anyone disagreeing with me". That would be platform bannable and you're imagining things if you think otherwise.

1
SwampRangers 1 point ago +1 / -0

He wasn't a Nazi as u/DresdenFirebomber thinks, he was more of a gnostic or Marcionite category, he affirmed no Bible except something called "Gospel of the Holy Twelve". However, he's done more than the usual departing user who just deletes all his content (with the option of returning): he's also abandoned his forum and replaced it with a pun. I would infer he didn't want to face us anymore, it looks fully voluntary. He should be able to receive your DM. Perhaps he got tired of my pointing out all his rarefied esotericism was just bad Swedenborgian garbanzo dreams from Gideon Ouseley ca. 1900. If anyone doesn't know where to find the mirror of what's left of his contribs I'll tell you.

2
SwampRangers 2 points ago +2 / -0

Oh, right, for those conservatives who don't believe in swearing oaths you can take an affirmation instead, we're equal opportunity. I forgot you might be one of those. I did suggest to Scott we might want to change the oath but so far that hasn't happened.

1
SwampRangers 1 point ago +1 / -0

I don't have an organization that upvotes my posts and downvotes anyone disagreeing with me

I don't either. I do have my wife the Rangerette but she doesn't come on Conspiracies hardly at all.

If you're asking me to leave the forum, yeah, who was here first is one of the considerations people use. Like I said you could stop misrepresenting me and I wouldn't need to respond to you.

I made my organization sufficiently known when I first arrived with mod and admin permission. I did an external Q analysis and mentioned recruitment. Again, I have nothing to hide, I told you I had a few forums, if the subject of my accountability org doesn't come up it's not like I'm failing to acknowledge it. Yes, I suppose people should know more about it, but I didn't want to overdo it myself.

I don't promote the things I claimed names for just by claiming the names and allowing discussion. I didn't care about being a mod here except for about one or two days when you thought it was an incredibly good idea, before you turned on me. As soon as you stop trying to extricate yourself from that admission by all the dumping on me, I'll be out of your hair.

1
SwampRangers 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm moving on asking for enforcement when enforcement is actionable. If you're going to ask stupid questions I'm going to treat you like a person who is getting paid to ask stupid questions and starve you of responses.

1
SwampRangers 1 point ago +1 / -0

I didn't say he wasn't evil enough, you say that. I said you worship the man who killed Hitler.

1
SwampRangers 1 point ago +1 / -0

Which is why we should get along great.

3
SwampRangers 3 points ago +3 / -0

I don't have the member numbers right now. You can become a Ranger by qualifying, paying the membership fee at that page, and swearing the oath. Scott might allow membership by other routes via personal relationship. You can become a Swamp Friend by any show of support and by asking to be put on our Friends list. I don't mind helping you with reading comprehension on your own links.

2
SwampRangers 2 points ago +2 / -0

The two of us should get along better because we're both accused of spamming by a spammer. But then maybe I'm spamming you too because you are in a cult called Popular Christianity that separated itself from Christianity. If you wanted to be a real Christian you could still reserve hyperdulia for Hitler, it's just that Jesus has this exclusivity thing that he insists on and that you don't seem interested in.

1
SwampRangers 1 point ago +1 / -0

There's nothing wrong with opening a forum for discussing all views about satanism. I'm glad you are giving me such exposure to explain this so many times so that it's clear to everyone but you.

3
SwampRangers 3 points ago +3 / -0

Rangers are the ones removing Swamp Creatures and parasites. Why don't you leave this wild-west forum?, I was here first. Or perhaps you could stop talking negatively about me, then I'd shut up and go back about my business of posting conspiracies.

3
SwampRangers 3 points ago +3 / -0

As your post shows, if you want to become an active Swamp Ranger you will have the right to nominate candidates for listing as Swamp Creatures with evidence, which leads to focus on their removal from positions of power. We've never had a call from a Ranger to list another Ranger, which would be silly.

1
SwampRangers 1 point ago +1 / -0

No other moderators ever stepped forward in four years for any of those names. Partly because they were afraid of me. Here is my initial strategy statement again. You are free to judge me wrongly (opinion) but I do contextualize you when you infer my state of mind wrongly (facts).

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›