Twitter would never have told him why, or how to stop violating the rule, or how to get off of it, or consistently approached him, or communicated with him in the modmail.
Wait, so you don't delete the comment; he has to do it? Normal site mods just delete rule breaking content and then ban the guy. Twitter hides your comment (effectively deletes it), then makes you delete it to get your account back in some sort of bizarre self-flagellation ritual.
You're right that they don't give you any information, though, nor do they respond to appeals.
I can't delete the comment, just remove it from being visible.
I don't think I've ever had the power to delete comments. I'm not a site mod.
Deleting the original comment, or altering the comment so that it is not offending the rule, ends the the ban and gets the comment approved. He's free to work with me to find out how to phrase it so it doesn't violate the rules.
For claiming that women, as a group, seek to end men's human rights. This goes into the point about an entire demographic operating as a collective cabal, and acting in a morally repugnant way, because they are asserted to be fundamentally morally inferior.
A bad one. And one that requires a belief in a basic principle that some words must not be allowed voice. That idea is wrong. All evil must be allowed voice, that it may be confronted, that its flaws may be enumerated, and the person advocating it known and (if possible) corrected. To not do this is allows evil to fester. Even if the intentions of your actions are good, the result is not. Exposure and vigilance are the only defense. Silencing weakens each of our abilities to call out bullshit. We need to hone that ability. We need the practice.
Plus, power corrupts. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Again, exposure and vigilance are the only defense.
The issue at hand on Reddit was that there was nowhere to voice specific viewpoints. The issue here, frankly, isn't even the viewpoints. It's the active measures that certain political groups take in order to intentionally balkanize a forum, squat in it, and turn it into a very specific, politically aligned, territory. The social aggression that results from their ideological possession makes certain places totally unapproachable to many people, especially when the barrier to entry into those places is zero.
This forum is borderless. There's barely any way to manage exclusivity. So, how do you gatekeep a place that has no borders? Especially from subversive, Leftist, elements that would be happy to fucking inhabit your space for their own political purposes, and then fucking destroy it by making it a worthless, hollow, shell? Social stigma is effectively the only mechanism. This is an effort of subversion.
Well, how do you counter subversion? You have to undercut the specific rhetorical devices of subversion, along with the social weaponry of the subversives. One of the most important rhetorical weapons of subversion is resentment mongering and sectarian rivalry. If you can get people to be resentful of some sect, especially if you can draw a friend-enemy distinction between your sect and another, you can balkanize the population.
The feelings of fear, anger, and resentment produce viral memes (literal scientific term), which will consolidate people into your sect, and destabilize the larger structure. Thus the structure will have been subverted into smaller, and more controllable, political blocs.
One of the easiest ways to do this, is to target immutable characteristics, and then assign the friend-enemy distinction. Due to immutability, you can declare the rival group fundamentally inhuman and you can attack it at will, deny their right to object, and permanently hold them as a lighting rod for any issue you have coming forward. Everyone else that is part of your chosen immutable characteristic can be pressured to feeling affinity towards you and your polarization. This is where the application of social stigma becomes important. You can use social pressure to push conformity into both groups in order to consolidate your own power over the sect you've created with resentment and vitriol. The worse of a shit-heel you are, the more effective it is because your antagonism is quickly replicated in everyone you interact with.
Imagine, if you will, if this sub was filled with people who told you to kill yourself because your username began with a vowel. They call themselves: The Consonant Crew. It's not one or two people. It's dozens of people, everyday they tell you to kill yourself. They make posts about why 'vowelists' are an inherently evil and deserve death for their crimes against humanity. Every objection is rebuffed not with arguments, but demands for suicide. This is everything they do, every day, non-stop. They will look at the name of every person who's written anything. They will construct elaborate narratives that have their own memes, that express why vowelists are sub-human and a threat to all civilization. Every objection or refutation is dismissed. Anti-vowelism is the only thing that is brought up in every thread, in every comment section, and makes up the majority of posts. And again, you can expect most of your comments to encourage you to kill yourself.
Now, sure, you can just say that you have a tough skin. But at some point, it just isn't fucking worth it to engage with a population of people being so openly hostile to you. Worse, that does nothing but support exactly what the subversives are trying to do. Because there is no exclusivity, there is no boundary, there's also nothing to keep you. You have no sunken cost, no real investment into the community. So why even take the minimal effort to return? Boom: subversion successful.
So, what mechanisms and tools do I have at my disposal to counter such subversion? Well, two fold: either restriction on animosity, or restriction on sectarianism. Neither is perfect, and certainly hammering on either to an extreme is nonsensical. Either I have to keep subversives from attacking you directly and telling you to kill yourself, or I have to remove 'vowelism' as an area of discussion because it's nothing more than a front for balkanism, rather than a genuine discussion topic.
This is how I got to violent speech, and identity attacks. Both of these two weapons are the most common mechanisms of subversives in this place. The violent speech can promote severe antagonism among users (and outside of users is a common trick of glowies). The identity attacks, as in declaring a demographic to be innately morally inferior is another tactic that promotes creating a friend-enemy distinction within the forum, and promotes ideological possession.
It is very common for the identitarians to squat in a place and engage in vitriol until a place is effectively ideologically captive and homogeneous. This is basically what happened to Consume Product. ConPro doesn't need to be explicitly White Nationalist or National Socialist. There's really no reason for that, but it very much is. And so many people find the very essence of that to be repugnant that it self-isolates. This happens repeatedly.
Now, the thing for Impy is that he already has his own subs that are explicitly anti-woman, so none of this really harms his efforts. However, his actions are fundamentally subversive. There's not that many women here (there's a couple), and thankfully his ideological possession has been more off-putting than attractive because he's far too zealous. But drawing the line on declaring an entire demographic to be an inherent enemy needs to be a line in the sand to prevent balkanization within the forum, particularly when it is a common rallying point for so many different varieties of subversives at the same time.
I hope I explained my thoughts well enough on that.
I miss him like I miss those "work from home and make over $300 a day!" Spambots. They were annoying but in the end you get used to them and expect them just to be there.
Since I can't say it to him, but I have a feeling he's probably following your posts...
Stay the course, Imp.
If it's objectionable enough to ban, mods can remove the post themselves. At which point it is gone, so the "option" is gone too. If it isn't objectionable enough to remove by force via mods immediately, it isn't objectionable enough to warrant a ban.
He could have removed the comment at any time, he still can. I told him so.
self-censor like a good boy or else!!!
Faggot
Twitter would never have told him why, or how to stop violating the rule, or how to get off of it, or consistently approached him, or communicated with him in the modmail.
Wait, so you don't delete the comment; he has to do it? Normal site mods just delete rule breaking content and then ban the guy. Twitter hides your comment (effectively deletes it), then makes you delete it to get your account back in some sort of bizarre self-flagellation ritual.
You're right that they don't give you any information, though, nor do they respond to appeals.
I can't delete the comment, just remove it from being visible.
I don't think I've ever had the power to delete comments. I'm not a site mod.
Deleting the original comment, or altering the comment so that it is not offending the rule, ends the the ban and gets the comment approved. He's free to work with me to find out how to phrase it so it doesn't violate the rules.
IT'S TOO LATE NOW
The comment? I'm shocked it's not his entire history.
Comment history determines length of ban. Not the cause of it.
You banned my best buddy? Why?
For claiming that women, as a group, seek to end men's human rights. This goes into the point about an entire demographic operating as a collective cabal, and acting in a morally repugnant way, because they are asserted to be fundamentally morally inferior.
I respect him more for waiting out the ban than I do you for enforcing such bullshit.
I know there's no malice behind your ban; just calling it like I see it. Censorship isn't a principle I can stand behind.
It's not a principle. It's a boundary.
A bad one. And one that requires a belief in a basic principle that some words must not be allowed voice. That idea is wrong. All evil must be allowed voice, that it may be confronted, that its flaws may be enumerated, and the person advocating it known and (if possible) corrected. To not do this is allows evil to fester. Even if the intentions of your actions are good, the result is not. Exposure and vigilance are the only defense. Silencing weakens each of our abilities to call out bullshit. We need to hone that ability. We need the practice.
Plus, power corrupts. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Again, exposure and vigilance are the only defense.
The issue at hand on Reddit was that there was nowhere to voice specific viewpoints. The issue here, frankly, isn't even the viewpoints. It's the active measures that certain political groups take in order to intentionally balkanize a forum, squat in it, and turn it into a very specific, politically aligned, territory. The social aggression that results from their ideological possession makes certain places totally unapproachable to many people, especially when the barrier to entry into those places is zero.
This forum is borderless. There's barely any way to manage exclusivity. So, how do you gatekeep a place that has no borders? Especially from subversive, Leftist, elements that would be happy to fucking inhabit your space for their own political purposes, and then fucking destroy it by making it a worthless, hollow, shell? Social stigma is effectively the only mechanism. This is an effort of subversion.
Well, how do you counter subversion? You have to undercut the specific rhetorical devices of subversion, along with the social weaponry of the subversives. One of the most important rhetorical weapons of subversion is resentment mongering and sectarian rivalry. If you can get people to be resentful of some sect, especially if you can draw a friend-enemy distinction between your sect and another, you can balkanize the population.
The feelings of fear, anger, and resentment produce viral memes (literal scientific term), which will consolidate people into your sect, and destabilize the larger structure. Thus the structure will have been subverted into smaller, and more controllable, political blocs.
One of the easiest ways to do this, is to target immutable characteristics, and then assign the friend-enemy distinction. Due to immutability, you can declare the rival group fundamentally inhuman and you can attack it at will, deny their right to object, and permanently hold them as a lighting rod for any issue you have coming forward. Everyone else that is part of your chosen immutable characteristic can be pressured to feeling affinity towards you and your polarization. This is where the application of social stigma becomes important. You can use social pressure to push conformity into both groups in order to consolidate your own power over the sect you've created with resentment and vitriol. The worse of a shit-heel you are, the more effective it is because your antagonism is quickly replicated in everyone you interact with.
Imagine, if you will, if this sub was filled with people who told you to kill yourself because your username began with a vowel. They call themselves: The Consonant Crew. It's not one or two people. It's dozens of people, everyday they tell you to kill yourself. They make posts about why 'vowelists' are an inherently evil and deserve death for their crimes against humanity. Every objection is rebuffed not with arguments, but demands for suicide. This is everything they do, every day, non-stop. They will look at the name of every person who's written anything. They will construct elaborate narratives that have their own memes, that express why vowelists are sub-human and a threat to all civilization. Every objection or refutation is dismissed. Anti-vowelism is the only thing that is brought up in every thread, in every comment section, and makes up the majority of posts. And again, you can expect most of your comments to encourage you to kill yourself.
Now, sure, you can just say that you have a tough skin. But at some point, it just isn't fucking worth it to engage with a population of people being so openly hostile to you. Worse, that does nothing but support exactly what the subversives are trying to do. Because there is no exclusivity, there is no boundary, there's also nothing to keep you. You have no sunken cost, no real investment into the community. So why even take the minimal effort to return? Boom: subversion successful.
So, what mechanisms and tools do I have at my disposal to counter such subversion? Well, two fold: either restriction on animosity, or restriction on sectarianism. Neither is perfect, and certainly hammering on either to an extreme is nonsensical. Either I have to keep subversives from attacking you directly and telling you to kill yourself, or I have to remove 'vowelism' as an area of discussion because it's nothing more than a front for balkanism, rather than a genuine discussion topic.
This is how I got to violent speech, and identity attacks. Both of these two weapons are the most common mechanisms of subversives in this place. The violent speech can promote severe antagonism among users (and outside of users is a common trick of glowies). The identity attacks, as in declaring a demographic to be innately morally inferior is another tactic that promotes creating a friend-enemy distinction within the forum, and promotes ideological possession.
It is very common for the identitarians to squat in a place and engage in vitriol until a place is effectively ideologically captive and homogeneous. This is basically what happened to Consume Product. ConPro doesn't need to be explicitly White Nationalist or National Socialist. There's really no reason for that, but it very much is. And so many people find the very essence of that to be repugnant that it self-isolates. This happens repeatedly.
Now, the thing for Impy is that he already has his own subs that are explicitly anti-woman, so none of this really harms his efforts. However, his actions are fundamentally subversive. There's not that many women here (there's a couple), and thankfully his ideological possession has been more off-putting than attractive because he's far too zealous. But drawing the line on declaring an entire demographic to be an inherent enemy needs to be a line in the sand to prevent balkanization within the forum, particularly when it is a common rallying point for so many different varieties of subversives at the same time.
I hope I explained my thoughts well enough on that.
I miss him like I miss those "work from home and make over $300 a day!" Spambots. They were annoying but in the end you get used to them and expect them just to be there.
nobody wants these faggot rules you made up.
Since I can't say it to him, but I have a feeling he's probably following your posts...
Stay the course, Imp.
If it's objectionable enough to ban, mods can remove the post themselves. At which point it is gone, so the "option" is gone too. If it isn't objectionable enough to remove by force via mods immediately, it isn't objectionable enough to warrant a ban.
I removed it already, but that doesn't mean he can't delete it.
Fuck you.
Comment Reported for: Rule 12 - Falsehoods
Go ahead and ask him.