He does do his best to follow the rules and not be too obnoxious, which is why I have always gone easy on him (in context of moderation). Unfortunately, his best is not very good.
Sometimes you simply have to invoke the "go away you stupid piece of shit" clause even if someone is technically following the rules as they're written but not responding to negative feedback like a normal person.
Users have every right to say that, but moderators do not - and certainly not to enforce it. The whole point of places like this is to allow unpopular views to be heard, even if they annoy other users.
Now, if someone is actively spamming every thread and generally being a nuisance, it's something else - but that should be content-neutral. It shouldn't matter if his position is "puppies are cute" or "women are bad" or "Ivermectin cures Covid".
Such idiocy is found everywhere. There was a longtime user of KiA2 who left the subreddit because I, not as moderator but as a user, said that Russia was in the right.
Moderators absolutely do, and should, simply click the I Win when it's clear you're dealing with a pathological little shithead who isn't affected by the normal immune system that communities have. If they can't be trusted to do that in incredibly obvious cases then you need somebody else to have the button, if your community has too many shit for brains libertarians to understand that then they deserve what they get.
I mean, you just listed a bunch of vague descriptors that would describe 90% of the community here if you asked someone who didn't like us about it.
KIA1 mods said that anyone who criticized moderation was a pathological little shithead just trying to stir trouble. I certainly wouldn't give them an out to just ban any criticism.
One of the purposes of hard defined rules with little wriggle room is to deny them real authority even if they manage to weasel into moderator positions.
He's not doing any harm to the community though. If he were, I'd agree with you that at least he has to be slapped down - because the first rule of anything is self-preservation.
Yeah that's far too simpy for my taste. I get that Imp isn't everyone's cup of tea, and his willingness to defend trannies is his worst quality. But there's way too much white knighting for women going on over there, even if the women in question are conservative. Any man who's been in family court knows how quick that shit changes when the prospect of enslaving someone that they've ceased to see as human presents itself. There's a few implicit swipes at MGTOW in there as well, which is retarded if you actually care about making marriage a viable prospect for men again.
Imp was never really wrong in a lot of the broad strokes he talks about, he just takes it well past the point of sanity and then loses everyone. The same way ranting about the Feds doing acts of unconstitutional evil actually does happen, but probably not to the homeless man on the street talking about the microchip.
Ironically, his biggest problem is that he himself is an addict. He is so high off the dopamine rushes he gets for being "right" (its why he always makes sure to post when he was right by predicting obvious things) that he will barrel over any actual substance.
He has no in-group bias for men anymore than feminists. He never even pauses for a moment to do anything positive for men, and most of his "solutions" would hurt men just as much. He just hates feminists and women so much that he holds a "men are suffering" sign to give a small amount of justification to himself.
Like how he defends trannyism even though it's objectively bad for men and feminists love it because he hates the terfs more. I actually wanted to ask him how he feels about Matt Walsh now since Walsh explicitly called out man hating women being the ones pushing Trans shit on their children. Imp always claims he'd never do that
If Imp could drop the tranny loving and admit that men also do dumbshit to support feminism I'd go back to defending his more sensible takes and stop insulting him
It's absolutely apparent men have zero in-group bias towards each other.
That's because collectivism is an inherently feminine trait. Only females and weak males band together. (This is seen in both humans and non-human primates.) As a strong male, why would I bother to expend my efforts lifting up weak males, when they would only serve to be my competition?
T_D has always been a "if you agree with us one time you are now our champion" shithole.
Its why they propelled retards like Candace Owens to stardom, and regularly simp for Congressmen with histories of horror just because they said something right once.
Is he really defending trannies or is that the terfs are worse then them and the only half decent post in that donald link was by MAGA9428 or Imp1's post on JK.
No, he defends trannies even when TERFs have nothing to do with the topic. He went as far as using feminine pronouns for Brett Gay. He seems to think it's a way to oppose the TERFs, but he's just cutting of his nose to spite his face.
The description "pro-men" applies to the women who post and comment on the forum, not conservative women.
"Conservative, decent, and pro men" all apply to "virtually all women here". One adjective doesn't all of the sudden describe another adjective in a sentence.
He's kidding. Just pointing out that you agree with the Imp while not sounding completely crazy and accusing everyone of being a TRAITOR, and raving about how the 'enemy gender' and 'Nazi gender' is blackmailing and bribing everyone.
I'm kind of surprised. He's been posting there since long before his current ban. He's not subtle about his hobbyhorse so you'd think he'd be known to them by now.
I agree with a few of his takes, but I just find it annoying that he has to fit his hate for women into anything that has nothing to do with women. That’s a skill that I wish to never obtain.
Aren't women the original sociopaths? They pretend to care about their families, but the moment there's an invader, they run to the arms of the conquerors.
Oh dear. This sort of thing is not going to fly on TheDonald.
It's scientifically proven that the only genuine support they give is to other women.
No accurate statement is every preceded by "it's scientifically proven".
I like how they don't even take his ravings seriously, rather than trying to refute it.
It's not surprising that you lie through your teeth like the demonspawn you defend.
He's simply sick. He can't help himself.
It won't take long for him to get booted from any other community he joins, because he simply can't take it easy for 5 minutes.
He does do his best to follow the rules and not be too obnoxious, which is why I have always gone easy on him (in context of moderation). Unfortunately, his best is not very good.
He’s so repetitive- are we sure he is human?
Sometimes you simply have to invoke the "go away you stupid piece of shit" clause even if someone is technically following the rules as they're written but not responding to negative feedback like a normal person.
Users have every right to say that, but moderators do not - and certainly not to enforce it. The whole point of places like this is to allow unpopular views to be heard, even if they annoy other users.
Now, if someone is actively spamming every thread and generally being a nuisance, it's something else - but that should be content-neutral. It shouldn't matter if his position is "puppies are cute" or "women are bad" or "Ivermectin cures Covid".
Such idiocy is found everywhere. There was a longtime user of KiA2 who left the subreddit because I, not as moderator but as a user, said that Russia was in the right.
Moderators absolutely do, and should, simply click the I Win when it's clear you're dealing with a pathological little shithead who isn't affected by the normal immune system that communities have. If they can't be trusted to do that in incredibly obvious cases then you need somebody else to have the button, if your community has too many shit for brains libertarians to understand that then they deserve what they get.
I mean, you just listed a bunch of vague descriptors that would describe 90% of the community here if you asked someone who didn't like us about it.
KIA1 mods said that anyone who criticized moderation was a pathological little shithead just trying to stir trouble. I certainly wouldn't give them an out to just ban any criticism.
The most important factor of all is making sure 105-110 IQ types like the KIA moderators absolutely never have any real authority.
One of the purposes of hard defined rules with little wriggle room is to deny them real authority even if they manage to weasel into moderator positions.
He's not doing any harm to the community though. If he were, I'd agree with you that at least he has to be slapped down - because the first rule of anything is self-preservation.
Having wretchedly irritating little tumors who wallow in negative attention and don't respond to negative feedback always does harm to a community.
Yeah that's far too simpy for my taste. I get that Imp isn't everyone's cup of tea, and his willingness to defend trannies is his worst quality. But there's way too much white knighting for women going on over there, even if the women in question are conservative. Any man who's been in family court knows how quick that shit changes when the prospect of enslaving someone that they've ceased to see as human presents itself. There's a few implicit swipes at MGTOW in there as well, which is retarded if you actually care about making marriage a viable prospect for men again.
Imp was never really wrong in a lot of the broad strokes he talks about, he just takes it well past the point of sanity and then loses everyone. The same way ranting about the Feds doing acts of unconstitutional evil actually does happen, but probably not to the homeless man on the street talking about the microchip.
Ironically, his biggest problem is that he himself is an addict. He is so high off the dopamine rushes he gets for being "right" (its why he always makes sure to post when he was right by predicting obvious things) that he will barrel over any actual substance.
He has no in-group bias for men anymore than feminists. He never even pauses for a moment to do anything positive for men, and most of his "solutions" would hurt men just as much. He just hates feminists and women so much that he holds a "men are suffering" sign to give a small amount of justification to himself.
Like how he defends trannyism even though it's objectively bad for men and feminists love it because he hates the terfs more. I actually wanted to ask him how he feels about Matt Walsh now since Walsh explicitly called out man hating women being the ones pushing Trans shit on their children. Imp always claims he'd never do that
Yeah exactly. He is only pro-trans because he hates feminists so much that they have become his ally by default.
If Imp could drop the tranny loving and admit that men also do dumbshit to support feminism I'd go back to defending his more sensible takes and stop insulting him
That's because collectivism is an inherently feminine trait. Only females and weak males band together. (This is seen in both humans and non-human primates.) As a strong male, why would I bother to expend my efforts lifting up weak males, when they would only serve to be my competition?
Dumb as fuck.
Sure, but you'll still be dumb as fuck and never understand why.
lol nigger
T_D has always been a "if you agree with us one time you are now our champion" shithole.
Its why they propelled retards like Candace Owens to stardom, and regularly simp for Congressmen with histories of horror just because they said something right once.
Is he really defending trannies or is that the terfs are worse then them and the only half decent post in that donald link was by MAGA9428 or Imp1's post on JK.
No, he defends trannies even when TERFs have nothing to do with the topic. He went as far as using feminine pronouns for Brett Gay. He seems to think it's a way to oppose the TERFs, but he's just cutting of his nose to spite his face.
He actively defends trannies
The last point is true though
He admits it tho.
I do agree here.
You think this is bad?
Its certainly delusional, thinking that conservative women are "pro-men" any more than other types of women.
The description "pro-men" applies to the women who post and comment on the forum, not conservative women.
"Conservative, decent, and pro men" all apply to "virtually all women here". One adjective doesn't all of the sudden describe another adjective in a sentence.
Yes, virtually all women who post on The Donald. What did you think?
I think we found TheImp's non-schizo alt
He's kidding. Just pointing out that you agree with the Imp while not sounding completely crazy and accusing everyone of being a TRAITOR, and raving about how the 'enemy gender' and 'Nazi gender' is blackmailing and bribing everyone.
This is something imp would say
Deleted. I assume it was a TheImpossible1 post from the comments that are still visible.
The thread/comments dont seem deleted to me, I can still see them.
Yeah, it's a screenshot of an Imp post. Just regular stuff, imp being imp. But it's probably still a novelty over in the Donald.
I'm kind of surprised. He's been posting there since long before his current ban. He's not subtle about his hobbyhorse so you'd think he'd be known to them by now.
I agree with a few of his takes, but I just find it annoying that he has to fit his hate for women into anything that has nothing to do with women. That’s a skill that I wish to never obtain.
I like how he calls people who disagree with him TRAITORS, as if they swore an oath of allegiance to King Imp the Great.
Scored wasn't working well for me, here's the community.win link for anyone with the same issue.
Thank you!
Are we sure he is human or just an AI designed to dissuade females from joining certain online communities?
I have never seen anyone so repetitive.
He fails to learn from normal social queues - he has a context window. But is not training his neural network on the data he reads.
lol but still magakikes aren't better
Comment Reported for Rule 15 - Slurs
Comment Approved: This is not about users.
The Donald lost all its good users who moved to Gab, Telegram or ConPro. It's a pretty pathetic group of people these days.
ConPro?
Basically, the only truly uncensored part of scored.co/communities.win...
https://scored.co/c/ConsumeProduct
Oh dear. This sort of thing is not going to fly on TheDonald.
No accurate statement is every preceded by "it's scientifically proven".
I like how they don't even take his ravings seriously, rather than trying to refute it.
lol