So... what was LXXXVIII banned for, anyway?

submitted by Debra_L from self.AskSaidIt

[removed]
all 47 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 4 fun -  (15 children)

Part of the problem is that so much of the spamming is from accounts that are only a few days old. Your account is only 4 days old. If we also don't know anything about you and your 4-day-old account, what is the point of working with you on Admin and Mod problems? How do we know we're not being trolled into another fake conversation? Moreover, at least two or three of the accounts you note above are regularly violating the Saidit rules and/or guidelines.

[–]Debra_L[S] 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (14 children)

Moreover, at least two or three of the accounts you note above are regularly violating the Saidit rules and/or guidelines.

Interesting. Which accounts would that be, and what are the violations in question?

(Also please note that some of the accounts listed are only rumored to be somehow associated with LXXXVIII/loki88. So if we're gonna uncover actually what LXXXVIII was banned for weeks ago, it may not be enough to determine what other users should be but haven't been banned for. You're not gonna want to say LXXXVIII was banned for our sins, are ya? XP )

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (13 children)

If you know what's happening, you've been at Saidit longer than this 4-day-old account. What was your original name on Saidit? The general question is: why trust a 4-day old account with anything related to problems with multiple 4-day-old accounts?

[–]Debra_L[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (12 children)

It's okay. You don't have to trust me. (Though... exactly what's at stake? We aren't having a confidential discussion here. Any statement you make here is a public statement, not actually a reply in private.)

In return, I will note that you're evading the questions at hand, trying to distract via ad hominems. Fair is fair, right?

If you do change your mind, please feel more than welcome to expound on the above.

[–]JasonCarswell 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

Now you're avoiding socks valid questions (whom I rarely agree with).

Who are you, and why should you care, and why should we indulge you?

If you can't be open, at least be clear, concise, and compelling.

If you can't comply with more you're a timesuck distraction, regardless of the good points raised in this post.

[–]Debra_L[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

You're discrediting your own notions of argumentative validity, if you tie them to the person. Ad hominems are frowned upon for good reason. (Actually a bannable offense on SaidIt, BTW.)

[–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

I didn't tie anything. I pointed out I'm flexible enough to agree with socks. Dragging down conversations, as you're doing, is ban-worthy, not ad hominems (especially with M7 unreliable moderation). More importantly, again you avoided the questions.

You are a waste of time.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

This answer confirms that you are likely one of the fake accounts.

The central argument here is that anyone familiar with the tactics of the fake account people would not so easily give themselves away as one of the fake account people, especially if this person were one of the Admins. You goofed. (You and most of the new accounts are already on a list of the fake accounts.)

[–]Debra_L[S] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

The central argument here

The central argument for what?

What are you afraid of, little man? That I might be LXXXVIII?? lol

He's reading everything we say anyway! Probably taking notes, too! XD
(Again: we're in public.)

The questions at hand are the questions at hand. Whether it's me or the Pope or Satan himself asking them. Either you can answer them -- or expose them as disingenuous, if you can -- or you have to hide behind ad hominems.

Appears it's the latter.

:sigh:

Next, please!

[–]JasonCarswell 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Argumentative and lame.

Maybe they're correct in that you're a shit disturber.

Prove me wrong.

[–]Comatoast 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (5 children)

This is embarrassing. I can't tell if you're balls deep on the spectrum, or just a sociopath with an insane amount of time on your hands that feels extremely ass blasted that the admin would ban you.

You! And of all people.. How could they do this? Don't they know who you are?

This is what entitlement looks like. Continue tipping your fedora while the rest of the world continues to turn and be active, despite not having to listen to your inane dogshit about ad hominems.

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 5 fun1 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 5 fun -  (4 children)

Hey! I wear fedoras. Some covered in aluminum foil. Leave headgear out of it! They dint do nuffin.

[–]Comatoast 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (3 children)

Jason, you've earned your fedora for different reasons. It's a pure fedora that seeks out justice, as opposed to the soul-stained fedora of the majority of fedora-donning agents.

[–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

Maybe I'm just clinging to my young sexy hipster glory days at Burning Man when fedoras and fur and pinstripes were rare before their mainstream comeback and corruption by wannabe SJWs.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 5 fun -  (8 children)

just guessing but it seemed like someone from reddit trying to get saidit closed by whomever hosts their servers by saying they are pro pedo or whatever

He was posting pedo stuff tho maybe that is deleted now so that is why you can't find it

[–]Debra_L[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

He was posting pedo stuff tho maybe that is deleted now

Even then, there should still be traces of this in his profile and/or the reactions on-board.

I mean, this way you could easily claim anyone's posting pedo stuff... even you do... it just always gets deleted in time, trust me.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

what do you mean by traces in his profile

Looks like they deleted the threads he made on it

[–]Debra_L[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

By traces in his profile I mean comments he made, threads he posted, and calling the context and full comments of the respective threads for the reactions and messages he replied to, etc.

Looks like they deleted the threads he made on it

Looks like based on what exactly? Who is they? How do you figure all this?

Sry to be so inquisitive, but I was hoping for something a little more substantial. I've got plenty of this gossippy hearsay and wild guesswork already... :-\

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

if you look at /u/LXXXVIII you still see his pedo comments

[–]Debra_L[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I see him calling out pedos like /u/comatoast. Is that what you meant by "posting pedo stuff"?

[–]Comatoast 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Any posts of mine that were deleted were done due to admin intervention. Eh, that's not entirely true, I've whined before somewhere... twice? now and deleted those, and then the one comment that I posted on mythology where I fucked up some details. Outside of that, my post history is an open book that anyone is welcome to bore themselves with going through. Heads up: I recall whining about period cramps or something in that vein several months ago.

That said, acknowledging something happens does not mean approving of it, and I've made it more than abundantly clear that I don't approve. If you're unable to tell the difference between those two very different concepts, then you should probably work on that before interacting with others where you're trying to prove your point. Do your homework.

[–]JasonCarswell 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Good post, IMO.

M7 doesn't like "negative" posts or keeping records of bans because he thinks bad drama reflects poorly on SaidIt. IMO, being opaque and secretive is FAR more damning that openly dealing with problems that are hardly unique to SaidIt.

We may at least see 100% of all mod activity, yet there's virtually no transparency nor accountability for admins. (This is part of why I propose a we develop a Next-Gen Forum. We'll initially discuss theoretical developments and alternatives to issues facing forums these days, including fair administration, and eventually we may then actually build and employ solutions. Here's my first pitch under an initial working-title: /s/PhoenixForum/comments/7fet/phoenix_forum/)

 

IMO, the better question is:

What was /u/diogenesjunior banned for?

Many of us wish to know /u/magnora7. IMO, he was one of the good ones. With your obfuscating silence we have no reference to any ill behaviour, guilt, nor innocence.

 

While I don't know if you'll find answers, but you may find more questions digging through https://SaidIt.net/subs/new/ to find all the private, locked, and sealed subs.

I'm curious why /s/HolocaustSkepticism is locked again, and why is /s/CultureWar private, who mods it, and who's a member? Is this some infiltration or am I just paranoid? I have zero interest in joining private clubs other than a curiosity to know what goes on in there.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Welp - there is indeed a '+diogenesjunior' at Ruqqus, but I don't want to bother him (whoever he/she is)

[–]JasonCarswell 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (14 children)

Lame that you removed your post.

EDIT:

Lame, why did /u/magnora7 remove the post?

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 7 fun2 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 7 fun -  (13 children)

So, maybe I'm a sucker.

Perhaps I got seduced by the idea of trying to improve SaidIt by having M7 evolve past his problematic limits as monarch admin - specifically by making a more transparent banning process, clear guides, better rules, consistent enforcement, and an open history. I could go on - another time perhaps. My views on this are not new, nor a secret.

I still don't know what happened to /u/diogenesjunior, a very good one IMO, nor have I any clue about this LXXXVIII thing - but most importantly I've found some things out about /u/Debra_L. Nothing spectacular nor new to many of you, including /u/magnora7.

A friend recently said, "If I ask you a direct question, you will answer it, directly. Shills do not do this. Malcontents do not do this." /u/Debra_L is very malcontent.

In private messages I let /u/Debra_L waste my time in order for me to try to draw out their motivations, alleged injustices, and intentions. They wasted MANY chances in PMs to legitimately plead their case and win over my open mind. It's now my firm opinion they have mental issues, are asstrolls, are distraction shills, timesucks, and/or a combination. They admit they aim to bully and win by attrition.

/u/Debra_L wants to destroy SaidIt.

They are enemies of SaidIt.

M7 and I may have differences of opinion on some things and many things in common, but he is certainly not my enemy.

I can only (((speculate))) why /u/Debra_L uses "bubele" so often.

[–]uv38 5 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 5 fun -  (8 children)

A friend recently said, "If I ask you a direct question, you will answer it, directly. Shills do not do this. Malcontents do not do this."

i've got a direct question for you then:

  • is it true that you aren't raping babies anymore?

now keep in mind: if you cannot give a straight yes/no answer, it means you're a shill/malcontent and want to destroy saidit.

(hint: you might want to consider getting better sources for your bon mots.)

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (6 children)

My direct straight answer:
The only babies I rape are the minds of infantile asstroll imbeciles on SaidIt who squirm from my prodigious hard truths.

You don't get to define my freedom to answer beyond only "yes/no", a divisive limited black and white mentality (key word: mental).

[–]uv38 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (5 children)

My direct answer

...is not a direct answer.

your hypocrisy lies exposed.

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

Oh no! I've been exposed! What ever shall I do?!!!

I guess I should bow down to your authority on what a "direct answer" can only be.

/u/magnora7, You may want to swat these bugs, though I don't know what good it will do.

[–][deleted]  (2 children)

[removed]

    [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    How many accounts have you made so far?

    [–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    Saying it doesn't make it true.

    [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

    You do know that the way you phrase your comments makes it really clear who you are?

    [–][deleted]  (3 children)

    [removed]

      [–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

      Perhaps I am. You being disingenuous about it certainly doesn't convince me you're helping to save SaidIt.

      /u/TheAmeliaMay has earned my respect and trust by actions, not trivial words. You could do the same but I think we both know who's (((team))) you likely play for.

      [–][deleted]  (1 child)

      [removed]

        [–]JasonCarswell 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

        No one gets my respect or disrespect from the start. I start neutral and actions earn notice.

        I suspect you're another timesuck, so clearly and concisely present your case on how I've earned your disrespect or I'll be distracted by you no more.

        [–]Airbus320 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (4 children)

        Who cares

        [–]JasonCarswell 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (3 children)

        I'm interested.

        [–]Airbus320 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

        Me not

        [–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

        So why so much effort in your comments?

        Silence speaks more than your noise.

        [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

        My guess is that he reads a post on Saidit, gets up from the couch, walks outside, around the block, until he can think of an answer, returns to the couch, types the two words, and passes out. That said, I think there's evidence that he reads more of Saidit each day than the rest of us, combined.