You got several things wrong.

I said, "I was so naive last year to think it could be different." I wasn't clear, but I meant that I hoped SaidIt would be distinct and different than Reddit. There's a reason I don't like Reddit and there's a reason I don't feel connected to SaidIt much anymore, and it has to do with the unbridled asstrollery and the so-called leadership, or lack thereof. A year ago a lot of my ideas seemed to be well received as good ideas but nothing came of them. That's to be expected with any number of reasons. I was also trying to help, and even lead by example in some instances. I was hoping to bring more organization to SaidIt, yet not be anal like Wikipedia or antifa like Reddit. Anyway...

I worked on "A Little Curious" in the summer/fall of 1998 at Curious ?ictures. Curious was most famous for the ghosts in Ghostbusters, the puppets in Pee Wee's Playhouse and a bunch of commercials. A Little Curious was the shittiest production I ever worked on, despite being a pretty good team. The character designs were cringe-worthy to be kind. The stories were stupid. It was a rushed job because HBO suddenly was allowed another kids channel. Curious ?ictures was NOT a gay studio or anything of the kind. "Curious" was not remotely as sexualized back then. As for the content and innuendo - I can't speak to that and never saw anything like it. There's no question that animation studios were sausage parties occasionally with lockerroom talk, but not really so much as they were more geeks and cartoon lovers than studs or posers. At that time though, Curious ?ictures had many women on staff, as producers, and even several animators - and in other departments than the CGI room. It was a shitty show, but they got me a work visa that lasted another year in NYC. I didn't last because I was trying to produce good animation and I was too slow. Fine with me. I moved on and worked in other studios on movies and commercials. I even came back to Curious ?ictures for a Sketchers Boot commercial. That director even gave me his custom Kawasaki Ninja when I moved to SF.

As far as my guilt with whatever may be applied to "A Little Curious" (news to me) - that's like blaming the craft service lady on X-Men 1 + 2 for the deeds of Bryan Singer. (Friends, Gamma Studios in Toronto, did the Wolverine X-rays for those first 2 movies. I said they should mass produce them and sell them. I think there were contractual limits.) I had nothing to do with the development of that show. I just animated some shitty rigs for a few months. Blame the writers and the executive producers who determine the content. The animators and producers just follow the script/blueprint.

Also, I grew up with "Curious George" and not until this moment did I ever wonder if there were sexual connotations to it. I don't know if being "aware" is all good. Maybe it's the times.

I'm not gay. I was a little sexually bi-curious for less than a decade, more out of horniness than anything but 99% preferred women. If that's enough to paint me gay then I don't give a fuck. I started writing a "How different is too different" kind of article with the last drama but shelved it. There seems to be a lot of tolerance for name calling but not for diversity. I'm not saying it has to be equal but it has to be fair. Also, FYI, I was anything but graphic in my tauntings of the homophobes. Believe me there's sooooooooooooooo much more to speak of regarding sexual explicitness and/or grossness - and that's not even touching porn, remaining within the rules/guidelines. Granted, the up or down of the pyramid is entirely subjective on many things. Anyway, eventually I made rules for myself that I wouldn't do dudes or fat-stupid-ugly chicks because it was a waste of our time, not fair to them or to me. I was always too nice and unable to withdraw myself from getting trapped in a relationship and drama and resentment and wanting more. Stopping all of that was easy with the rule. I could go on but I bore myself.

I agree the world is being told not to have kids or blend them with other races or whatever. Very mixed signals. Suicide is legal and assisted in many places - yet it's not common everywhere in North America - which is very peculiar to me. IMO, it should be available as this world is for shit and those who truly suffer need a better way out. I also think Big Pharma poisons people too and between dealing with that and offering better alternative solutions, even with legal suicide, I'd wager the suicide rate might go down. Especially if drugs were decriminalized and treatment was better, and of course if the stresses of society weren't so severe. But that's a whole other topic. I agree that the Gay Agenda has been weaponized, but to say it's only about population control is very narrow minded. My cousin married another dude and they are raising two boys. Sounds weird and sketchy for sure - but they are all fine people and knowing them I see no problem. Maybe there's weird shit behind their closed doors - but the same could be true for every home (just look up incest porn) - and they don't act strangely. Dave is a general physician and does a lot of research at the University of Western Ontario. I don't recall what Allen does. I expect the kids are out of highschool by now.

I honestly haven't made many gay-ish comments. I was getting the goat (an expression he'd not heard of apparently) of that one guy who wouldn't relent so I wouldn't either. Not very mature, but I thought he was having just as much fun.

As far as intervening goes, none of it would be an issue if there was no name-calling. Rules without enforcement is poor governance.

Telling people to fuck off regarding suggestions is hardly good form, especially when they're meant to help. Granted I've seen him welcome suggestions that had their not-so-covert angles that are not healthy for SaidIt. I suspect those go in the "To Do Never" pile, along with many of my hairbrained ideas. That's his prerogative. On the other hand it's very hypocritical to have an "elevated discussion forum" where you can't discuss ideas for elevating the platform.

I don't envy M7D3 and their burden. I didn't bring them up to crap on them.

I don't know what you're suggesting

I was suggesting drafting up write ups on Chipit and other actors with agendas, with lots of examples/proof, etc. This would help caution people. It might also form teams. And undoubtedly it would cause drama. The latter two cons outweigh the first benefit.

Maybe a wiki page would be better, tucked out of the way, with a growing list of agents and examples. Then when you say so and so is a shill, as you so often do, you can link to the evidence. Maybe those agents might be persuaded to find easier places to disrupt than SaidIt. (You could create a private sub with a private wiki.)

I guess I missed those reckless policy suggestions. IMO, the policy is great, but the enforcement lacks. Also, I think that an abundance of examples would be terrific to illustrate to people what exactly this so-called policy means. Right now there's an abstract idea - with no examples. Also the examples, IMO, should also offer corrective examples to emulate too. I feel like there's a word for this syntax example thing, something simple, like "FAQ", but it escapes me.

No, my goal is not to stir shit up. But that may be a bi-product when improving the site. (ie. If you made lists of the agents and shills with examples of their efforts.) Sadly not everything goes according to plan, ie. improvement.

It's not broke. Some are trying to break it.

Excellent point.

LOL. I think Wizz4 meant well, somehow in his obtuse normie-propagandized way. But he sure pissed me off at one point. He's still on Wikipedia and fighting my Open-Source broad concept article about me hyper-politicizing Scientism vs Open-science - which is the whole point. He's repeatedly censoring rather than correcting/improving the article.

Ya, witch hunts aren't good. But sometimes purges are necessary. And IMO, all the name-callers should be corrected or booted. "Nigger" and "faggot" are just words, but they have heavy meaning with them, and are especially problematic when unimaginative name-calling is the best they can do. As for the "shills" and people with their tribal or propagandized mindsets, that's another story. Their views are valid, but incomplete, and could do with exposure to more ideas, civilly. I agree shilling is repeating propaganda - just as counter-propaganda is.

That's enough for me.

Fair enough.

SaidIt has already banned several subs and people. That's not new. And the narrative will be what it be to whoever regardless of the truth or not, depending on who's repeating it. If SaidIt were the civilized pinnacle of the Interwebs (as hyper-conspiro-censorious Quora aimed to be) then it wouldn't matter what the naysayers say. The essence and reputation are not always equal. He's bold enough to start SaidIt. He should be bold enough to maintain it, as diplomudge, regardless of ebbs and flows of reputation, IMO. The essence will out.

I like weird hats. Except for the dogmas.

I might be wearing a mod hat but I don't care, didn't notice, and maybe misplaced it. It might mean something on Reddit, but it's a limitation and/or power I don't care for. Yes, I made a bunch of subs - to help organize and beautify SaidIt, not to rule over it. Now I could care less. Chaos won.

Remain Vigilanté!