SaidIt Survey: Ban /u/socks and /u/ActuallyNot or keep them around?

socks · 2021-09-25T03:02:57+00:00

You are basically asking for equal treatment

The opposite of this.

Per the title: "Ban /u/socks and ...."

(It's bullying and a kind of political cleansing, aka politicide; it's not equal treatment.)

socks · 2021-09-24T23:20:07+00:00

Nov. 2020

This reminds me, if I may butt in: "inauthentic" is one of the various forms of strange name-calling I've only seen on Saidit, and I don't know what it means or why anyone has to use the term. It's just bullying, though I am surprised by the lengths to which some users will go to continually claim that users thay don't agree with are paid antifa, Soros, Chinese, Zionist, libtard, gay, non-white, furry, dominatrix, Opus Dei, Jesuit, Rothschild, Fauci, Big Pharma, CIA, NSA, terrorist shills. I've learned all of that here on Saidit. I previously had no idea one could be so talented. Lucky me.

socks · 2021-09-24T21:40:18+00:00

But it's rather gauche of whitie to wear white after Labor Day, unless of course he dons a capirote

socks · 2021-09-24T20:00:42+00:00

Well - it brought be back to Saidit for a day. Perhaps I should post Dylan's 'Everybody must get stoned.'

socks · 2021-09-24T19:54:41+00:00

She's the only one who did not answer the 'what do you want' question with the request for world peace. (Though I am sure she wants world peace. There are also much better photos of her.)

socks · 2021-09-24T19:45:24+00:00

One of the best songs...

socks · 2021-09-24T19:34:11+00:00

Puzzling responses.

socks · 2021-09-24T18:29:03+00:00

You call yourself Chomsky - who is an amazing scholar and a gentleman - and yet you resort to calling people names and to personal attacks, something Chomsky would never stoop to doing. If you're going to be Chomsky, try to make proper arguments that are backed by reasonable evidence. I will look forward to reading anything Chomsky-esque from you.

socks · 2021-09-24T16:51:53+00:00

Not that I can understand all of this, but it's brilliant.

socks · 2021-09-24T16:36:17+00:00

They're just comments...

socks · 2021-09-24T14:43:34+00:00

For what it's worth: I see on Saidit that many here are upset about 'brigading' on Reddit, where 'brigading' was seemingly invented. Some users are here because they were victims of Reddit brigading, bullying, censorship, bans, mod abuse, admin abuse, &c, &c. I've not thought much about it, and I could be wrong, but there are several users here in the thread who appeaar to be brigading (and the post is itself a request to brigade).

BTW: I am grateful to those who've discussed censorship in the present thread.

socks · 2021-09-24T11:27:04+00:00

A lot of people fall on the idea that radical conspiracism is a good way not to be fooled by any bias, but It's actually a tool of the people in power to keep us passive.

It's not going to be easy, but we have to fight to gain credibility when it comes to exposing the corruption in the government.

I've just seen this, and for what it's worth u/HibikiBlack, I agree wholeheartedly with these comments. One of my concerns has been that there has been a significant rise in 5 years of very well-funded influencer websites, social media, and video bloggers (&c) that peddle all kinds of misinformation and disinformation, meant not only to influence public opinion, but also get people to argue over facts, science, masks, &c. In 10 years World billionaires have doubled their ranks and almost trippled their net worth. COVID also helped billionaires, and increased income inequality. Misinformation websites support these billionaires, many of whom help pay for them. Many at Saidit - perhaps unintentionally - help these billionaires by sharing this misinformation and arging over it, whereas the #1 problem in the US that Saidit can potentially help deal with is government and corporate abuse and corruption. But I rarely see a post or comment on Saidit where the user understands this, and is thus interested in reliable democratic solutions. It would be especially helpful to those of us who want to make a difference, reduce income inequality, reduce climate change, support the 99%, &c, to focus more on politicians and political action that will support these causes, rather than fall for the distractions in the propaganda websites. This is why I appreciate your post.

Not that I want to discuss a 10-day old post. It's just my 2 cents.

socks · 2021-09-24T01:58:59+00:00

lol

12 hours ago, I defended another user by telling you:

Don't try to ban someone because he/she disagrees with you or others.

socks · 2021-09-23T22:50:38+00:00

So either it's him or me

lol

socks · 2021-09-23T19:56:07+00:00

Oh my - what will I do with all of my internet points....

socks · 2021-09-23T19:55:11+00:00

I only get personal attacks from you. (You're breaking the Saidit rules.)

socks · 2021-09-23T19:17:25+00:00

socks · 2021-09-23T19:16:35+00:00

If you think I'm 'dangerous', you need help.

^{Also, stop trying to ban those who disagree with you or others.}

socks · 2021-09-23T18:32:06+00:00

?

I made a very simple logical argument about an obvious problem.

No one has to "read minds" or do whatever you're discussing. Yikes.

socks · 2021-09-23T18:06:12+00:00

Again: pointing out your erroneous assumptions ≠ an erroneous assumption

socks · 2021-09-23T17:40:21+00:00

Anyone who disagrees with you will get this kind of response from you. You're not 13, FFS (people who disagree with you are not automatically inauthentic, lying, shills, SJW, shit disturbers, or whatever). Moreover, it can only help Saidit to have the occasional user disagree with the right-wing and alt-right misinformation and disinformation here. There aren't more users here because you and others have harrassed and tried to ban people who've naturally questioned this misinformation and disinformation (and because Saidit spreads these lies on its front pages). It's sad.

socks · 2021-09-23T14:31:16+00:00

*Stop trying to ban those who disagree with you or others.

socks · 2021-09-23T13:09:58+00:00

Don't try to ban someone because he/she disagrees with you or others.

socks · 2021-09-22T03:50:44+00:00

Sorry you had to deal with that. (No one should try to censor you on Saidit.)

socks · 2021-09-17T21:15:39+00:00

No Chipit - for reasons already discussed.

socks · 2021-09-17T18:15:37+00:00

EDIT: 22 hours later: Thank you - everyone - for your comments, which have been helpful and informative. I think I can see sufficient evidence here that I was unfairly banned as a moderator of 2 subs because of the complaint of one user that he didn't like my responses to him and others. My responses were normal arguments - much more polite than the responses of others on Saidit - that did not break the rules of Saidit (or I'd be banned also from Saidit). Rather, the stated reason for banning me as a mod was that I removed a post (the 1st post I've removed as a mod in /s/politics). The post in question was a 24-hour-old duplicate with no comments on the front page of /s/politics, directly below an identical post that had received comments. Thus removing this duplicate made it possible for the same OP to share one more of his other posts on the /s/politics front page, where on some days he posts 70% of the submissions that remain at the top. Thus it seems there was not a good reason to remove me as a mod of /s/politics and /s/WorldNews, for reasons summarized here, and noted in the threads below. Other users might want to consider this development.

As a website that supports dissent and is against censorship, Saidit seemingly does not promote the equal treatment of moderators, or especially the equal treatment of those who can potentially help Saiditors understand arguments against those they disagree with. It's perhaps not terribly important to anyone here that I am censored, but it is important that we especially at Saidit understand censorship, including the censoring of mods, especially when banning a mod is a potential double standard, and thus itself a violation of a core principle for Saidit: that it's a free speech alternative to Reddit. Free speech for whom, however?

socks · 2021-09-17T15:37:27+00:00

No Chipit - none of this is related to the question about duplicate posts or the banning of a mod. It's that simple. Moreover, no one censored you. Removing a duplicate post helps you show more of your other posts on the /s/politics front page.

socks · 2021-09-17T10:59:52+00:00

Chipit - you're again conflating points in these arguments. None of this applies to the question. You seem not to know or want to know about any of this. Should I explain? Two of your links are taken out of context from other subs where I am not a mod. One of your links an example where I confront someone about their aggression, as mods can do. It's OK. And then you have factual errors: no there aren't "many other insults and violations". No there is no "hardcore hate of J. Dore" that relaes to anything. My disagreement with Dore or you or anyone else is not "hardcore hate". You apply here constant emotional reactions to what I write, as if you're a victim, whereas I am merely disagreeing. (This too is OK; it's not hate. People can argue.) And your other note here is that I am attacking someone and that I am a "nazi" or whatever. Really, Chipit.

socks · 2021-09-17T10:53:16+00:00

Thanks. I see your point. Two issues I've not already addressed in other comments:

these are people you now have power over.

The duplicate post is the first one I've removed (and did so by accident). In other cases I've helped the sub by reporting spam (not by removing it), and I've asked people to avoid being abusive (as I would ask in any other sub). Absolutely no one on Saidit was worried about my role as a moderator, and I am certain they did not see that role as having any power over them. This is very different at Reddit - where one knows that there are shill moderators who will look for and remove (without comment) certain comments or posts that are critical of Pakistan, India, Israel or China, in that order. Some of those posts survive the shill moderators, but there is a Pakistan moderator or two who are removing items and banning users without explanation. In any event - does anyone think I have power over them at Saidit? I would be really surprised if so, especially because I've not done anything to develop such a fear in any user. By contrast, I am the Libtard some users want to harrass, tag, question &c. They're not worried in the least. (Nor am I.)

You seem to want a heavily curated space,

No. Even /u/d3rr was annoyed when I told him that I didn't want to change Saidit - I wanted users to carryon as they are, so that I can learn from them. I also explained that I'd like to help with the spam (which was the main problem back then). Thus I was appointed as a spam deleting moderator. I think an old duplicate post with no comments on the front page is a form of spam, or at the very least, that the removal of a duplicate will give users an opportunity to see more of the legitimate posts (80% of which are Chipit's on some days, so I helped show more of his posts by removing a duplicate).

socks · 2021-09-17T10:35:13+00:00

It's not antogonistic to reply to someone and disagree with them. That's certainly not the point of a debate. Did Chipit feel antagonized? I doubt it. He antagonized me and I responded. It's known as a debate. Regarding M7, he had many additional comments on what he wanted Saidit to be. If you've not seen those other comments, I can potentially find them for you, in his posts from long ago on Saidit and Reddit. Saidit - parts of it - did not become what he wanted it to be. And regarding "respectful, rational, conversations", that has happened. And given the amount of abuse I receive, especially from Chipit and others - without my prompting them to be abusive - I've had the patience of Job with these people, in order to develop conversations that will tell me more about their way of thinking. Thus I've learned a lot at Saidit, which as I've said many times before, was my reason for being here. Learning develops especially with debate and questions (per Socrates &c). I've had the thick skin that you note here.

The question I've asked is related to moderation methodology, and you've not addressed that question. What you indicate in your comments is that you will interpret what is considered the "higher standard" for the moderator, and that you will interpret who is antagonistic, and that you want a 'wall' between the mod's actions and the user's actions. None of these are requirements for the moderator on any other sub. The tradition with moderators - as I've seen in the past 15 years at Reddit and as I've seen here at Saidit - is that they can and do argue with others in the subs, as you've done quite often. Do you see a double standard here?

Did you follow a higher standard when you supported the ban of a moderator who had merely done hiw job? Did you see this as 'respectful' of the mod team and of a user? Did you unfairly see me as the the 'antagonistic' one in these conversations? Did you not appreciate that I do indeed have a thick skin on Saidit? (How many Democrats are here?) Did you - as a mod - consult the other mods when you made your decision? Have you deleted duplicate posts at /s/politics? Have you argued with anyone at /s/politics? None of my questions here about you specifically, but about the methods of a moderator. Per my original question, and per the points here, I've not done anything as a moderator that would qualify as a reason for banning me.

socks · 2021-09-17T01:46:07+00:00

I don't know him, but he has good imput here for the question. Regarding this:

https://www.politicalquadrant.com/quiz/results.php?e=27&s=41

I definitely disagree with those divisions. Authoritarians, "Conservatives" and Libertarians are all very similar - in that they are all focused especially on one kind of legislation: make the rich richer, at the expense of the 99%. They are consistently in politics only for themselves and the wealthy. A better division would have two versions of Authoritarian, Republican, Democrat, Communist.

socks · 2021-09-17T01:25:26+00:00

Yes - though the stated reason for my removal from 2 subs (from d3rr) was "that chipit post removal".

I am trying to stay on the POD with this question, which is why I do not wish to mention names. But if you note that I antagonized anyone, we're onto a different topic, wherein I can easily argue that I constantly get angry low-POD responses from users like Chipit, to which I respond - not with oh, Chipit, I love you, you're awesome - but with a counter argument to Chipit's abuse, without abusing Chipit (in all cases I can think of, but perhaps not every case). Mods are also not prohited from arguing, or alternatively, thanking people for their abuses. But this is not what I've asked about in the present post. I was removed as mod from 2 subs because of a duplicate removal. In order to properly debate the censorship of mods who argue with users, I'd have to make another post. But I did not know that that was related to the censorship of my mod activities.

Regarding apologies - should I apologize for removing a 24-hour exact duplicate (under its duplicate) on the front page of /s/politics? That's related to the OP question.

socks · 2021-09-17T01:13:42+00:00

Yes - the front page of /s/politics, though perhaps also on the front of /s/all or /s/subscribed. I should have clarified that it was - along with the duplicate - 10 or 15 submissions down the /s/politics page.

socks · 2021-09-17T01:06:45+00:00

I see. I've wondered if that had meant - approve the removal - so I've never tried it. Reddit got that wrong. It should say: 'restore'

socks · 2021-09-17T01:00:34+00:00

I need to keep them 100% legit.

That's why I've asked this question.

(I am not trying to annoy you, d3rr, but I argue that there was no mod abuse by me and that I was removed/censored for my removal of an old, inactive duplicate. Had another mod done this, they'd still be a mod for /s/politics. I know we don't agree on this, but I think it's an important question for mods in general, esppecially at a "free speech" website where were are so concerned about censorship. It's merely one of my various questions and debates at Saidit, not meant to annoy anyone.)

socks · 2021-09-17T00:45:02+00:00

Thanks. I see it's a 'delete' and not a 'remove', but it's good to know that there is the option for a tag (which I've not seen).

socks · 2021-09-17T00:40:42+00:00

Yes - because I had hit the 'remove' instead of 'report' button, and then wasn't sure what to do, as I could not find an option to cancel the removal. (In any event, it was an exact duplicate with no comments, on the front page for 24 hours, under its duplicate.) Thanks for the note, however, which I would agree is a problem in general (where to put a comment on the reason for the removal).

socks · 2021-09-16T23:15:31+00:00

I don't think mod demotion can in any way be construed as censorship.

Thanks - I appreciate your point - though I of course think an unethical removal of a mod is indeed a way of censoring that mod's contributions as a mod on a sub.

The content is an exact duplicate

Yes - that's what it was

There is no engagement on the post

Yes - that too

To be safe, perhaps before removing the mod should tag the OP in a comment that redirects to the older duplicate?

Yes - that would be nice. I have this option when removing posts at Reddit, but there is no option to comment on the reason for a removal at Saidit, perhaps because this site is using an earlier version of the code. That said, I had noted the explanations in the comment section of the duplicate post, but was censored nonetheless.

socks · 2021-09-16T23:09:32+00:00

It seems you don't understand or don't want to understand what's been asked in the prompt. (It's unrelated to your emotional concerns. Don't respond to the post if you don't want to address the issue of duplicate posts and moderation methods. Your choice.)

socks · 2021-09-16T18:42:12+00:00

You've turned this into a personal attack, rather than address moderator standards, as had been requested (it's also low on the POD to attack users, as was the attempt to get me banned from Saidit, which is of course another form of censorship, thanks to which there is no Democrat in /s/politics; not that anyone here will miss a Democrat's opinion). Removal of an exact duplicate - especially after 24 hours of no activity - regardless of its content, is of course the norm for moderators. If you're in favor of duplicate posts on the front page of a sub, note why.

socks · 2021-09-15T10:48:29+00:00

You obviously misunderstood the interview and did not read any of the points in the links. He had no choice. This also has absolutely nothing to do with his pro-democracy approaches thereafter. Stay on topic.

socks · 2021-09-15T10:46:38+00:00

No - Chipit - the anti-AOC lobbying is everywhere, without suppression or censorship. Stop lying, FFS.

socks · 2021-09-15T10:44:33+00:00

You're obviously joking.

socks · 2021-09-15T10:43:06+00:00

Of course. (Though this goes against your earlier comments.)

socks · 2021-09-15T09:35:45+00:00

Don't oversimplify this. ANYONE can be a white supremacist.

socks · 2021-09-15T09:35:08+00:00

Did you look at the links, Chipit? No - seems not. Germans required Jews to do so much of the work. If they refused, they went to concentration camps. Read about it, rather than post lies constantly on Saidit about two people who are helping the 99%, whereas Republicans have been raping the country.

socks · 2021-09-15T09:32:39+00:00

Again, Chipit, this is the opposite of what's happening.

socks · 2021-09-15T09:28:02+00:00

Of course Chipit - you've taken this personally, as you often do. I had merely wanted to report it as a duplicate post (of the same age as Carswells) so that other mods could see it. I am very well aware of the fact that my removal of anything would piss off people; hence I don't do it, and mistakenly pressed 'remove' when I had meant to press 'report', where I thereafter stated in the report that the intention was to flag it as a duplicate, not to remove it. After I removed it, I could not see a way to re-approve it, which is a button I normally see.

On a mod matter: I saw that you posted a half dozen AOC hatred posts yesterday, and I commented on that. Post whatever you want, but do see if you can not spam /s/politics with hatred misinformation about AOC, selecting instead some of the better examples of misinformation about her and posting those. For example, the Dore video is a duplicate of Carswell's.

socks · 2021-09-15T09:16:32+00:00

I noted in my comment on the post that my intention was to 'report' rather than 'remove'. I have trouble seeing words on Saidit. I normally argue that posts should not be removed. After it was removed, I could not see my comment in the 'report' and I could not see how to not remove it. The reason I reported it was because it was a duplicate, with no comments, 24 hours later, and Carswell had already posted the same video (as he seemingly posts EVERY Dore video) before Chipit 24 hours earlier, and there were already various comments on it. AXXA has done most of the work, if not all of the work for /s/politics, and has removed duplicates, as we do in other subs. If AXXA had removed it - because it was a duplicate, and a duplicate for 24 hours without comments - it would not have been questioned. If you want a balance of mods, I might have been the only Democrat in the group. (Much of Saidit is astroturfed with extreme rignt-wing hatred, misinformation and disinformation. M7 didn't want that, and he noted months ago that that is what had happened. Hence, Saidit is not merely an "alternative to Reddit", with fewer restrictions, but has become another extreme right-wing misinformation website, where indeed anyone who questions this development is abused and eventually leaves. I've recently posted positive comments about Saidit, noting how it's more engaging than Reddit, but don't feel like noting them again here.)

socks · 2021-09-15T09:11:26+00:00

Completely irrelevant. She's done nothing wrong. Meanwhile, hundreds of other congresspeople who do nothing aren't getting this idiotic response about: ooooh - he LOVES attention - look at him....

socks · 2021-09-15T02:17:09+00:00

Capital Gains Tax?

This is a very old discussion, one that could not be appropriately addressed in the jobs bill, as it would be consided unfair to a specific rich minority. The only taxt congress would consider in a jobs bill is one that applies to the broadest selections of people. The fact is: ANY additional tax on the rich would be a step in the right direction, given the tax cuts over the past 40 years. Regarding offshore accounts, those also have to be restricted, though not in the Jobs bill. One tax law at a time, if Democrats can remain in office.

socks · 2021-09-15T01:12:38+00:00

she is a hypocrite, not unlike the dumb republicans who only care about the rich

This is a circular argument (it's false). It's this simple:

Increase taxes for the rich. That's what she supports. That's what the Biden jobs bill has in it. That's what a handful of Dems and ALL Republicans are against. She and a few other Dems support a higher tax for the rich. It's that simple. Republicans (and some Dems) do NOT support the higher tax. This should be crystal clear to everyone.

socks · 2021-09-15T01:06:12+00:00

Chipit - this is your 5th or 6th post in /s/politics and other subs attacking AOC because of something unimportant. You obviously want us at Saidit to join in your hatred of her. But why go after her and not the hundreds of other politicians? How is she so different? Is it because she is actively working on legislation that will help the 99%, whereas most of her colleagues aren't doing that, and that all Republicans (and a few Dems) are actively lobbying with disinformation about this - and a damn dress - in order to block her progress with bills that help the 99%? You're helping these rich assholes fuck over the 99% when you spread their propaganda. I hope you appreciate that these posts are part of a political lobbying movement to harm the 99%.

socks · 2021-09-15T00:56:06+00:00

No - Chipit - he's wondering about the topic of the post, not about the damage to your ego when someone disagrees with you. Grow up.

socks · 2021-09-15T00:53:29+00:00

You three should get a room. (It's also OK to support pro-democracy progressives on Saidit. That's not provoking a reaction.)

socks · 2021-09-15T00:41:25+00:00

Or - Rob - you could have something to say, rather than so little confidence in yourself that you have to resort to weak insults. Go on then, think of something informative.

socks · 2021-09-15T00:29:46+00:00

That's the opposite of what's happening, while hundreds of other congresspeople are corrupt and ignoring millions facing eviction. Who do you think pays for this propaganda? Follow the money.

socks · 2021-09-15T00:14:50+00:00

It's bloody obvious that Elder is a white supremacist, and it's making him a ton of money. He's worth $16 million, thanks especially to his propaganda since 2004. His approaches are quite harmful to other blacks, getting in the way of decades of attempts to reduce racism.

socks · 2021-09-14T23:58:46+00:00

So - you've read the definition and now you're trolling?

socks · 2021-09-14T23:57:32+00:00

Some of the worst kinds of people are those who think they're so smart when they aren't.

Your comments take everything out of context, as if you have no idea where she was, what the Gala was for, the rare tradition of making a political statement with a dress, and so much more about the context. If you wore the dress, would that be an argument? Not really, because you're an anonymous online person. It's a slogan if you wear it.

If a politician wears that dress in a room of rich people, that is an argument. Do you understand?

The person, the dress, the statement on the expensive dress, the rich people at the Gala, the publicity for it, the history of political statements at Galas, the fact that this is a fundraiser, the need for rich people to pay a fair share of taxes (which some rich people agree with), and so much more make this 'event' of her's and the dress at the Gala an argument.

And you are definitely in no position to determine who has "brains" and who doesn't. If you were a zombie, you'd starve.

socks · 2021-09-14T23:46:20+00:00

It's false, but many right-wing assholes in Israel believe it. See the links in the comment above: https://saidit.net/s/news/comments/8dpm/china_slams_george_soros_declares_him_a_global/v3mq

Do you also have a problem with democracies? (You don't have to answer, but also know that you're a traitor to other Jews if you support the spread of disinformation about Jews. It just creates additional hatred of them, as you can see on Saidit.)

socks · 2021-09-14T23:40:57+00:00

Not soup Nazis, not spelling Nazis, not feminazis, but real live Nazis.

LOL!

It's a damn myth, and it has absolutely nothing to do with his support of democracies and the 99%. WTF. Do you have a problem with democracies? Do you have a problem with someone who supports the 99%?

More info on the myths:

https://www.vox.com/2018/6/11/17405784/george-soros-not-a-nazi-trump

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/five-myths/five-myths-about-george-soros/2020/08/06/ad195582-d1e9-11ea-8d32-1ebf4e9d8e0d_story.html

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-photo-soros-nazi-bookkeeper-idUSKBN23P2TP

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/george-soros-nazi-jew-conspiracy-theory-roseanne-barr-twitter-rant-a8377301.html

https://apnews.com/article/archive-fact-checking-2336951905

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/feb/10/facebook-posts/no-george-soros-wasnt-nazi-soldier/

https://digitaledition.chicagotribune.com/tribune/article_popover.aspx?guid=9a79dc19-674b-4126-a805-f1ba9c57d15c

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Soros

https://www.forbes.com/sites/sethcohen/2020/09/12/the-troubling-truth-about-the-obsession-with-george-soros/?sh=42cb86054e2e

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/george-soros-ss-nazi-germany/

https://forward.com/scribe/402708/george-soros-is-not-and-has-never-been-a-nazi/

https://www.mythdetector.ge/en/myth/who-spreads-repeated-disinformation-about-george-soros-collaboration-nazis

https://twitter.com/adamwagner1/status/1156460706092519424?lang=en-gb

socks · 2021-09-14T23:29:21+00:00

Look up the definition of 'troll'

socks · 2021-09-14T22:35:02+00:00

So you're making this up as well? The contradiction is the "no", OK? The argument is what follows the contradiction.

socks · 2021-09-14T22:31:26+00:00

It doesn't matter. The discussion is about Soros, not my mind, or your mind, or anything personal. Have confidence in your arguments and evidence.

socks · 2021-09-14T22:28:22+00:00

Courage would have been wearing an openly pro-American dress.

No - not at all

She would have been thrown out of the event.

No - not even.

But this virtue signalling?

No - It's POLITICS - the rich should pay taxes

Fit right in.

No - she didn't - around the rich people: that's the point!

Everyone knew it was theater.

Of course - for everyone and what they wore. Do you know anything about Galas?

AOC is a fraud.

Certainly not.

What happened to force the vote?

Not related to the Gala

AOC showed courage by standing up to the little people

No - they're not little people

and bravely going along with Pelosi.

No - it's politics

Stunning and brave!

No - it's her job

All of these points are really strange, as if they copied a Fox News broadcast. They're also all wrong.

socks · 2021-09-14T22:11:07+00:00

I think you're projecting (ie. you absolutely believe the anti-Soros disinformation - as if he has so much control over everything [which he doesn't]). I am merely mentioning what I've learned about him, his foundations, his support for democrats, and his support for democracy. Only people who don't like all of that would bother to argue. But what's not to like, I wonder (and don't feel compelled to answer).

socks · 2021-09-14T21:51:15+00:00

This is way too oversimplified, as if you've copied it from Fox News. He's spent billions on assisting the 99%. Attacks on him by the 1% are solely for the purpose of continuing their abuses of the 99%.

socks · 2021-09-14T21:48:56+00:00

This is unrelated to The Open Society foundations, and if he supported peaceful protestors, all the better. Video evidence shows white people in black masks and outfits breaking windows and throwing molotov coctails into buildings. Plenty of evidence of these anarchist and fascist agitators. Peaceful BLM protestors tried to stop them.

socks · 2021-09-14T21:45:21+00:00

He is - though perhaps you note this because you're influenced by right-wing propaganda.

socks · 2021-09-14T21:28:14+00:00

I already get your operation mode.

There's no 'operation mode'.

There is no way to compare a period of 100 years (Khanate)

Several hundred years (why don't you know this?)

concrete periods that already existed for more than a thousand years, and lasted for more than centuries afterward,

This is not a discussion of history. Compare the Golden Horde with the Huns.

Khanate period did not determine the people of Europe.

That's not the issue. The issue is that these are periods with relatively mixed ethnicities, even if by a low margin.

Miscegenation is a theory?

Yes - for the reasons I mention, and it's unrelated to pre-modern history.

socks · 2021-09-14T21:01:56+00:00

You already saw the post that answers this question: https://saidit.net/s/news/comments/8dpm/china_slams_george_soros_declares_him_a_global/v3eu

socks · 2021-09-14T21:00:38+00:00

No - Jet - there's no need for all of this. Soros has pro-democracy foundations. Why turn this information into something it isn't. This is exhausting...

socks · 2021-09-14T20:56:00+00:00

This doesn't make sense.

socks · 2021-09-14T20:55:21+00:00

No - Yin - we don't compare reality with a stupid movie. Grow up.

socks · 2021-09-14T20:53:26+00:00

So what? She made an important statement, in a room of rich people. We should tax the rich. Noting that she could have done something else is missing the point.

socks · 2021-09-14T20:51:58+00:00

At least she's made a good argument on the dress. Yes, that did require courage.

socks · 2021-09-14T20:45:54+00:00

Right - not really much to discuss....

socks · 2021-09-14T20:20:04+00:00

your mind is clearly made up

This has nothing to do with me. I've made points about Soros; that's it. If you have a problem with Soros, mention what it is. Did he help create income inequality in the US? No. Think about the legislation passed by Republicans (and Clinton) in the past 40 years. If all of this is to be reduced to attacks on 3 people who are working on democratic and financial benefits of the 99%, while being blocked by Republicans, guess who is fucking up our lives. (Not those 3 people.)

socks · 2021-09-14T20:13:52+00:00

So you make assumptions about the migration and Khanate periods that are false, and now want to attach historical research that indicates "miscegenation" did not happen in Europe? Miscegenation is a THEORY, published ahead of the 1864 election in order to scare honkies into voting for a racist. It worked, and helped put in place a number of post-Civil-war racist segregation laws. Until recently I was not legally permitted in my state to marry a person of color (from any other part of the world). States repealed that law as late as the 1960s. Another modern concept is white nationalism. Yes, there were previous groups in Europe who arranged marriages within their own families, their own extended families, their own towns, and so on. But the main approach to selecting a partner was not the selection of skin color. There are no records of referring to the selection of a white man. There are records complementing a woman with nice white skin, but this is merely aesthetic, not about the MASTER RACE. Marrying someone with a different skin color would depend on their wealth, association with the family, or other circumstances. In many cases, women were raped by the invatinding groups from the East and elsethere. Women and children were also traded throughout Europe. The children of slaves were often mixed. Were Europeans predomantly white-skinned and round-eyed? Yes, in the West, but not in Eastern Europe, or in part of Central Europe, where some of these traits are partially mixed. Consider much of Iberia, North Africa and the Eastern Mediterranean. Europeans have always been partially mixed, for many reasons.

socks · 2021-09-14T19:53:51+00:00

One of the Visigoth leaders was Attila the Hun. You mention groups that conquered parts of Europe, Africa, and the East during the "migration" period, including Alamans, Vandals, Goths, Huns, Ostrogothsand Bulgars.

The Hun, Ostrogoth, Vandal and Khanate invasions and settlements definitely changed the gene pools of European populations. More links:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huns

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Europe

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_Period

socks · 2021-09-14T18:37:59+00:00

And pro-democracy - so that you can continue to enjoy your freedom fries and potentially vote your favorite candidates into office

socks · 2021-09-14T18:34:53+00:00

Some of my views are left, some center, some right, perhaps like most people in the US. Brief examples:

RIGHT - immigration (send illegals back, without question; there's a process for everone)

CENTER - abortion (allowed only in the 1st trimester)

LEFT - eliminate the electoral college and all votes should be on paper or online (every vote counts)

socks · 2021-09-14T17:31:08+00:00

They didn't nominate her.

They did - that's the legal name for it.

She stole the election from Bernie.

I think there was good evidence of this, but conversations with normal people have to address the fact of the nomination, after which one can discuss the evidence of manipulating votes. Nonetheless, Bernie had an unelectability problem, but I think he would have solved it with his many supporters (including me).

Dore was a hardcore Bernie supporter. Something that nazis aren't known for doing.

Which is why Dore is a fraud. He and some other Bernie supporters who helped get Trump elected are terrible people and caused additional problems for the 99%, as well as Democrats.

He has plenty of solutions. Most of which start with "not being corrupt bastards" which eliminates most of the Democrats. Including AOC, who just wore a $30,000 dress to a gala full of pedophile billionaires.

Yes - the Gala is terrible - but AOC offered an important political message to the "rich" who were at the Gala. She also supported Bernie, and addresses many of the concerns Bernie had. Why do you think she was not a pic for VP? Because of the damn DNC &c. None of this is simple.

Electoralism is considered a non-starter by the hard left, as you know well being one yourself.

I'm a centrist. (Though I appreciate that the extreme right-wing folks here don't see it that way, nor does it matter. Don't make any of this personal or take my comments personally.)

"social democracy is objectively the moderate wing of fascism"

I don't know who you're quoting, but the 1930s concept of German fascism did change significantly by 1939, and is very different today.

socks · 2021-09-14T17:05:38+00:00

Yes - I see your points, though I also agree and argue that the Clintons deserve quite a bit of criticism for their dirty deals with the GOP. It's horrific that the DNC nominated Hilary. But my problem with Dore is that he's focused only on criticisms, which ring dry after a while, especially when he's not looking at the broader picture, or balancing his arguments, or considering the impossible alternatives. His most recent criticism of AOC is that she's not doing enough. He's really reaching as far as possible to find critical material, and what he's found is that this broadens his listener base and pays his bills. Meanwhile, his followers also focus only on criticisms and not solutions, will not want to vote in elections (because everyone is a baddie), and are impossible to talk with regarding politics because they only know how to whine about every single topic. It's pathetic. Dore is a businessman, and sees that his complaints make money. But by throwing the baby out with the bathwater, he's fucking over the pro-democracy democrats who are trying to make a difference for the 99%, even if they too are limited.

socks · 2021-09-14T16:35:34+00:00

You simply don't understand what democracy is.

Really - that's the conversation we're supposed to have? High School civics? You telling me what I know or don't know? How is that an adult conversation?

It's not the outcome you personally think is good.

This is irrelevant. It's not at issue.

That's not right wing propaganda.

This is irrelevant. It's not at issue.

Can you even give an example of a supposed pro democracy policy promoted by Soros?

You can easily locate this, because it's the #1 aim of his foundations (to put the 99% back in control of their nations):

https://money.cnn.com/2017/10/17/news/george-soros-18-billion-open-society-foundations/index.html

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/george-soros-open-society-foundations-pro-democracy-donate-billions-hungarian-american-a8007431.html

https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/who-we-are

The Open Society Foundations, founded by George Soros, are the world’s largest private funder of independent groups working for justice, democratic governance, and human rights. We provide thousands of grants every year through a network of national and regional foundations and offices, funding a vast array of projects—many of them now shaped by the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic.

socks · 2021-09-14T16:27:27+00:00

Sorry - you lost me at "Jimmy Dore is a hard leftist."

Dore acts like he's concerned about the 'left' while DEFINITELY supporting the extreme right wing, because he's constantly attacking politicians on the left. He's helping the right, not the left. There is so much written about this, though here are two sources:

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/01/29/dore-j29.html

https://www.thedailybeast.com/these-dirtbag-left-stars-are-flirting-with-the-far-right

socks · 2021-09-14T15:54:27+00:00

Hence - presidents aren't really "Frustrated Over Seeing 'F [president X]' Signs and Flags Across the Country" (moreover, 5 derps with flags aren't really "across the country"). Rather ironic that "proudamerican.site" isn't proud to be American, according to what we read in their idiotic posts.

socks · 2021-09-14T15:29:51+00:00

The issue here is that insider trading on the Hill is definitely a problem, which is why right-wing propagandist Jimmy Dore tries to turn your attention to an old Democrat who should have retired years ago. This shifts our attention on the real problem to one Democrat, whereas ALL congresspeople should be investigated for insider trading on a regular basis, and that the ONLY people who want to limit insider trading have been Democrats. The bill from the Obama administration was one of many in 2012 meant to curb corruption. The GOP have been the party of deregulation and corporate abuse. (There have been republicans who've supported insider trading laws - in 1988, for example - but in general, the GOP and others have engineered loopholes in the legislation that allow them to continue insider trading and to hide their money offshore.)

socks · 2021-09-14T15:20:00+00:00

Are you trying to get me to believe something that's this ridiculous, or do you genuinely believe it?

(If the latter, keep in mind that there are numerous wealthy doners who support initiatives that help democracies develop and the rule of the 99% over the 1%, just as there are numerous donors who support initiatives that ruduce the role of the 99% in a democracy, so that the 1% can abuse the 99% for temporary gain. Search 'corporate' 'donors', and search 'wealthy' 'donors'. The extent to which right-wing propaganda helps people believe what you wrote is quite worrying. It's not logical or based on factual information.)

socks · 2021-09-14T12:57:52+00:00

yet again implying Europeans are heavily mixed

I didn't say this. It seems your arguments (before and now) focus mainly on predominantly white vs predominantly non-white genes in Europeans. I'm not really addressing this. My main argument is that there is a mixture of ethnicities, albeit less in some and more in others, but naturally Europeans are predominantly white-skinned, and regarding the Semitic or Hebrew groups, one would have great difficulty showing that these people are any different from Medeterranean white-skinned groups, even while appreciating that some Semitic groups try to marry ONLY Semitic people.

socks · 2021-09-14T12:05:19+00:00

To understand European mixed ethnicity, we need to appreciate the extent of human trafficking, rape, conquest, migration, &c especially between 150,000 BCE and 1700 around the Mediterranean and further north. Mixed race groups on the Iberian peninsula are an easy topic, as they were a combination of Arab, Berber, and other groups between the early eighth century and the late 15th century. Note also the mixing of groups that occurred during the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_Period . Mexicans are 70% - 90% mixed-race, many of whom have Iberian ancestry: https://www.quora.com/How-many-Mexicans-have-at-least-some-degree-of-Iberian-ancestry . An interesting part of Ukranian and Polish ancestry is the Khanate contribution in the 12th - 18th centuries. Scandinavians who traded (&c) along the Volga river and in the Mediterranean in the 8th-12th centuries also had Arab slaves and partners. Turkic groups spread throughout Eurasia, as conquerors and as slaves. There were Africans in Europe, for various reasons. Here's one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camera_degli_Sposi#/media/File:Andrea_Mantegna_-_Ceiling_Oculus_-_WGA14023.jpg

socks · 2021-09-14T10:17:57+00:00

Why so hostile?

Anyhow, seems you missed this day in school:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Horde

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_Empire

Most Europeans are mixed.

socks · 2021-09-14T09:46:57+00:00

Indeed - it's just her, and not hundreds of other congresspeople.

Democrats have tried to stop insider trading: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STOCK_Act

https://thehill.com/opinion/criminal-justice/493497-insider-trading-by-congress-its-time-to-fix-the-law

socks · 2021-09-14T09:18:13+00:00

Yes - though it's so easy for Americans to become obese, that most of them gained a bit of weight during COVID lockdowns (per the news), and indeed, these obese Americans have been more likely to suffer from COVID19, as have old people. The older one gets, it's so much more difficult to lose weight.

socks · 2021-09-14T09:13:09+00:00

If your monkey bar moat plan goes through I'll probably just invest in a trebuchet.

Golden comment!

socks · 2021-09-14T09:05:49+00:00

Thanks for this. En-volve.com is now now nominated for the list at /s/ShitpostNews, here

socks · 2021-09-14T09:04:05+00:00

Certainly not if it supports democratitic causes.

socks · 2021-09-14T08:58:51+00:00

Here is the post that inspired the present nomination.

It's obvious that their posts are focused on extreme right-wing propaganda, misinformation and disinformation, though one can also see reviews of the site here:

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/en-volve

socks

MODERATOR OF