More on Reddit's pedophile subculture

[EricBarbour]

This ran on Gawker today:

"Pedophiles Are Still Tearing Reddit Apart"

They purged Michael Brutsch. They shut down hundreds of really disgusting subreddits, and banned hundreds of accounts. And yet this variety of petty bullshit keeps happening, and they keep covering it up. Because "Men's Rights!" and "secrecy!"

The full post is kind of convoluted, but here is the gist: user A claims that he or she was banned from AskReddit after noting that user B has admitted to pedophilia in past posts, in a thread in which user B was defending the rights of pedophiles in the work place (#reddit). According to screenshots posted by user A — whose user name is "CoonTown" (#reddit), by the way — he or she was banned because "pointing out [that] someone is a pedophile is likely to cause them to suffer the wrath of the hivemind."

The banned user, and others in subsequent comments in the thread, are accusing Reddit of having a double standard when it comes to the protection of its posters. They allege that Reddit's moderators condone the common practice of male users bullying female posters by digging through their post histories in order to re-post nudes from Reddit's many "gonewild" subreddits in non-related threads. One moderator, at least, acknowledges the double standard but nonetheless wipes it away.

This is just a few moderators of one subreddit, albeit one that reaches nearly 20 million people per month. The story, though legitimate, could be a minor one. Nonetheless, it speaks to a problem at Reddit's core that the site has yet been able to completely destroy: that its libertarianism is so deeply poisoned by misogyny that freedom from harassment is more urgent for child pornographers than women.

Emphasis mine.

Looking at CoonTown's thread right now, and it's the most heavily downvoted thread I've ever seen on Reddit, with a score of -491. Almost every commentor in the thread was heavily downvoted.

As he said lower down in the thread:

The top mod on /r/askreddit is a site admin. I think it's pretty safe to say that this new rule protecting pedos is coming straight from the top.

[Michaeldsuarez]

The same thing happens on Commons, yet Gawker doesn't write stories about that.

[EricBarbour]

And today, Salon ran yet another item on Reddit misogyny:
Doxxing Internet babes: “She wanted it”

When a woman posted a before and after weight loss photo of herself in her underwear, a redditor posted a comment with her name and social media accounts and it was upvoted more than 500 times. The subreddit r/ShitRedditSays, which criticizes comments that are “bigoted, creepy, misogynistic, transphobic, racist, homophobic, or just reeking of unexamined, toxic privilege,” recently called out r/photoplunder, a subreddit devoted to discovering photos in women’s photobucket accounts that are meant to be private. The site comes with the tag line, “They should know better.” As ShitRedditSays points out, many posts link “back to the photobucket account it came from, names and even high schools and colleges, and some of it is searchable to more personal profile information than that. despite this, the mode refuse to check links that may have real names and content info in the titles.”

It can spill over into women’s real lives, too. A redditor with the username thatonecatlady who had posted to GoneWild wrote, ”Some of the guys in my university’s dorm found out, and they proceeded to write rude things on the whiteboard outside my room.” It can get a lot worse than that. Redditor kwammiz wrote about her experience having her email account hacked and naked images of her, along with her name and address, posted on 4chan. “Men at bars in the (large) town where I live call me slut. Entire threads on 4chan are devoted to finding out which facebook-events I am attending. I recieve multiple emails everyday calling me horrible things. So do my mother, father and little sister. And my dear cousin, who is only 14, had them sent to her as well. I cannot begin to explain the hurt of being called up by a child, wondering why I’m naked in her facebook inbox.”

[enwikibadscience]

This ran on Gawker today:

"Pedophiles Are Still Tearing Reddit Apart"

They purged Michael Brutsch. They shut down hundreds of really disgusting subreddits, and banned hundreds of accounts. And yet this variety of petty bullshit keeps happening, and they keep covering it up. Because "Men's Rights!" and "secrecy!"

The full post is kind of convoluted, but here is the gist: user A claims that he or she was banned from AskReddit after noting that user B has admitted to pedophilia in past posts, in a thread in which user B was defending the rights of pedophiles in the work place (#reddit). According to screenshots posted by user A — whose user name is "CoonTown" (#reddit), by the way — he or she was banned because "pointing out [that] someone is a pedophile is likely to cause them to suffer the wrath of the hivemind."

The banned user, and others in subsequent comments in the thread, are accusing Reddit of having a double standard when it comes to the protection of its posters. They allege that Reddit's moderators condone the common practice of male users bullying female posters by digging through their post histories in order to re-post nudes from Reddit's many "gonewild" subreddits in non-related threads. One moderator, at least, acknowledges the double standard but nonetheless wipes it away.

This is just a few moderators of one subreddit, albeit one that reaches nearly 20 million people per month. The story, though legitimate, could be a minor one. Nonetheless, it speaks to a problem at Reddit's core that the site has yet been able to completely destroy: that its libertarianism is so deeply poisoned by misogyny that freedom from harassment is more urgent for child pornographers than women.

Emphasis mine.

Looking at CoonTown's thread right now, and it's the most heavily downvoted thread I've ever seen on Reddit, with a score of -491. Almost every commentor in the thread was heavily downvoted.

As he said lower down in the thread:

The top mod on /r/askreddit is a site admin. I think it's pretty safe to say that this new rule protecting pedos is coming straight from the top.

What's the Wikipedia connection?

[Stierlitz]

This ran on Gawker today:

"Pedophiles Are Still Tearing Reddit Apart"

They purged Michael Brutsch. They shut down hundreds of really disgusting subreddits, and banned hundreds of accounts. And yet this variety of petty bullshit keeps happening, and they keep covering it up. Because "Men's Rights!" and "secrecy!"

The full post is kind of convoluted, but here is the gist: user A claims that he or she was banned from AskReddit after noting that user B has admitted to pedophilia in past posts, in a thread in which user B was defending the rights of pedophiles in the work place (#reddit). According to screenshots posted by user A — whose user name is "CoonTown" (#reddit), by the way — he or she was banned because "pointing out [that] someone is a pedophile is likely to cause them to suffer the wrath of the hivemind."

The banned user, and others in subsequent comments in the thread, are accusing Reddit of having a double standard when it comes to the protection of its posters. They allege that Reddit's moderators condone the common practice of male users bullying female posters by digging through their post histories in order to re-post nudes from Reddit's many "gonewild" subreddits in non-related threads. One moderator, at least, acknowledges the double standard but nonetheless wipes it away.

This is just a few moderators of one subreddit, albeit one that reaches nearly 20 million people per month. The story, though legitimate, could be a minor one. Nonetheless, it speaks to a problem at Reddit's core that the site has yet been able to completely destroy: that its libertarianism is so deeply poisoned by misogyny that freedom from harassment is more urgent for child pornographers than women.

Emphasis mine.

Looking at CoonTown's thread right now, and it's the most heavily downvoted thread I've ever seen on Reddit, with a score of -491. Almost every commentor in the thread was heavily downvoted.

As he said lower down in the thread:

The top mod on /r/askreddit is a site admin. I think it's pretty safe to say that this new rule protecting pedos is coming straight from the top.

What's the Wikipedia connection?

Both sites have had child porn on them, they both suffer from egos run amok, the user base is pretty young. The main difference is that, because Reddit is a series of sub-forums, you can unsubscribe from the crazy ones and hang out on your own alternate Reddit of cat photos, weird YouTube clips, and beer homebrewing.

[EricBarbour]

What's the Wikipedia connection?

a) this subforum is for Web 2.0 discussion in general, not necessarily about Wikipedia.
b) many, many Wikipedia insiders have Reddit accounts. And how heavily downvoted and censored any thread dealing with Wikipedia problems tends to be.

Recall the Sue Gardner thread from last November. A small mob of WMF employees/buttlickers stood around, dominated the entire thread, and tried to silence any criticism of Gardner, Wikipedia or WMF. You were downvoted in that thread; it wasn't an "accident". Until the WMF tossed her out recently, Sarah Stierch was a regular thread starter on Reddit, albeit not very successful. Her focus was almost entirely on feminist issues and protecting Wikipedia, and the former is extremely unpopular in Reddit's twisted little subculture.

Since early 2012 I've been keeping track of Reddit scandals. They have major ones almost every month, and more telling, in many cases all of the direct evidence is erased. That's what happened with Michael "Violentacrez" Brutsch, he was running scores of subreddits that were extremely disgusting, and some apparently contained child pornography. After the explosion, all traces of his account were deleted and all traces of his subreddits were deleted by Reddit's administrators. If you think Wikipedia admins are abusive, high-handed and dishonest, Reddit admins make them look like nice guys. I've seen serious claims that Reddit is possibly the most heavily censored website on earth -- and very few members of Reddit's massive userbase have any idea this is going on.

[Johnny Au]

I have mimicked Reddit's design to create the message below:

Reddit really needs to clean up their acts.

[Poetlister]

Both sites have had child porn on them, they both suffer from egos run amok, the user base is pretty young. The main difference is that, because Reddit is a series of sub-forums, you can unsubscribe from the crazy ones and hang out on your own alternate Reddit of cat photos, weird YouTube clips, and beer homebrewing.

On the whole, you can do that on Wikipedia. You restrict yourself to articles on some obscure topic where there is little controversy, like cat photos, weird YouTube clips, and beer homebrewing.

[lilburne]

And you can combine all three and produce a HOWTO video on making cat piss beer.

[Zoloft]

This ran on Gawker today:

"Pedophiles Are Still Tearing Reddit Apart"

They purged Michael Brutsch. They shut down hundreds of really disgusting subreddits, and banned hundreds of accounts. And yet this variety of petty bullshit keeps happening, and they keep covering it up. Because "Men's Rights!" and "secrecy!"

The full post is kind of convoluted, but here is the gist: user A claims that he or she was banned from AskReddit after noting that user B has admitted to pedophilia in past posts, in a thread in which user B was defending the rights of pedophiles in the work place (#reddit). According to screenshots posted by user A — whose user name is "CoonTown" (#reddit), by the way — he or she was banned because "pointing out [that] someone is a pedophile is likely to cause them to suffer the wrath of the hivemind."

The banned user, and others in subsequent comments in the thread, are accusing Reddit of having a double standard when it comes to the protection of its posters. They allege that Reddit's moderators condone the common practice of male users bullying female posters by digging through their post histories in order to re-post nudes from Reddit's many "gonewild" subreddits in non-related threads. One moderator, at least, acknowledges the double standard but nonetheless wipes it away.

This is just a few moderators of one subreddit, albeit one that reaches nearly 20 million people per month. The story, though legitimate, could be a minor one. Nonetheless, it speaks to a problem at Reddit's core that the site has yet been able to completely destroy: that its libertarianism is so deeply poisoned by misogyny that freedom from harassment is more urgent for child pornographers than women.

Emphasis mine.

Looking at CoonTown's thread right now, and it's the most heavily downvoted thread I've ever seen on Reddit, with a score of -491. Almost every commentor in the thread was heavily downvoted.

As he said lower down in the thread:

The top mod on /r/askreddit is a site admin. I think it's pretty safe to say that this new rule protecting pedos is coming straight from the top.

What's the Wikipedia connection?

Both sites have had child porn on them, they both suffer from egos run amok, the user base is pretty young. The main difference is that, because Reddit is a series of sub-forums, you can unsubscribe from the crazy ones and hang out on your own alternate Reddit of cat photos, weird YouTube clips, and beer homebrewing.

Reddit also has the slightly milder image sharing social network, Imgur.com, which shares many of its characteristics.

oh, and of course,



to new member Stierlitz!

[Stierlitz]

Reddit also has the slightly milder image sharing social network, Imgur.com, which shares many of its characteristics.

oh, and of course,



to new member Stierlitz!

Thank you......my name is a handle, a reference to Seventeen Moments of Spring, the old Soviet spy drama/meller.

As for Imgur, don't check out the photos that go along with r/WTF; lots of "my friend mashed his hand at his warehouse job and here is his cameraphone pic of it" and gifs of things best kept in a medical textbook.

[TungstenCarbide]

... Thank you......my name is a handle, a reference to Seventeen Moments of Spring, the old Soviet spy drama/meller...

I loved that series!

[enwikibadscience]

What's the Wikipedia connection?

a) this subforum is for Web 2.0 discussion in general, not necessarily about Wikipedia.
b) many, many Wikipedia insiders have Reddit accounts. And how heavily downvoted and censored any thread dealing with Wikipedia problems tends to be.

Recall the Sue Gardner thread from last November. A small mob of WMF employees/buttlickers stood around, dominated the entire thread, and tried to silence any criticism of Gardner, Wikipedia or WMF. You were downvoted in that thread; it wasn't an "accident". Until the WMF tossed her out recently, Sarah Stierch was a regular thread starter on Reddit, albeit not very successful. Her focus was almost entirely on feminist issues and protecting Wikipedia, and the former is extremely unpopular in Reddit's twisted little subculture.

Since early 2012 I've been keeping track of Reddit scandals. They have major ones almost every month, and more telling, in many cases all of the direct evidence is erased. That's what happened with Michael "Violentacrez" Brutsch, he was running scores of subreddits that were extremely disgusting, and some apparently contained child pornography. After the explosion, all traces of his account were deleted and all traces of his subreddits were deleted by Reddit's administrators. If you think Wikipedia admins are abusive, high-handed and dishonest, Reddit admins make them look like nice guys. I've seen serious claims that Reddit is possibly the most heavily censored website on earth -- and very few members of Reddit's massive userbase have any idea this is going on.

Lol. Everything I said was so lamely downvoted that it brought attention, and my next thread with some other, but also unanswered question, was excessively upvoted. I got e-mails from some blog writers whose posts are sometimes discussed on Wkipediocracy and a huge upswing in viewers (and messages, they came because I was downvoted) from all the notice due to downvoting me on the Gardner thread.

To me Reddit is so obviously tainted it seems irrelevant. I am always surprised when legit people agree to an Ask Me Anything as it shows their low level of knowledge of the Internet. Who would want to associate with child pornographers and misogynistic basement dwelling trolls? At least at Wikipedia your excuse for being there can be cover.

[Stierlitz]

I have mimicked Reddit's design to create the message below:

Reddit really needs to clean up their acts.

It would break their ideology to do that.....these are the same guys who have r/nazis, used to have r/ni**ers, and let giant trollwars go on between "the Crew" of r/conspiratard and r/NoLibsWatch. It's distilled Internet jackassery all under one "roof."

[Johnny Au]

I have mimicked Reddit's design to create the message below:

Reddit really needs to clean up their acts.

It would break their ideology to do that.....these are the same guys who have r/nazis, used to have r/ni**ers, and let giant trollwars go on between "the Crew" of r/conspiratard and r/NoLibsWatch. It's distilled Internet jackassery all under one "roof."

No doubt about that. Reddit mods would never create that image of course.

I created that image for satirical purposes (and it was uploaded using imgur to boot!)

[Stierlitz]

I have mimicked Reddit's design to create the message below:

Reddit really needs to clean up their acts.

It would break their ideology to do that.....these are the same guys who have r/nazis, used to have r/ni**ers, and let giant trollwars go on between "the Crew" of r/conspiratard and r/NoLibsWatch. It's distilled Internet jackassery all under one "roof."

No doubt about that. Reddit mods would never create that image of course.

I created that image for satirical purposes (and it was uploaded using imgur to boot!)

Has it been sneered at by the "hive mind" yet?

The hard-core people hate being criticized, even by insiders.

[EricBarbour]

It would break their ideology to do that.....these are the same guys who have r/nazis, used to have r/ni**ers, and let giant trollwars go on between "the Crew" of r/conspiratard and r/NoLibsWatch. It's distilled Internet jackassery all under one "roof."

They still have:
Raping Women
Nazi
Abuse porn
Hot Rape Stories "because "no" is negotiable"
Killingwomen
Beatingwomen
Eatingwomen
Niggas
Faggots
ChokeABitch (now private)
BeatingCripples
Necroporn

Etc, etc......

[EricBarbour]

Nice follow-up to the Salon piece, includes a reference to Wisconsin governor/asshole in chief Scott Walker:

Scott Walker Ordered a Woman Fired Because She Modeled Thongs. Scott Walker Would Love Reddit.

As Clark-Flory writes, this is hardly a unique circumstance. Women are routinely doxxed and harassed on Reddit for the perceived crime of being sexy. She reports on a variety of women, some who posted anonymous pictures of sexy poses and some who weren't even trying to be sexy with their selfies, who have found their names and contact information floated in retaliation. It seems that there are all different ways to chastise women for showing skin. In this regard, the creeps on Reddit and the governor of Wisconsin are on the same page.

[enwikibadscience]

It would break their ideology to do that.....these are the same guys who have r/nazis, used to have r/ni**ers, and let giant trollwars go on between "the Crew" of r/conspiratard and r/NoLibsWatch. It's distilled Internet jackassery all under one "roof."

They still have:
Raping Women
Nazi
Abuse porn
Hot Rape Stories "because "no" is negotiable"
Killingwomen
Beatingwomen
Eatingwomen
Niggas
Faggots
ChokeABitch (now private)
BeatingCripples
Necroporn

Etc, etc......

Thanks. I have never wanted to browse there, but I like having this list for the next person who does an AMA.

[Johnny Au]

It would break their ideology to do that.....these are the same guys who have r/nazis, used to have r/ni**ers, and let giant trollwars go on between "the Crew" of r/conspiratard and r/NoLibsWatch. It's distilled Internet jackassery all under one "roof."

They still have:
Raping Women
Nazi
Abuse porn
Hot Rape Stories "because "no" is negotiable"
Killingwomen
Beatingwomen
Eatingwomen
Niggas
Faggots
ChokeABitch (now private)
BeatingCripples
Necroporn

Etc, etc......

Thanks. I have never wanted to browse there, but I like having this list for the next person who does an AMA.

Even if that person is CGP Grey (T-H-L)?

[enwikibadscience]

It would break their ideology to do that.....these are the same guys who have r/nazis, used to have r/ni**ers, and let giant trollwars go on between "the Crew" of r/conspiratard and r/NoLibsWatch. It's distilled Internet jackassery all under one "roof."

They still have:
Raping Women
Nazi
Abuse porn
Hot Rape Stories "because "no" is negotiable"
Killingwomen
Beatingwomen
Eatingwomen
Niggas
Faggots
ChokeABitch (now private)
BeatingCripples
Necroporn

Etc, etc......

Thanks. I have never wanted to browse there, but I like having this list for the next person who does an AMA.

Even if that person is CGP Grey (T-H-L)?

No one should ever give credibilty to scum. Why not CGP Grey?

[The Joy]

It would break their ideology to do that.....these are the same guys who have r/nazis, used to have r/ni**ers, and let giant trollwars go on between "the Crew" of r/conspiratard and r/NoLibsWatch. It's distilled Internet jackassery all under one "roof."

They still have:
Raping Women
Nazi
Abuse porn
Hot Rape Stories "because "no" is negotiable"
Killingwomen
Beatingwomen
Eatingwomen
Niggas
Faggots
ChokeABitch (now private)
BeatingCripples
Necroporn

Etc, etc......

Thanks. I have never wanted to browse there, but I like having this list for the next person who does an AMA.

Reddit is truly a strange, strange place. Let me shun that. No more of that.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-26343700

[EricBarbour]

It's been a great week for bad news about Web 2.0.......

Reddit: a community toying with journalism

Cale Weissman commented on Reddit users’ decision to block a large number of sites from the Politics subreddit:

Let’s look at what this creates: a Reddit-induced filter bubble. Reddit and its melange of voices has been working to create a space where people submit content that is voted up based on the “merits,” whatever that means. As the site has evolved, new criteria has been adopted about what, precisely, a Reddit merit is. This is just another chapter in this evolving story.

Now, instead of merely barring websites that ragged on Reddit or outright called out its hypocrisy because of these actions, it is claiming to introduce a new criterion called “quality,” which may or may not have to do with the source’s opinion on Reddit. And this gives r/Politics an even broader dominion of content control than ever before.

Isn't it strange, that the "libertarian experiments" on the web keep turning into feudalistic, or in this case fascistic, crazyvilles.

[Stierlitz]

It's been a great week for bad news about Web 2.0.......

Isn't it strange, that the "libertarian experiments" on the web keep turning into feudalistic, or in this case fascistic, crazyvilles.

I'm going to open a can of worms here, but fascination with fascism has gone on forever in Libertarian circles. Back in 1966, the Rampart Journal a publication of the now-defunct Rampart College, had an issue on historical revisionism, which you can read here: http://mises.org/journals/rampart/rampa ... ng1966.pdf. Three of the authors stand out: Harry Elmer Barnes, Michael F. Connors, and Murray Rothbard.

Harry E. Barnes had gone from being a Germanophobe during America's involvment with WWI to a Germanophile, spending the 1920s debunking reams of anti-German propaganda. After WWII, he began debunking the reasons for the war, and with some help from the works of Paul Rassinier he became one of the first English-language Holocaust Deniers.

Michael F. Connors later wrote Dealing in Hate: The Development of Anti-German Propaganda, a thirty-page booklet which mentions H. E. Barnes in the first appendix. (By the way that booklet, first published in 1966, was republished in 1979 by the Institute for Historical Review, a Holocaust Denial outfit.)

Murray Rothbard is most well-known for being with, and leaving, Ayn Rand's Objectivist group in the 1950s, but afterwards he got kookier, supporting torture in police interrogation of "violent criminals", agreeing with Charles Murray's The Bell Curve because scientific racial inequality would kill any hope of socialism, was an anti-Zionist, and supported "free baby markets" to keep libertarian parents from letting their children starve in the crib (don't ask.) I should also add that James J. Martin, who also contributed to that issue, later wound up writing for the Institute for Historical Review.

***

What does this all that have to do with us today? The link is Robert LeFevre, dean of Rampart College and writer of the "On The Other Hand" column of Rampart Journal. According to Mark Ames, LeFevre was a guru to Charles Koch of Koch Industries. According to Ames, Charlie showed up at Rampart in 1964 for a two-week indoctrination course and he never left mentally. In 1977 Charles Koch and Murray Rothbard founded the Cato Institute.....the circles are small, but then they are very old.

[enwikibadscience]

It's been a great week for bad news about Web 2.0.......

Isn't it strange, that the "libertarian experiments" on the web keep turning into feudalistic, or in this case fascistic, crazyvilles.

I'm going to open a can of worms here, but fascination with fascism has gone on forever in Libertarian circles. Back in 1966, the Rampart Journal a publication of the now-defunct Rampart College, had an issue on historical revisionism, which you can read here: http://mises.org/journals/rampart/rampa ... ng1966.pdf. Three of the authors stand out: Harry Elmer Barnes, Michael F. Connors, and Murray Rothbard.

Harry E. Barnes had gone from being a Germanophobe during America's involvment with WWI to a Germanophile, spending the 1920s debunking reams of anti-German propaganda. After WWII, he began debunking the reasons for the war, and with some help from the works of Paul Rassinier he became one of the first English-language Holocaust Deniers.

Michael F. Connors later wrote Dealing in Hate: The Development of Anti-German Propaganda, a thirty-page booklet which mentions H. E. Barnes in the first appendix. (By the way that booklet, first published in 1966, was republished in 1979 by the Institute for Historical Review, a Holocaust Denial outfit.)

Murray Rothbard is most well-known for being with, and leaving, Ayn Rand's Objectivist group in the 1950s, but afterwards he got kookier, supporting torture in police interrogation of "violent criminals", agreeing with Charles Murray's The Bell Curve because scientific racial inequality would kill any hope of socialism, was an anti-Zionist, and supported "free baby markets" to keep libertarian parents from letting their children starve in the crib (don't ask.) I should also add that James J. Martin, who also contributed to that issue, later wound up writing for the Institute for Historical Review.

***

What does this all that have to do with us today? The link is Robert LeFevre, dean of Rampart College and writer of the "On The Other Hand" column of Rampart Journal. According to Mark Ames, LeFevre was a guru to Charles Koch of Koch Industries. According to Ames, Charlie showed up at Rampart in 1964 for a two-week indoctrination course and he never left mentally. In 1977 Charles Koch and Murray Rothbard founded the Cato Institute.....the circles are small, but then they are very old.

Institute for Historical Review. Lol. That is a piece of work. I grabbed half a dozen of their books at a garage sale, the titles being surprising.

And I had thought creationists were self-delusional morons.

[Kelly Martin]

Isn't it strange, that the "libertarian experiments" on the web keep turning into feudalistic, or in this case fascistic, crazyvilles.

Not really; it's fairly predictable, in fact.

[Cedric]

Institute for Historical Review. Lol. That is a piece of work. I grabbed half a dozen of their books at a garage sale, the titles being surprising.

And I had thought creationists were self-delusional morons.

Ah yes. That rings some bells.

[Stierlitz]

I dare people to actually read the 1966 Rampart Journal (http://mises.org/journals/rampart/rampa ... ng1966.pdf); I can't see a real case for why an "individualist anarchist" magazine ("Libertarian" was not being used at the time) would get into the subject of historical revisionism.

[enwikibadscience]

I dare people to actually read the 1966 Rampart Journal (http://mises.org/journals/rampart/rampa ... ng1966.pdf); I can't see a real case for why an "individualist anarchist" magazine ("Libertarian" was not being used at the time) would get into the subject of historical revisionism.

Limited mind extremists always jump ship from one to a different one. People think Libertarians are cool, kinda main stream. They are just another kind of unrealistic weirdo. So they turn out to be Nazis. They always were. Just had their brown coats on inside out for a while.

[Johnny Au]

I dare people to actually read the 1966 Rampart Journal (http://mises.org/journals/rampart/rampa ... ng1966.pdf); I can't see a real case for why an "individualist anarchist" magazine ("Libertarian" was not being used at the time) would get into the subject of historical revisionism.

They believe that their way is the only true way.

[Stierlitz]

I dare people to actually read the 1966 Rampart Journal (http://mises.org/journals/rampart/rampa ... ng1966.pdf); I can't see a real case for why an "individualist anarchist" magazine ("Libertarian" was not being used at the time) would get into the subject of historical revisionism.

Limited mind extremists always jump ship from one to a different one. People think Libertarians are cool, kinda main stream. They are just another kind of unrealistic weirdo. So they turn out to be Nazis. They always were. Just had their brown coats on inside out for a while.

I disagree; I don't think they are Nazis, but I do want them to explain why extreme free-market, pro-individual rights people want to re-jigger history so that Holocaust didn't happen, or minimize it into meaninglessness.

[Bottled_Spider]

I dare people to actually read the 1966 Rampart Journal (http://mises.org/journals/rampart/rampa ... ng1966.pdf); I can't see a real case for why an "individualist anarchist" magazine ("Libertarian" was not being used at the time) would get into the subject of historical revisionism.

Limited mind extremists always jump ship from one to a different one. People think Libertarians are cool, kinda main stream. They are just another kind of unrealistic weirdo. So they turn out to be Nazis. They always were. Just had their brown coats on inside out for a while.

I disagree; I don't think they are Nazis, but I do want them to explain why extreme free-market, pro-individual rights people want to re-jigger history so that Holocaust didn't happen, or minimize it into meaninglessness.

There's always been a very strong contrarian streak amongst the kind of people that self-identify as Libertards. They'd probably be just as happy to state the Holocaust did in fact occur if the prevailing consensus was that it didn't.

[Kelly Martin]

I disagree; I don't think they are Nazis, but I do want them to explain why extreme free-market, pro-individual rights people want to re-jigger history so that Holocaust didn't happen, or minimize it into meaninglessness.

Because the reason many of them became extreme pro-individual-rights people was in reaction to having their "individual rights" limited by the Civil Rights Act of 1964. You see, they are hard-core racists who deeply resent the government taking away their natural right to be racists, and they latched onto the libertarian philosophy as a "legitimate" philosophy that can underpin a legal argument why nondiscrimination laws are illegitimate. When libertarians (and today conservatives) says "get the government off our backs", this is what they're talking about.

This doesn't describe all libertarians, of course, but it describes a great many of them, especially those who came to the libertarian position in the 1960s through 1980s.

[EricBarbour]

"Why Reddit moderators are “censoring” Glenn Greenwald’s latest bombshell"

Mt. Gox’s imminent demise has particularly gripped Reddit communities like r/Bitcoin and r/news following rumors of a $300 million hack that crippled the Japan-based business. Redditors from r/news have also obsessed over Greenwald’s latest Edward Snowden leak—only his story has been banned from the default subreddit.

All links to Greenwald’s piece on the Intercept, a publication founded by First Look Media and home to Snowden’s leaked materials, titled “How Covert Agents Infiltrate the Internet to Manipulate, Deceive, and Destroy Reputations,” has been removed more than six different times from r/news and at least once from r/worldnews.
.......

One r/news moderator who has drawn the ire of the community is BipolarBear0. He has defended the removal of the article citing r/news’s rule against posting “opinion/analysis or advocacy” pieces.

“Since the Firstlook article is primarily analytic and non-objective in nature, it wouldn’t be allowed in /r/news,” he commented. “The story itself is irrelevant, it’s simply how the story is presented—which is why any unbiased, objective and wholly factual news article on the event would be (and is) allowed in /r/news.”

Damn, this sounds almost exactly like an AN/I argument over content that one of the meaner admins doesn't like/wants to eliminate.

Plus, a serious news story is quoting a faceless Reddit moderator who calls himself "BipolarBear0". This would make a good storyline for a satirical novel.

[EricBarbour]

“This isn’t about porn, this is about humiliation”

Definitely. [Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects websites from responsibility for what third-parties publish on their site,] was a very groundbreaking legislation that completely alters how we think of publishing things in public. This third-party business kind of makes it possible for you to do whatever you want on whatever platform you want without suffering any consequence, and no higher authority has to OK what you’re saying. I realize that when people oppose this they say it’s a limit on free speech, which is absurd. There’s been free speech in America up until now without the Internet. It’s being used by people to secure their right to watch weird porn online without people knowing and trying to say it’s about free speech and it’s not. It’s a free-for-all for abuse.

Plus,

Guys often say that you shouldn’t identify yourself as a woman on the Internet or that you shouldn’t have taken the pictures, but a lot of guys on Reddit freely talk about masturbating as if it was nothing — and no one [exposes them]. Women are told to limit what they do, limit what they wear, limit what pictures they take, limit what they write. We never seem to limit the rights of the guys who abuse us. Like, you should have the right to post things anonymously, you should have the right to privacy? If someone posted me on the Internet and at least attached their name to it I would somehow respect it. Like, OK, you’re an abuser, you’re an asshole, but at least you’re coming out publicly. People are abusing their anonymity to abuse the privacy of others. It’s such a hypocritical move.

[Stierlitz]

"BipolarBear0" has a long complicated history on the site, he hangs around with the ex-Digg guys "Jcm267", "TheRealHortnon", and "Herkimer" on /r/conspiratard, and they tangle with the crowd over at /r/NoLibsWatch ("NoLibs" is the multiply-banned "grandfather" of the conspiratard crowd.) The two groups (and outsiders who get sucked into it) are fighting this running slip fight because the "conspiratardistas" are pro-war Conservatives/conservative Democrats and the NoLibsWatchers are anti-war Libertarians/"former" Ron Paul supporters, though the truth is the former are just trolls using politics to push buttons. It's a mess, in short.

[EricBarbour]

"BipolarBear0" has a long complicated history on the site, he hangs around with the ex-Digg guys "Jcm267", "TheRealHortnon", and "Herkimer" on /r/conspiratard, and they tangle with the crowd over at /r/NoLibsWatch ("NoLibs" is the multiply-banned "grandfather" of the conspiratard crowd.) The two groups (and outsiders who get sucked into it) are fighting this running slip fight because the "conspiratardistas" are pro-war Conservatives/conservative Democrats and the NoLibsWatchers are anti-war Libertarians/"former" Ron Paul supporters, though the truth is the former are just trolls using politics to push buttons. It's a mess, in short.

I believe you. Unfortunately. R/conspiratard is a really disturbing mess. And r/NoLibsWatch can't seem to shut up about BB0.

Two of them have WP accounts, Jcm267 (T-H-L) and BipolarBear0 (T-H-L). Neither did very much.

[EricBarbour]

The dark side of Reddit's cringe culture

Also brings up r/imgoingtohellforthis, one of the most offensive "joke" pages I've ever seen. Like 4chan, no punches are pulled, and misogyny is openly celebrated. (nsfw)

[Stierlitz]

The dark side of Reddit's cringe culture

Also brings up r/imgoingtohellforthis, one of the most offensive "joke" pages I've ever seen. Like 4chan, no punches are pulled, and misogyny is openly celebrated. (nsfw)

Every time you hit bottom with Reddit, you find that there's a trapdoor to even worse things, some of them hidden by the "private subreddit" setting. Violentacrez was the tip of the iceberg.