TH3WH17ERABB17 -Q- Questions. White House Insider's postings -PART- -e11even-

a reply to: Krazysh0t

So because you think it's off the wall everyone who wishes to follow it is a degenerate. This is the divide I'm referring to.

Because you don't like the subject matter you are happy it was censored?

What happens when someone censors you because they"think" you are a degenerate?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

You really have no clue on who believes what - only what you believe. Be safe Brother, It is going to get rough out there

Keep Love In Your Heart

originally posted by: tiredoflooking
a reply to: Krazysh0t

So because you think it's off the wall everyone who wishes to follow it is a degenerate. This is the divide I'm referring to.

Because you don't like the subject matter you are happy it was censored?

I think that stalking, issuing death threats, accusing someone of pedophilia, doxxing and mods approving such behavior is degenerate behavior. If you don't, then that is on you.

What happens when someone censors you because they"think" you are a degenerate?

Then I don't use that web platform anymore. It's pretty easy. I don't need to pitch a giant whine because I was banned from a website that is totally within its rights. I've been banned from online outlets before too.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

The Q community's ban is a result of their own degeneracy.

There is always the possibility of agent provocateurs.

Is that what happened? I'm not sure.

With that said, I would expect with how easy it is to signup and advocate for hate and violence, that anyone looking to silence those interested in Q might take advantage of that option.

It wouldn't be the first time (FBI).

OWS, Ferguson, Charlottesville, etc.

...all things considered.

originally posted by: MetalThunder
a reply to: Krazysh0t

You really have no clue on who believes what - only what you believe. Be safe Brother, It is going to get rough out there

Meh. I don't need your empty platitudes. Life is rough. That is just a statement of fact and isn't some grand insight that a select few "woke" people know that everyone else doesn't.

Keep Love In Your Heart

I'm a liberal. All I do is try to improve the living conditions of my fellow man.

a reply to: eisegesis

Yep. I know the standard goal post relocation when bad news hits a conspiracy community or idea. I've been on ATS long enough now. At no point should the option that the conspiracy is just wrong cross your head though. Having an open mind can never extend to the mainstream narrative.

originally posted by: eisegesis
a reply to: Krazysh0t

The Q community's ban is a result of their own degeneracy.

There is always the possibility of agent provocateurs.

Is that what happened? I'm not sure.

But, I would expect with how easy it is to signup and advocate for hate and violence, that anyone looking to shutdown those interested in Q would take advantage of that option.

It wouldn't be the first time (FBI).

OWS, Ferguson, Charlottesville, etc.

...all things considered.

Bingo

agents provocateurs

anti-Q agents provocateurs

set em up and pick em off

Hegelian Dialectic -- old and effective tatic

😎💡😎

a reply to: Krazysh0t


Was never asleep Brother .... Peace

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Stalking, targeting etc. Should have been dealt with by the platform itself by banning the individuals involved.

It certainly does not warrant taking down everything about a vast subject because of a few rotten apples, it's overkill.

So you are good with censorship on social media, got it.

You can be one of the people who was fine with it when it continues off social media into every part of life.

It might be easier if everyone realized it's OK to listen to people's opinions EVEN IF they have different opinions, even ones you don't like.

Before it's too late.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: eisegesis

Yep. I know the standard goal post relocation when bad news hits a conspiracy community or idea. I've been on ATS long enough now. At no point should the option that the conspiracy is just wrong cross your head though. Having an open mind can never extend to the mainstream narrative.

Are you accusing me of doing that or is it possible that I'm simply offering another totally plausible scenario? I never ruled out the information you provided, or the explanation for the closures. Can you entertain both sides without bias?

a reply to: eisegesis

I did entertain both sides. I also looked at the evidence that shows that the community supported these actions. Here's the thing about entertaining both sides. Just because I've entertained them doesn't mean I can't discard narratives that are unlikely. Ones such as yours. If you want your narrative to stand side-by-side with my narrative then you are going to have to bring to the discussion a bit more than, "Well maybe people infiltrated the movement". As it stands that is just a possibility, but with no proof that is all it ever will be.

Meanwhile, my narrative is a valid explanation because I have proof on my side. I really hate the idea that conspiracy theorists think that being open minded means that entertaining an idea means that we can never discard it for lacking evidence.

originally posted by: tiredoflooking
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Stalking, targeting etc. Should have been dealt with by the platform itself by banning the individuals involved.

How can that happen if the mods are sanctioning it?

It certainly does not warrant taking down everything about a vast subject because of a few rotten apples, it's overkill.

If the police that are in charge of taking it down sanction it then no it isn't overkill.

So you are good with censorship on social media, got it.

I'm good with the 1st Amendment. You are welcome to point out how this violates the 1st Amendment. Make a good case and maybe I'll believe you. Though you are going to be hard pressed to show how social media is an arm of the government (without using conspiracies and hearsay).

You can be one of the people who was fine with it when it continues off social media into every part of life.

So you don't support censorship on social media? So ATS removing offensive posts is wrong to you? Also, why are you making # up about me? The only position on censorship I made in this thread is on Reddit.

It might be easier if everyone realized it's OK to listen to people's opinions EVEN IF they have different opinions, even ones you don't like.

Before it's too late.

You can still listen to the Q ideas. You just have to go to Voat to see them now and deal with WAY more overt racism doing so.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

It's likely nobody finds out for sure if the doxxing and targeting that happened was provoked or organic.

Do you support the entire subject matter being banned because a few people in the group got out of hand?

I just want to be crystal clear on your position.

Me- "HEY! LOOK OVER THERE! WHAT IS THAAATTTT?!?!
Myself- "Nothing to see here, it is just the entire thread drifting away........."

You do realize that there are some people who will come on this thread and try to get you agitated to the point that you post something you shouldn't, right?
Then once you have posted something you shouldn't they report your post.
I am sure this probably happened on reddit as well, probably even had a host of people claiming to follow Q but were only there to get sub shut down by talking about violence and such.
I predict the same will continue to happen here.

a reply to: tiredoflooking

I support Reddit as a privately owned company acting in its own best interests. I really don't care what happens to the community. I already know they'll just go elsewhere and spew the same bull# they spewed on Reddit. And as a matter of fact, they already have migrated to Voat. So there you go.

I think your hangup is that I'm not going to weep or cry over them being banned. In fact, it's hilarious to me.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

If you want your narrative to stand side-by-side with my narrative then you are going to have to bring to the discussion a bit more than, "Well maybe people infiltrated the movement". As it stands that is just a possibility, but with no proof that is all it ever will be.

I wasn't aware that I had a narrative and will not stand here and be told that I have one. If I was attempting to convince you of what I had suggested, then I would agree with your statement above, but I'm not.

I provided examples to you where it's been proven that FBI agents were in the middle of the "action," during events that seemingly define a particular "movement," for better or worse. You seemed pretty sure of yourself earlier, so I offered an alternative way to think about the same situation. You and I both may be right.

It appears the difference between you and I is that I'm talking directly to YOU, whereas you are talking about "Q cults" to everyone here like we are hive-mind affiliates.

Q is entertaining, to me.
Is it not harmless?

a reply to: tiredoflooking

This is a problem on the authoritarian-left (which exists) and milquetoast "radicals" who call for the abolishment of "authoritative hierarchies" yet, appeal to those hierarchies to do the work they need to be done for them.

it circles around to this spooky idea of "rights" and "constitution" where you are granted certain rights because someone/thing says so, versus you are born "liberated" and everything else "domesticates and authorities over you"

and this hyper-civilised thinking of relying on social-law and justice to "do the right thing" and control "order"

instead of doing what is natural to us, and doing what we need to do...