all 75 comments

[–]d3rr[A] 12 insightful - 3 fun12 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 3 fun -  (39 children)

/u/jasoncarswell OP is right, you are not allowed to censor his comment. It doesn't matter if you think or know OP is a big pharma shill. You cannot make a sub rule that violates saidit sitewide rules.

So either restore the comment and unban OP, or you are a non-debate sub and have to hide from /s/all.

[–]humancorpse 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (12 children)

since you dont mind people using the word cockwomble..

/u/jasoncarswell should establish his own forum and abandon saidit like the piece of crap cockwombles that it is.

i would support such a move.

[–]JasonCarswell 5 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 4 fun -  (10 children)

Thanks for the support but dividing SaidIt is not my goal. It would be funny though as /u/fschmidt wants more free speech, and I want less shilling. Shame this isn't a decentralized platform to still be able to network over our shared common ground.

Ironically, I do already have a forum on my server, but https://RabbitHole.WF (phpBB) is actually owned and run by /u/LarrySwinger2. He also set up my GiraffeIdeas.Wiki and other stuff. This winter I/we aim to have https://Projex.Wiki (MediaWiki), https://TruthSeeker.Party (Lemmy), https://Volun.Tube, and other stuff up (/s/LeverMind Variety Show), even if I have to learn how myself. Today I was looking into FLOSS video chat platforms. My local Windsor resistance is heavily addicted to Facebook, and that's one thing we may need when Facebook bans us.

If you want to financially support any of this feel free to gift me money. Throw lots of money to make it happen sooner and/or if you hope to influence me without any guarantees. For guaranteed influenced results you'd be better off throwing your obscene wealth in many other places, but of course I won't say no to accepting obscene wealth.

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

I'm getting a dns error on rabbithole.

[–]LarrySwinger2 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

The domain is not in use currently. I got a simple redirect working in the past, but I wasn't happy with it because it'd change the URL in the address bar. When I pick up that project, I'll look for a more elegant solution. Note that Rabbit Hole is the new name for Incantation, which you can visit here. (To be clear: the previous solution would redirect you to that exact page.)

So you can visit and post on Rabbit Hole right now, although I'm not actively promoting it. It's been on hiatus during the last 1.5 months and still is for the time being.

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

As winter sets in I'll have more time to focus on Cassy stuff. Maybe I can help put wings on your Rabbit Hole and Foil Hat if you're interested.

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

I'm getting a dns error on rabbithole.

Ping /u/LarrySwinger2.

[–]LarrySwinger2 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks, I answered it.

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

Wouldn't a simple way around this controversy, while still being included in /s/all, be as follows:

  1. State in the description that the group's intent is against medical tyranny.
  2. Then shilling for medical tyranny isn't allowed by definition.
  3. Note that linking to examples of tyranny is completely on topic and important, which is not the same as advocating for it.



  1. You start a group called "Food Porn" for pictures of crazy foods, everything from extreme fast foods to extreme fancy dining and beautiful or funny looking foods of the earth. It gets included in /all.
  2. Then a subversive user starts posts things like disgusting slobs eating literal trash and nauseating stuff that obviously violates the purpose of the group.
  3. What constitutes "literal trash" and "nauseating" is subjective. Yet there's a territory where it crosses into "you know it when you see it" and so it depends on the mods.

Or pick any analogy from any group already included in /s/all, if off-topic posts started hitting their main pages.

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

I like your thinking, but there are issues.

Being against medical tyranny doesn't mean it can't be questioned and debated. Unfortunately that potentially opens it up to exploitation by infiltrating sealions and shills.

I'm almost of the mind that when we finally get the decentralize forums going, in addition to TruthSeekers.Party, we might want AntiAuthoritarianism.Party or or something. Yes, we'd allow devil's advocates, but we could be harsher on perpetual nay-saying shilling and advocating for authoritarian tyranny.

Sometimes I just want a news aggregator, without the debates. Some people here don't post much and just like to debate.

"you know it when you see it"

This is so problematic, yet part of life. The more grey area we can clear up the better.

Maybe you can read my other comments and offer feedback.

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

But if the group's intent is specifically against medical tyranny (of course not to the exclusion of examples showcasing it, just to the exclusion of shilling/promoting it) then that would mean it can't be questioned and debated. It would not be a "debate" group.

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

But if the group's intent is specifically against medical tyranny (of course not to the exclusion of examples showcasing it, just to the exclusion of shilling/promoting it) then that would mean it can't be questioned and debated. It would not be a "debate" group.

Ah, yes, there's the rub: the different kinds of subs.

  • community group fellowship sub
  • topical sub
  • news feed sub
  • genre sub
  • entertainment sub
  • blog sub
  • personal interest sub
  • project sub
  • discussion sub
  • debate sub
  • info-bubble sub
  • echo-chamber sub
  • strict sub
  • casual sub
  • free speech sub
  • civil sub
  • polite sub
  • utility sub
  • platform sub

What have I missed? Which should I explain? Which should I remove? Should I create sub-categories? These aren't even categorizing the type of content. Figuring out how to organize all this would be nice before the next Lemmy gets off the ground.

For future forums, Cassy, Phoenix, whatever - it would be nice to have types / classification / categories of subs presented, even if just in the sidebox.

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

  1. Then a subversive user starts posts things like DeathFats eating McDonalds and KFC that obviously violates the purpose of the group.

Ewww that is absolutely disgusting!

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

Hear hear!

[–]JasonCarswell 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (25 children)

unban OP or non-debate sub

1) The OP is clearly shilling in BAD faith.

2) May I first put this to a public vote for SaidIt to decide what to do with the community /s/Passports sub?

[–]d3rr 5 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 4 fun -  (15 children)

1) The OP is clearly shilling in BAD faith.

It's not clear at all, and the only context you should be considering as a mod here is the comment that zhe made in your sub.

2) May I first put this to a public vote for SaidIt to decide what to do with the community /s/Passports sub?

No, the weird ass rules here are not up for debate.

[–]Horrux 3 insightful - 6 fun3 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 6 fun -  (1 child)

zhe? WTF is this? Reddit ultra-queer?

[–]Tiwaking 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

A spelling error becomes a pronoun becomes a gender. Its how the Transvasion started

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 4 fun2 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 4 fun -  (12 children)

No, the weird ass rules here are not up for debate.

That wasn't my aim.

I want to ask SaidIt weather to make /s/Passports public (restore the comment) or semi-private (take off /s/all).

You cannot make a sub rule that violates saidit sitewide rules.

While I'm at it I should ask you and SaidIt how to improve this rule:
1) No spam, sealioning, STABs (shills, trolls, and bots), nor liars.

[–]d3rr 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (11 children)

While I'm at it I should ask you and SaidIt how to improve this rule: 1) No spam, sealioning, STABs (shills, trolls, and bots), nor liars.

This rule goes against the moderator policy. You must allow debate from shills unless you hide from /s/all

[–]JasonCarswell 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun -  (10 children)

It seems there's a conflict between how we define things.

Some shills can be part of a scam operation. Some shills can sell products via advertising. Some shills can be good, ie. shilling for decentralizion, peace, fairness, etc. And some shills on social media push agendas and propaganda, good, bad, and ugly.

Bad and ugly shills do not post or comment in good faith.

It all boils down to subjective views on what constitutes good, bad, and ugly regarding types of comments and their faith.

How can we finetune our definitions?

[–]d3rr[A] 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (9 children)

there is no fine tuning. i already removed your sub from /s/all. Continued violations of the moderation policy will result in a ban.

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (8 children)

This is hypocritical in several ways.

I already said I'd comply with one of the two options. I wanted to know if I could /s/AskSaidIt which option they would prefer for /s/Passports. You haven't answered if I could ask or not, and subsequently your impatience now results in warnings.

(As you know, I am trying to develop a bottom-up self-regulating management system that is FOTPACH (fair, open, transparent, peaceful, accountable, consistent, honest) and can be used on social media platforms among other things (off-grid prepper communities, freedom rally organizing, etc). Your haste is an example of the issues of top-down management rather than having a community discussion in a designated forum to resolve things. But I digress.)

This is not about SaidIt's policies and I'm not here to change M7. But I am trying to clarify what the existing SaidIt policies are and fine tune our collective understanding of them.

Clearly you and I have different definitions of what "bath faith" means. I can't follow the rules if I don't know what they actually mean.

Further, if I restore that comment and return to /s/All, may I keep ActuallyNot and socks banned because they are already proven bad actors? Or must I restore them too? This remains unclear.

Also, I would have tried this first, had I thought of it sooner, as it may be less controversial than outright censorship/trash removal, though less effective. Here it is, on the chance you or M7 have issues with it, especially were I to go big in a post asking all willing mods to add a bold sidebox message: "Be skeptical of /u/socks and /u/ActuallyNot misinfo as they support harmful big pharma tyranny."

Alternatively, "Be skeptical of shill and sealion misinfo as they support harmful big pharma tyranny." linked to /s/SaidItCommunity/wiki lists (or better that the lists be on Projex.Wiki with more robust wiki tools and history) of who is potentially an infiltrator shill with supporting citations linked.

Why is this even worth discussing? You know we and others hope to develop platforms beyond SaidIt. Even /s/FreedIt may have to determine what is spam and what is free speech. If I hope to host a Lemmy forum I aim to have the manifesto, rules, and guides worked out first to remove confusion and to be as self-regulating as possible. This includes navigating the grey areas. I've also expressed the idea of open-developing terms and conditions templates and standards for all indie sites to employ and build on - and make easier for users to follow (much like CreativeCommons licenses).

You've expressed interest and support for decentralization. Having this conversation to clear some things up would ultimately indirectly help toward that in a small way. I hope you see that now.

And lastly, whether SaidIt grows or not, whether it's on this platform or not, whether they bring more STABs (shills, trolls, and bots) and sealions, we need to be developing better defenses, because they won't stop.

Maybe my approaches here are not good. Maybe there are existing better ways or other new ways we can develop. Maybe, now that I've drafted all this up, as so often now longer than initially intended, perhaps I should make a new post on this to get feedback from everyone.


[–]d3rr 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Further, if I restore that comment and return to /s/All, may I keep ActuallyNot and socks banned because they are already proven bad actors? Or must I restore them too? This remains unclear.

You must restore them too. You can only ban/censor people from an /s/all sub if they are off topic or are commenting IN YOUR SUB in bad faith.

Here's an example of bad faith:

Be skeptical of /u/socks and /u/ActuallyNot misinfo as they support harmful big pharma tyranny."

This is low pyramid unless you provide links to comments or posts where they do so. ARGUMENTS WITH SUPPORTING EVIDENCE AKA DEBATE.

[–]JasonCarswell 4 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

Well that's something I guess.

We can caution folks and call them out by name WITH supporting evidence.

Better than nothing. Hopefully I can think up some more. Too tired now. All this is tiring too, or maybe it's just the hour.

I'm not thrilled that our proven bad-faith actors can still smear up the place with their "good faith" nay-saying posts as it does grant them more liberty than they deserve in this case, but it errs on the side of caution and is thus generally a fair and good policy - for SaidIt, potentially for my future projects, and for anyone else who can utilize these developments.

By optimally organizing the wiki list citations of repeated misinfo we might also prove when they are bad-faith shilling misinfo after being corrected (maybe repeatedly). Thus continued lying should obviously be bad-faith.

I'm not sure if there's anything to do about "legitimate" sources vs "illegitimate" sources, which some moot issues may revolve around.

And even with outright lies, many of them can be excused away as common hyperbole (ie. You always* say this. You never* do that. Etc.).

These proposed wiki lists may seem like an impossibly tedious task for an individual to track another person, but as a community, with a good system, we just might be able to help self-regulate. In developing the system, the first few will certainly be the most challenging, making it up as we go and working out the kinks - and making it clear, idiot-proof, abuse-proof, and fair. After the initial hurdles we should arrive at a methodology with patterns to emulate or templates.

I've unbanned/restored the shill, the comment, and the sub. And I'll draft up a post as soon as I can to share. This week may be busy too. Winter is coming.

[–]d3rr 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (3 children)

You haven't answered if I could ask or not, and subsequently your impatience now results in warnings.

Of course you can ask. What you can't do is expect special treatment for your rule violation.

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

I wasn't asking for special treatment. I was asking for the opportunity for the community to democratically decide.

[–]socks 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I have no comment about this general conversation, as I've not read all of it. Regarding the rule in /s/Passports:

1) ...sealioning, STABs (shills, trolls, and bots), nor liars.

With respect, Jason, none of this is really a problem on Saidit, and these folks don't really exist here for more than a moment or two. This rule allows mod abuse, whereby one can build an echo chamber sub of only one approach, and ban anyone you disagree with. The rule can be applied merely with an opinion, rather than facts, evidence, or logic. You wouldn't want to be judged with the same rule.

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 3 fun1 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

The OP is clearly shilling in BAD faith.

I'm not shilling, it's not in bad faith, and I provided a link to my data, even without being prompted.

Things you have never done even when asked.

Which is how we know I tell the truth and you shill lies.

[–]d3rr[A] 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

... Which is how we know I tell the truth and you shill lies.

This is low pyramid unless you prove it with citations. Cockwomble is also low pyramid personal attack, from the sounds of it.

[–]Heterophobe4Life 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Said the racist

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

Things you have never done even when asked.

Yet another lie.

You paint yourself into a corner when you make declarations in absolutes.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

You've never done to me.

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


[–]mahavishnunj 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

why would you censor u/actuallynot anyway? they are dumb low hanging fruit fun to fuck with. like a cat with a laser pointer.

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

why would you censor u/actuallynot anyway?

We know they're shills. New readers don't.

We need to clarify how to manage the grey area between censorship and cleaning the trash.

[–]mahavishnunj 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

and I provided a link to my data

and what a source that was, lol

[–]JasonCarswell 7 insightful - 5 fun7 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 5 fun -  (14 children)

How many times have I told ActuallyNot and socks not to comment on my posts?

You are a perpetual nay-sayer, as in your name, inauthentic, sealioning, lying, and shilling for authoritarianism and big pharma and advocating for their harms to humanity - and your OP is selectively quoting the SaidIt-wide Mod Rules where it clearly states:

4. Mods must not remove user comments and posts that are on-topic and made in good faith UNLESS one of these conditions are met:

    1. It's clearly stated in the sub's sidebar that the moderators remove opposing opinions AND the mods must uncheck the sub setting allow this sub to be included in /s/all as well as the default and trending lists so that the sub won't appear on /s/all.

    2. The name of the sub must ends with "positive" or "negative" to clearly indicate the sub's intentional bias, thus allowing the sub to appear on /s/all.

Clearly in the sidebox of that sub you'll find a single rule:

1) No spam, sealioning, STABs (shills, trolls, and bots), nor liars.


The only questions now are:

Should we of SaidIt be forced to make this sub semi-private off of /s/all or completely private?

Or should we be forced to tolerate sealions, shills, propaganda, and lies?

Does /u/ActuallyNot ever actually act in good faith?

Is "cockwomble" name calling?

Is "cockwomble" worthy of a strike?

Does anyone else want to co-moderate /s/Passports (also for social credits and mandates)?


/u/magnora7 and /u/d3rr may weigh in as they see fit and I'll respect their decision(s).

[–]Node 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (9 children)

Does /u/ActuallyNot "Who the hell is upvoting racist assholes?" [+6] ever actually act in good faith?

Not sure about good faith, but I think I've seen him make some reasonable statements on non-covidhoax topics. But it's like he's being directly paid directly by the drug companies when he talks about the covidhoax.

[–]JasonCarswell 6 insightful - 5 fun6 insightful - 4 fun7 insightful - 5 fun -  (8 children)

Everyone knows propagandists have to mix poison lies in with the sweet truth for people to swallow it.

I'll never deny that ActuallyNot or socks may have good points occasionally, often seeming sincere.

I'll always be surprised at the number of SaidIt regulars who don't see through their bullshit.

Obviously I have a problem with their inauthenticity, "Oh yes, I'll look at what you've countered with," but they ignore it and keep shilling their bullshit lies and authoritarianism.

Banning ActuallyNot and socks from /s/Passports/about/log is an intentional experiment of discovery and consequences. I'm for freedom of expression, but I'm also against pollution, sealioning noise, and bullshit lies that advocate for the ruling class' harms to humanity. They are free to "express themselves" on the corporate platforms they view as legitimate sources of information where they would be welcomed. But as authoritarians, they do not support alternatives as I do.

In a few weeks I'll have been on SaidIt for a few years, and a few weeks ago I did my first non-spam moderation action when I banned /u/Popper from /s/StandUpWindsor/about/log/. That got me thinking about it, and as you know we've been thinking and occasionally working on /s/Cassy stuff, including how to better organize (see also /s/Organizing) and manage indie social media platforms to be FOTPACH (Fair, Open, Transparent, Peaceful, Accountable, Consistent, Honest).

Also a few weeks ago I started /s/SaidItCommunity " for organizing bottom-up self-reliance solutions, guides to lead by example rather than by dictate, and to develop ways to help and support each other and our community, rather than overburden and depend upon top-down mods and admins - for a fair, open, better user experience. " The lessons we might learn and share may come in handy on many ground-up social media platforms beyond just SaidIt or Cassy if we can develop and present them clearly on the /s/Projex wiki and elsewhere. Instead of inconsistent owners' whims, vague corporate terms (Facebook, Reddit, YouTube), or hierarchy commie mobs (Wikipedia), it would be nice to have foundational manifestos and constitutions, rules, guides, and other tools for respectable self-regulating platforms. Here are more similar musings. Until the Projex.Wiki is up to start laying out and documenting all of this concretely, it's all just theoretically moot.

But back to the issues of shills, as well as your comment with citing links, and how it relates to /s/SaidItCommunity... In this comment I stated, " Among the many areas of potential, this includes making open transparent lists and records to collect evidence on problematic users to not only build up cases for banishment if necessary, but also to help clearly educate visitors, newbs, and rare to casual users to the infiltration agents of chaos that infect all social media, as well as their techniques. Naturally I welcome folks to make a list on me if they like. Critically important: this must not turn into an unjust witch hunt, immediately or via slow corruption over time. [...] For starters we need good ideas and decent neutral terms for our social-media-self-management projects, including these "Caution Lists" for lack of a better name. "

And now I have a some questions.

  • What do you think in general?
  • What do you think of /s/SaidItCommunity and do you have any ideas for it?
  • What do you think of making "Caution Lists" in /s/SaidItCommunity/wiki? (Projex.Wiki may be of better use with more robust deeper wiki features, including better wiki history tools.)
  • How can we further avoid false witch hunts? (Lists may build cases for people to make up their own minds, thus this is a (potentially flawed) step toward fair solutions.)
  • Would you consider developing this system and/or helping keep track/build cases? (As you did with your comment citation above.)
  • Could this be a solution to sealioning traps that lead to endless stupidity and downward debates?
  • Is this just unnecessary bureaucracy?

What do you think /u/magnora7 and /u/d3rr?

Until this past weekend I've had an intense few months, some I have yet to share on SaidIt and Projex, and some I never will. This week I've been in limbo, chilling and cleaning while waiting on a several things. The intensity may kick off again or it may be over for the winter. Either way, at least half if not most of my winter I aim to be focusing on /s/SaidItCommunity, /s/Projex, /s/Cassy, and /s/LeverMind projects.

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

I've started several replies over the past few days. Right now am attempting to reduce my tabs to under 150, so will just say I went to the farmers market today for the first time in a year and a half. Damned maskers.

But I walked in unconfronted this time, and the one guy from out of the area, who I deem innocent, was there with his 20 types of dates from some enormous date farm in southern California. Got 8 pounds of my favorite types of dates.

Everyone else can fuck off and die.

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

A date with death.

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

If you get the chance, try some unpollinated Dayri. They have no seed or end cap. I like the dryer dates, and especially dates like the Deglet Noor that turn hard as the sugars crystalize.

I've found the site of the farm that grows and sells them.

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


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

Didn't check shipping, but the pound costs are equal or lower than the farmers market price.

I rationed the last dates I got in 2020, and only finished them about a month ago. Just kept them in the paper bags on my counter, and over the year they got deliciously hard from the crystallization. They also have the soft and gooey dates, if you like those.

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

What do you think /u/magnora7 and /u/d3rr?

d3rr already responded an hour ago. Maybe address that response - ASAP - and stop breaking 4a? THEN further discussion can be appropriate.

[–]JasonCarswell 5 insightful - 5 fun5 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

I did respond.

It seems he wrote his two paragraphs as I took the time to draft my lengthy ideas for improving SaidIt's community.

You've strangely responded from nowhere, only making demands, offering nothing constructive.

1 post karma
0 comment karma
saiditter for 4 months
0 posts
1 comment (above)

[–]Optimus85 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)


[–]d3rr 4 insightful - 4 fun4 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

Or should we be forced to tolerate sealions, shills, propaganda, and lies?

Yes, that is the whole point of this site, moderating fair fights for the unkempt masses.

[–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 5 fun2 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 5 fun -  (0 children)

Or should we be forced to tolerate sealions, shills, propaganda, and lies?

Yes, that is the whole point of this site, moderating fair fights for the unkempt masses.

I guess that's why you changed it from AntiExtremes.

Actually not unkempt masses or just dirty socks?

[–]Popper 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

never censor

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

never censor

I agree. I also agree with cleaning up trash. We need to clarify how to manage the grey area.

[–]Popper 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (15 children)

you're wrong since being killed by covid in the line of duty makes no sense, but you shouldn't be censored, I'll fight to the death for your right to be wrong.

[–]Hel 4 insightful - 5 fun4 insightful - 4 fun5 insightful - 5 fun -  (1 child)

If they contracted it from someone they came into contact while fulfilling their duties then they were killed by it in the line of duty

[–]Popper 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

nah killed in the line of duty means shot or stabbed by a criminal or something like that

[–]thefirststone 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

To be fair, it's listed under "Total Line of Duty Deaths" and included in its count, on that linked page. They justify it like so:

Beginning in early 2020, thousands of law enforcement officers and other first responders throughout the country have contracted COVID-19 during the worldwide pandemic due to requirements of their job.

The following law enforcement officers died as a result of contracting the virus in the line of duty.

But the OP is clearly wrong that vaccines would have saved them. Likely most of them happened to test positive while suffering from cardiac arrest.

[–]JasonCarswell 7 insightful - 5 fun7 insightful - 4 fun8 insightful - 5 fun -  (5 children)

But the OP is clearly wrong that vaccines would have saved them.

But the OP is clearly shilling in bad faith.

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

I don't perceive that, so I disagree with your deleting the comment or post or whatever it was.

Maybe they are serious, or providing a realistic argument. Or maybe they're trolling, which might not be the highest form of argument, but it's head and shoulders above anything you get on highly-popular websites, if done well.

[–]Node 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (2 children)

Have you not seen any comments or posts by AN before? He's a 100% hoax promoter.

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

Just so we're clear here: By "hoax" you mean the current pandemic that's literally everywhere in the world, barring the bottom of the Mariana Trench.

[–]Node 6 insightful - 6 fun6 insightful - 5 fun7 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

Sealioning is a harassment tactic by which a participant in a debate or online discussion pesters the other participant with disingenuous questions under the guise of sincerity, hoping to erode the patience or goodwill of the target to the point where they appear unreasonable.

I've looked up Jasons claim, and it turns out I can hear you guys at the pier some nights when my back door is open.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

The content linked to the data. Your "bad faith" deflection doesn't pass muster, because the content is true and evidenced.

[–]Popper 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

yeah if they died of covid they'd have felt sick and gone home or gone to a hospital and then died there.

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

But the OP is clearly wrong that vaccines would have saved them.

The vaccines are very effective at keeping CoVID infections mild or asymptomatic. Since there's no 70 year olds on active duty, of would stop nearly all the deaths from CoVID in police.

Likely most of them happened to test positive while suffering from cardiac arrest.

Generally also while intubated in an ICU because of CoVID infection.

Most CoVID deaths aren't sudden. You get a decline over a few days.

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

The vaccines are very effective at keeping CoVID infections mild or asymptomatic.

Vaccine abstinence is even more effective at keeping COVID infections mild or asymptomatic.

Shill your poison on Reddit.

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

Thanks for your openness to debate. I appreciate it.

Cops get coughed on, get spat on, get blood on them, grapple with people. They've been dying much more than other people of CoVID, and their database honours them as deaths in the line of duty.

I can understand why.

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

that could have happened before covid, like they might have caught the flu while at work, any of us might catch the flu at work but we don't say in the line of duty, those words clearly mean violence

[–]mahavishnunj 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

They've been dying much more than other people of CoVID, and their database honours them as deaths in the line of duty.


[–]Optimus85 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)


1) No spam, sealioning, STABs (shills, trolls, and bots), nor liars.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Yeah the cockwomble in question put that there just before deleting the comment and banning me.

But he uses the accusation "sealioning" to shut down any debate regarding his Glavset shilling. And he calls other people shills and liars to deflect from his shilling and lying.

I think if you look at my post, it's high on the POD. The police have had several hundred deaths by CoVID in the line of duty, and that's relevant to the post, and supported by my links.

There's no questions, so it's not sealioning. (Although the mod of that forum has accused my of sealioning in other comments in which I asked no questions, demonstrating I think, that he's not concerned about sealioning, but by shutting down evidence-based discussion).

So it even obeys to those retrofitted rules: it's not spam, it's not sealioning, it's anti-shilling, by countering the post, I'm not a bot, and you can see it's not a lie because I link to the data.

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

Glavset shilling

Confession through projection.

Since you know so much about these Russians, let them know I have yet to receive any money for my divisive shilling. The sooner I get it the sooner I can set up more platforms to shill on.

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

.So I've made just one post to /s/Passports:

Demonstrating that the "blue lives matter" was all bullshit.

The biggest killer by far of police in the line of duty is COVID-19. Vaccines would have saved most of those 250 deaths this year so far, and some of the later of the 248 deaths last year.

still just desperately beating this dumb dead horse? lol