• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Resetera reflects: This place sucks. We want GAF back.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Blam

Member
I see those who still cling on their love for RE and/or Old-Romper Room GAF have twisted this thread in typical IdPol bullshit.

This is why we do not miss the GAF prior to the screeching exodus, nor care for ReeeEra. It gets injected into everything they touch.

I'd like for everyone in ERA, to stay in ERA. You made a choice leaving don't pussy out because you don't like it anymore. That's your fault. You're the ones doing that to your own community so you're the ones to blame for the trash on the site.
 
I'd like for everyone in ERA, to stay in ERA. You made a choice leaving don't pussy out because you don't like it anymore. That's your fault. You're the ones doing that to your own community so you're the ones to blame for the trash on the site.

There are plenty of people on Era that just went over in the chaos of that first weekend and just stuck around because all their friends are there. I don't think most of the people who post there are all that crazy but probably would feel at home here on GAF again. For one reason or another they haven't found their way.

The moderation was the real problem on Mid-Gaf (I refuse to call it old because oldGAF was cool) and continues to be an issue on Reset. The majority of the user base is probably fine. I would like to see the numbers grow here. It steadily seems to be going up as it is.

So far, I really enjoy going back and forth posting on both. Sometimes I need a break from one place or the other as well.
 

Blam

Member
There are plenty of people on Era that just went over in the chaos of that first weekend and just stuck around because all their friends are there. I don't think most of the people who post there are all that crazy but probably would feel at home here on GAF again. For one reason or another they haven't found their way.

The moderation was the real problem on Mid-Gaf (I refuse to call it old because oldGAF was cool) and continues to be an issue on Reset. The majority of the user base is probably fine. I would like to see the numbers grow here. It steadily seems to be going up as it is.

So far, I really enjoy going back and forth posting on both. Sometimes I need a break from one place or the other as well.
I mean I get where you're coming from but maybe the posters from the first 5 pages I'd rather not have since those people are all the, "wow", "Nice" "insertgifhere" people, and we only need so many.

I don't want a single moderator on ERA to post here. I really want the bad to stay there.
 
Last edited:

Yoshi

Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
I see those who still cling on their love for RE and/or Old-Romper Room GAF have twisted this thread in typical IdPol bullshit.

This is why we do not miss the GAF prior to the screeching exodus, nor care for ReeeEra. It gets injected into everything they touch.
Where have there been identity politics in this thread?
 
the whole nazi thing is such a boogeyman, straw man leftist loser labeling schemata ...

like, is there an epidemic of nazis in america that i'm unaware of? i mean it man, besides the white nationalist tiki torch idiots, where are these nazis?

This is an actual quote from John Podesta:
“Compare your opponent to Adolf Hitler. This is your heavy artilery, for when your opponent is obviously right, and you are spectacularly wrong.”

A member of the authoritative left calling someone a Nazi is akin to them saying, “You are obviously right, and I am spectacularly wrong.”
 
This is a non-argument. A compound word for the combination of different views will in almost all instances not be in 1:1 relation to any single trait, because otherwise it is redundant to define it via the combination. If I say a field is a set F with two operations + and * where (F,+,0) is an abelian group and (F\{0}, *,1) is an abelian group with distributivity of * over +, then this is a reasonable definition even though you will find an endless amount of structures (F,+,*) that has any subset of these properties, but not all of them (and thus, is not a field).

I concur that a term doesn't need exclusive traits, but since you're basically establishing a wider and new term for "nazi", pointing out the different parts you've used to define it, outside of its actual historical context, I'm allowed to point out that your new term focuses on aspects that are not connected to any specific part of the political spectrum. Nor have you managed to lay the basis for the compound in regards to why someone is identified in it nor why being identified into this new use of the compounded word entails any ill whatsoever, considering it's operating as a homonym or a different definition. A further problem is that most of the elements you talk about are not further outlined, meaning that they be so general, that the combination might as well regards to communism, with xenophobia, self-elevation and nationalism being prevalent in Stalin's communism. Fear of the bourgeois/capitalist, elevation of the soviet, of the socialist and a strong nationalism in "Socialism In One Country" and the Great Retreat. These aren't fringe elements of communism either. Does that mean that Stalin was a Nazi? No, you need far more defining traits, if you want use to be able to separate your weirdly expanded nazi term from what people identify as a nazi.
The fact that you pretty clearly said "someone who shares these three ideological traits", traits which even together aren't able to safely separate what's left from what's right, if we're working by a perception of nazism as right-wing.

Again, you use the word nazi as it pleases you, language is after all still something that will always be malleable, but that also means you're speaking about something completely different and weakening the historic gravitas of the actual term.
The racial hierarchy and anti-semitic aspect is what has always defined nazism and what was in turn also represented in neo-nazism. Religion, ideology and cultural artifacts aren't near on the same level as biology, something that's not malleable or a representation of ideas. It's due to that fact, the rejection of cultural relativism that we also safely call nazism evil.

We are in disagreement here, then. Since it is a matter of opinion, it is impossible to prove one way or the other.

There is one way to clarify it. Define nationalism. And what do you think about the importance nationalism has had for minority groups like indigenous peoples? Both its evils and its goods.


They, as held by the demonstrants in Dresden, are extreme.

Can you clarify what those are. Not conveniently avoiding pointing it out.


Just to recap here:
- We started with you accusing people here of being either nazis/neo-nazis or at least sympathetic to nazis/neo-nazis.
- Being challenged on it, you've managed to expand the term of nazi to be pretty general and more so regard traits that even together aren't really that defining of what nazism and neo-nazism is about.
- Then we've gone into this whole discussion around those three defining traits you mentioned, but that again doesn't look past the fact that you've had to expand the term itself to even be able to use it and you've still accused the forum here of carrying these sympathies or hinting at sneaking by an association fallacy.
- Remind me, where is this going and will you still claim that there are prominent nazi sympathizers here at the forum and will you clarify what a nazi is, because to me it's pretty easy now to use "nazi" on either black supremacists or to use it against democrats, because I can certainly see that they have a large degree of self-elevation based on ideology, they've got surprisingly a sense of nationalism and when you think about it, there's a degree of xenophobia when it comes to russians. I'm being facetious here, but it's just to point how ridiculous your convenient expanded term is and how it shapes by convenience.



You use academic language to project an aura of authoritative neutrality but then claim "ideologies are good, neutral or bad" instead of sticking to your neutral wording. The dichotomy is very funny to me and just felt compelled to point it out.

giphy.gif
 
Last edited:

bigedole

Member
Please stop lol. Why are you trying to use a thesaurus on every sentence to make yourself seem smarter?

Obviously he wants to make sure his verbocity matches his intellectual prowess. How else do you score internet points?
 

Blam

Member
Obviously he wants to make sure his verbocity matches his intellectual prowess. How else do you score internet points?

I think you mean digital points on a screen which pushes out light rays to your eyes that your brain interprets as words which are written through the means of a button plate that translates each button press into letters which get understood by a machine which then lets others see them as well and put their own thoughts against it in return letting you vote if you would like to give the digital point to this other stream of consciousness that uses the world wide web.

I truly agree this stream of thoughts is the most equitable one for this position we stand on.
 
Last edited:

Yoshi

Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
Are you being purposefully obtuse? You are exchanging with the "what is a Nazi and what is not" labeling rhetoric.
I have no idea how the discussion of when one uses the term Nazi is identitiy politics. Maybe if you assume that I want to identify as a Nazi, which I assure you I do not.


A further problem is that most of the elements you talk about are not further outlined, meaning that they be so general, that the combination might as well regards to communism, with xenophobia, self-elevation and nationalism being prevalent in Stalin's communism. Fear of the bourgeois/capitalist, elevation of the soviet, of the socialist and a strong nationalism in "Socialism In One Country" and the Great Retreat. These aren't fringe elements of communism either. Does that mean that Stalin was a Nazi? No, you need far more defining traits, if you want use to be able to separate your weirdly expanded nazi term from what people identify as a nazi.
I am unaware that Stalin was particularly xenophobe, but if he was that as well, then yes, the term may apply. Either way, the so called communist states are hardly a realisation of Marx' model, but are merely using terms from left ideology to establish an authoritarian regime which goes contrary to the idea of the ruling of the proletariat.

I agree that the terms I used do not differentiate the economical aspects of left and right, but I maintain that the term used as I do his helpful because it is isolating the problematic common core of traditional nazism and current day right extremism, which exists both, in neoliberal and fiscally social variants.

The racial hierarchy and anti-semitic aspect is what has always defined nazism and what was in turn also represented in neo-nazism. Religion, ideology and cultural artifacts aren't near on the same level as biology, something that's not malleable or a representation of ideas. It's due to that fact, the rejection of cultural relativism that we also safely call nazism evil.
The biological aspect was bullshit anyway and the differentiation was at its core an ethnical one, with a huge emphasis on religion and nationality.
There is one way to clarify it. Define nationalism. And what do you think about the importance nationalism has had for minority groups like indigenous peoples? Both its evils and its goods.
Nationalism is the believe of the superiority of citizens of one nation (possibly limited by what you accept as a citizen, so people who migrated may be excluded) due to past achievements or societal structure and the ascribtion of achievements of people within the group to the whole group. Independent of being indigenous or not, the advantages are the following: and the disadvantages are seperatism, discrimination, exclusive behaviour, misplaced pride, and in many cases direct or indirect violence.

Can you clarify what those are. Not conveniently avoiding pointing it out.
The demand to stop migration, throw out asylum seekers and to take away legal rights that protect asylum seekers, basically revoking rights that are guaranteed by the constitution.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
I have no idea how the discussion of when one uses the term Nazi is identitiy politics. Maybe if you assume that I want to identify as a Nazi, which I assure you I do not.

It is still IdPol because one labels someone with a false identity they are not, or vise/versa. Regardless, I stand behind my original statement. "pie_tears_joy:
 

Redneckerz

Those long posts don't cover that red neck boy
You use academic language to project an aura of authoritative neutrality but then claim "ideologies are good, neutral or bad" instead of sticking to your neutral wording. The dichotomy is very funny to me and just felt compelled to point it out.
You are literally stating the exact same thing for 3 posts now when you have been asked to elaborate. Which you don't. What you are doing is analogus to bringing a (obvious) false painting to an art fair and then insist for hours that it's in fact, just like the real thing.
We are in disagreement here, then. Since it is a matter of opinion, it is impossible to prove one way or the other.
Nationalism and Patriotism do share some similarities, especially in regards to how an individual sees his or her nation. Merriam-Webster has a rather excellent breakdown of the history of these words, which as a word-nut, you surely will appreciate.

TLDR: More often than not Nationalism has a negative historic tone, but it is by no means inherently negative, although it commonly does. There are side streams like Pagan nationalism or Pagan Christianity which may or may not have Nationalistic elements in them. Elements in this case are essential. Every ism has its own set of negatives and positives, some more balanced then another, with Nazism just being plain bad.

Really though the only actual bad ism is ventriloquism. :lollipop_wink_tongue:
I see. Thanks for providing a better context and it at least paints Bachmann as a particularly dubious character. It pays some credence to the neo-nazi accusation, though it might be as you said be for "stirring up the pot", though it might also be that and appealing to neo-nazi sentiments. How does he place himself in regards to Israel and jews? And in regards to people with a different colored skin? Does he talk about "Germany for white people" or similar sentiments?
Admittely, I am not too well-versed in Lutz Bachmann, but i do know that he has resigned from Pegida.

Regarding the imagery: Now that i looked into it, his photo may actually be satire, to mock the image he has been given, and according to Bachmann, it was an old photo meant as a joke. I have to concede that my prior context may not be entirely accurate (if at all). A starting point might be Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lutz_Bachmann
I'm also skeptical when people use the nazi word, because it often is used wrongly and it further moves the discussion over to accusations and simple talking points and moves away from attacking the argument or beliefs the person holds.
That much is true. The term is so overused (Due to overlap) that its impact and its meaning have been lessened by the years. Thus, a Nazi means more these days than the literal definition of the word, for better or worse.

Also what Do Say Think tries to say is that you use luxorious words to explain your situation. Some people may take offence to this terminology, but unlike said user, i understand why it is used: To increase the quality of the posts in terms of explanation and grammatical constructs, rather than to imply you speak from a position of authority.

EDIT: Note to self: Make complete sentences with proper phrasing instead of wanting to type faster than the speed of light.
 
Last edited:
I am unaware that Stalin was particularly xenophobe, but if he was that as well, then yes, the term may apply. Either way, the so called communist states are hardly a realisation of Marx' model, but are merely using terms from left ideology to establish an authoritarian regime which goes contrary to the idea of the ruling of the proletariat.

He was pretty xenophobic, heck, appeals to anti-semitism is available as well. However, I doubt you'll find any professors agree to use the label nazi for him.
What does Marx's vision has to do with anything, we're using your expanded definitions, we don't need to understand the historical context of Marx' model then, the word has after all been synonymous with the Soviet Union. :lollipop_yum:

I agree that the terms I used do not differentiate the economical aspects of left and right, but I maintain that the term used as I do his helpful because it is isolating the problematic common core of traditional nazism and current day right extremism, which exists both, in neoliberal and fiscally social variants.

The common core for you seems to be quite a general one, imo. Xenophobia is such a weird term to use, because it often can fail at being an apt description and it can often function as a way to shut down criticism. Are one speaking of a rational or an irrational fear? If we refute cultural and moral relativism, it should be said in itself that fear of something strange or foreign shouldn't be a term of absolute certainty, but in which one has to understand the specific context of its use.


The biological aspect was bullshit anyway and the differentiation was at its core an ethnical one, with a huge emphasis on religion and nationality.

The biological aspect was technically bullshit, but it's not reality and rationality that's driving white nationalists, neo-nazis and white supremacists. Ethnicity isn't really a good term either, if you view the biological aspect of it as not important. I'd say the term was very specifically connected to the biological aspect and a sense of german cultural superiority. That doesn't mean that one can discount a sense of cultural superiority as being connected to nazism, unless we all want to go the route of cultural relativism.

Nationalism is the believe of the superiority of citizens of one nation (possibly limited by what you accept as a citizen, so people who migrated may be excluded) due to past achievements or societal structure and the ascribtion of achievements of people within the group to the whole group. Independent of being indigenous or not, the advantages are the following: and the disadvantages are seperatism, discrimination, exclusive behaviour, misplaced pride, and in many cases direct or indirect violence.

Your definition of nationalism could be ascribed to one part of nationalism yes, it's also the identification of a specific people as well. Minorities have clinged to the concept of their nation, especially indigenous people. There's numerous sources of Sami people recognizing themselves as a nation, a nation worthy of existence and living as their own particular people. Of course, the Norwegian State, even ran by rather left-wing people, was solely focused on assimilating them into Norwegian culture and recognizing them all as Norwegians, teaching them Norwegian. On the Swedish side you had the concept of Sami being ignorantly connected to excoticism and a prejudice to being Sami being equal to being a nomadic reindeer herder, while language was discounted.
I would point out that your definition, in order for it to be bad, would have to support itself on a sense of cultural and moral relativism. If seeing one's own nation as being superior to another one would be considered bad. Would it be nationalism to believe that Norway was superior to Nazi-Germany, to take a ridiculous example?
In your definition you're not connecting violence to nationalism, even if you are saying it is connected to it. Are you saying it's a consequence of it? If so, what about other isms, like capitalism, might that also cause cases of violence either directly or indirectly? I can imagine in some cases it would, due to the distribution of resources.

The demand to stop migration, throw out asylum seekers and to take away legal rights that protect asylum seekers, basically revoking rights that are guaranteed by the constitution.

So, understanding this, if someone wants to stop migration and views the asylum institution as bad, they're akin to a nazi? Constitutions can be amended, as people on the left in the US tells me. That's without considering whether all of those account for the people you're talking about, which I'm not seeing much proof and I hope if there is proof, it's not based on anecdotes.

My point in all of this is your dubious use and convenient use of the word "nazi". If people were to listen to you explain your definition of the word and hear it repeated often, it loses the gravitas that the origin of the word has. Sure you can expand and change words, but that also changes the effect of the word itself. You could change nazi to mean "people who love their country" if you wanted, but that doesn't mean that the semantic change carries over its previous gravitas and inherits its historical meaning.
My disagreement on you in regards to nazi, regards to the same disagreement I have previously had with the right wing americans using the word "socialist" or "communist". Sure, they can expand the term if they want, but they just look like simpletons and they don't understand the importance of a term in regards to its historical context. If you go around calling more and more people nazis, it certainly won't do a lot of good for those who've had family members or their country affected by nazi doctrine. It's laziness, that's what it is, because in the end there are probably more apt words you want to use, but you want to hitchhike on the gravitas of the term instead. It's just a populism, but from the left.
 
Personally I think those posters should be banned for misogyny, downplaying transphobia, and arguing in bad faith. Oh and history of infractions
Don't forget about "vilifying journalism" and I feel that this should be talked about more here.

ResetERA's biggest problems don't just include the over-reactive mob, the mod team's hyper-authoritarianism, and the forum's need to install politics everywhere, but also cronyism and gatekeeping for certain gaming sites.

Never forget how ERA handled the fallout of ArenaNet firing Jessica Price. It is arguably its biggest example of how far the forum would go to make sure the "correct" narrative, i.e. Jessica Price was fired because of the "hate mob" and sexism, and coddle their "approved sites" (e.g. Kotaku, RPS, Polygon, etc.). Three threads were locked because the mod team did not like how most users agreed with ArenaNet's decision. A fourth thread was made with the OP including articles that the mod team particularly approved. Anyone who called the authors out for their slant and bias were banned for "vilifying journalism".
 

Green Saber

Member
Don't forget about "vilifying journalism" and I feel that this should be talked about more here.

ResetERA's biggest problems don't just include the over-reactive mob, the mod team's hyper-authoritarianism, and the forum's need to install politics everywhere, but also cronyism and gatekeeping for certain gaming sites.

Never forget how ERA handled the fallout of ArenaNet firing Jessica Price. It is arguably its biggest example of how far the forum would go to make sure the "correct" narrative, i.e. Jessica Price was fired because of the "hate mob" and sexism, and coddle their "approved sites" (e.g. Kotaku, RPS, Polygon, etc.). Three threads were locked because the mod team did not like how most users agreed with ArenaNet's decision. A fourth thread was made with the OP including articles that the mod team particularly approved. Anyone who called the authors out for their slant and bias were banned for "vilifying journalism".
Wow the other place really is a joke, people daring to have differing opinions banned, three threads locked for not being the right type of thread, all I can say is thank god this place is now free of that mentality.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Don't forget about "vilifying journalism" and I feel that this should be talked about more here.

ResetERA's biggest problems don't just include the over-reactive mob, the mod team's hyper-authoritarianism, and the forum's need to install politics everywhere, but also cronyism and gatekeeping for certain gaming sites.

Never forget how ERA handled the fallout of ArenaNet firing Jessica Price. It is arguably its biggest example of how far the forum would go to make sure the "correct" narrative, i.e. Jessica Price was fired because of the "hate mob" and sexism, and coddle their "approved sites" (e.g. Kotaku, RPS, Polygon, etc.). Three threads were locked because the mod team did not like how most users agreed with ArenaNet's decision. A fourth thread was made with the OP including articles that the mod team particularly approved. Anyone who called the authors out for their slant and bias were banned for "vilifying journalism".

This was the vomit icing on top of the shit layered cake.
 
H

hariseldon

Unconfirmed Member
Hey, guys, remember the "What will happen when white people are going to be minority" thread in Resetera?

https://www.resetera.com/threads/so...ite-people-become-a-minority-in-the-us.31543/

See some comments there, see ti which posters the bans (or lack thereoff) were handed to and wonder yourselves..

Why some people here seem so desperate in lambasting nazism, while simmultaneously defend a forum full of Nazis?

Holy fucking shit.
1. First, a LOT of racism against whitey. No ban.
2. Chap gets banned for racism for saying "That new majority will be even worse to the now minority." The funny thing is that it's 100% true. Whitey isn't the only racist in town. The Chinese have a pretty poor track record with non Han Chinese. Thais absolutely hate black people (the school I worked in hired 2 black teachers and the parents kicked up a massive stink), in fact they don't even like Thais who are too dark (hence the popularity of whitening cream - I shit you not). In South Africa, when apartheid ended, Nelson Mandela did his best to keep things sane, but I'm reliably informed by my South African friends that being white is now quite hazardous for your health. Then go and look at Zimbabwe. When revenge is being stoked up by the SJWs damn right it'll be fucking worse. They want a 2nd wrong to make it right.
3. We celebrate. So celebrating whites being the minority isn't a tiny tiny bit racist? Fuck me.

Got about a quarter down page 2 and lost the will to fucking live. So much hate for white people, but no that's not racist at all. As I've said for a long time, SJWs and the alt-right are two sides of the same fucking coin.
 

Redneckerz

Those long posts don't cover that red neck boy
I think that, although i am guilty as charged of the same crime, there are two concurrent discussions going on:
  • The Reset talk. This is more in line with the prior thread.
  • The Spot the Nazi and win a price talk. Perhaps all those posts can be moved to a seperate thread? Its Politics discussion after all.
With that being said, i should just throw out a whole list of links to get people up to speed regarding the issues on ERA. Jessica Price was not the only case where things went down miserably. The thing is.. there already is that other thread, and i don't feel like reposting things again. So i am rather in favor of some kind of Wiki OP where these cases are linked.
 

ResurrectedContrarian

Suffers with mild autism
ResetERA closely mirrors a trend I've observed in certain quarters in the software world, where major open source projects (nodejs being a key example) are suddenly forked by a splinter sect that wants, above all else, to have extremely close moderation and "codes of conduct" enforced, with all that implies ("boosting" minority voices, softening the discourse and adding a million emojis everywhere, etc). This usually happens after a key player in the original project said something Very Mean and the rest had emotional issues dealing with such a harrowing experience.

But those projects never go anywhere, and mainly because that kind of person--who needs identity-style affirmations throughout and strict codes of conduct enforced--isn't really interested in or capable of producing real contributions. They just feel bitter at whatever group is competitively dominating a certain area, and want their own clique created where their ostracism is reversed into a new crown of "moderation" authority.
 
Last edited:

Green Saber

Member
Holy fucking shit.
1. First, a LOT of racism against whitey. No ban.
2. Chap gets banned for racism for saying "That new majority will be even worse to the now minority." The funny thing is that it's 100% true. Whitey isn't the only racist in town. The Chinese have a pretty poor track record with non Han Chinese. Thais absolutely hate black people (the school I worked in hired 2 black teachers and the parents kicked up a massive stink), in fact they don't even like Thais who are too dark (hence the popularity of whitening cream - I shit you not). In South Africa, when apartheid ended, Nelson Mandela did his best to keep things sane, but I'm reliably informed by my South African friends that being white is now quite hazardous for your health. Then go and look at Zimbabwe. When revenge is being stoked up by the SJWs damn right it'll be fucking worse. They want a 2nd wrong to make it right.
3. We celebrate. So celebrating whites being the minority isn't a tiny tiny bit racist? Fuck me.

Got about a quarter down page 2 and lost the will to fucking live. So much hate for white people, but no that's not racist at all. As I've said for a long time, SJWs and the alt-right are two sides of the same fucking coin.
Jesus that thread is sad to read, the other place is filled with some very unpleasant people.
 
A mod started a thread asking if you would date a transgendered person. Many were banned for saying no because they are attracted to vaginas and not penises. They took that as transphobia. When some trans people started saying they wouldn't date trans people the thread got locked.
They call that a honeypot thread....I cant recall if there has been a "who voted for trump thread" but I could imagine it being the same result
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
They call that a honeypot thread....I cant recall if there has been a "who voted for trump thread" but I could imagine it being the same result

They already had a thread similar to that, and they admitted to having a list of users who are Trump supporters.

Those squishy little bitches are pathetic.
 

Green Saber

Member
A mod started a thread asking if you would date a transgendered person. Many were banned for saying no because they are attracted to vaginas and not penises. They took that as transphobia. When some trans people started saying they wouldn't date trans people the thread got locked.
So basically they create bait threads as a way of finding people to ban.
 
I think that, although i am guilty as charged of the same crime, there are two concurrent discussions going on:
  • The Reset talk. This is more in line with the prior thread.
  • The Spot the Nazi and win a price talk. Perhaps all those posts can be moved to a seperate thread? Its Politics discussion after all.
With that being said, i should just throw out a whole list of links to get people up to speed regarding the issues on ERA. Jessica Price was not the only case where things went down miserably. The thing is.. there already is that other thread, and i don't feel like reposting things again. So i am rather in favor of some kind of Wiki OP where these cases are linked.
I have a feeling that there is a place where all of ERA's shenanigans have been documented, but it's not widely known. Otherwise, I wouldn't oppose opening a thread dedicated towards documenting ERA's transgressions.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member

Nethernova

Member
That "would you date a trans" thing is something else. I mean, you do you guys/girls, but i am in no fucking way open to dating anything other than my heterosexual opposite gender.
 

Battlechili

Banned
Not in the way it did, though. It's a bit of an angry boys club now. The moderation has gotten better but the community itself has suffered some pretty big losses. What good is freedom of speech without the diverse community to go with it?
That's fair and certainly true. Its something that's always annoyed me; the more freedom a site offers, the more it seems to repel certain people whilst attracting more..unsavory kinds of posts.
Though, the only way to fix this is for more people from the old community to post here! Its kind of a catch 22 after all; if the old community isn't coming here because the old community isn't here, the site can't ever have that old community. People need to take initiative. Be the change you want to see and all that.
 

brap

Banned
That "would you date a trans" thing is something else. I mean, you do you guys/girls, but i am in no fucking way open to dating anything other than my heterosexual opposite gender.
I'd date a cute girl with a peen but it's completely normal to see why somebody wouldn't.

I don't really think its wise to link or promote anything KF. That site promotes doxxing people and collecting people's personal information among other icky things.
Best to let that site die.
Yikes! Very icky and gross indeed.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
I don't really think its wise to link or promote anything KF. That site promotes doxxing people and collecting people's personal information among other icky things.
Best to let that site die.

Well, ResetEra promoted doxxing to the CDPR guy as well as other's in the past, getting people they did not like fired, and yet here we are sharing posts and talking about them.

That bot is still a valuable tool, regardless of the source. There is no bias when it is straight pulled data from 1's and 0's.
 
Last edited:

Dr. Claus

Banned
I don't really think its wise to link or promote anything KF. That site promotes doxxing people and collecting people's personal information among other icky things.
Best to let that site die.

Data is data. This just compiles the list of bans at a single location. Also, DeepEnigma hit it on the head as this entire thread is in regards to a site and its community that has openly shown that they are willing to doxx people themselves.
 
So basically they create bait threads as a way of finding people to ban.

As someone pointed out ...yes
My guess is the helpers report the non conforming people and those people are heavily watched and scrutinized for anything that goes against the grain and you eventually get banned

There are users on there that simply go around reporting people and everytime they mash that report button its usually an infraction which tallys up as some of them literally stalk people from area to area.....if your on the discords its talked about a bit ....some of them actually have competitions to see how many people they can report or get banned......back seat mods at its finest
 

Green Saber

Member
As someone pointed out ...yes
My guess is the helpers report the non conforming people and those people are heavily watched and scrutinized for anything that goes against the grain and you eventually get banned

There are users on there that simply go around reporting people and everytime they mash that report button its usually an infraction which tallys up as some of them literally stalk people from area to area.....if your on the discords its talked about a bit ....some of them actually have competitions to see how many people they can report or get banned......back seat mods at its finest
The people that do that are truly pathetic, instead of promoting free speech and an atmosphere of healthy debate they choose to create a forum of yes people who either go with the flow or get banned.
 

Cunth

Fingerlickin' Good!
As someone pointed out ...yes
My guess is the helpers report the non conforming people and those people are heavily watched and scrutinized for anything that goes against the grain and you eventually get banned

There are users on there that simply go around reporting people and everytime they mash that report button its usually an infraction which tallys up as some of them literally stalk people from area to area.....if your on the discords its talked about a bit ....some of them actually have competitions to see how many people they can report or get banned......back seat mods at its finest
lol what a bunch of losers
 

ULTROS!

People seem to like me because I am polite and I am rarely late. I like to eat ice cream and I really enjoy a nice pair of slacks.
Personally, I think it's a nightmare to moderate Off-Topic over there. I'm guessing it was a nightmare to moderate old-GAF when it was on the peak of having lots of SJW echo chambers and arguments?
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Personally, I think it's a nightmare to moderate Off-Topic over there. I'm guessing it was a nightmare to moderate old-GAF when it was on the peak of having lots of SJW echo chambers and arguments?

The moderators over there, where the main SJW loudmouths here.
 
That "would you date a trans" thing is something else. I mean, you do you guys/girls, but i am in no fucking way open to dating anything other than my heterosexual opposite gender.

That's just the thing. I said I would only date someone of the opposite SEX. Sex means genitalia. The mod that started the thread said I was "denying gender identity" and permanently banned me. Before that he called me out on it and I asked him to point out when I ever even said the word gender. He couldn't and then banned me. Is what it is. It's a shit site.
 
Please stop lol. Why are you trying to use a thesaurus on every sentence to make yourself seem smarter?
Please don't discriminate against those who like using researched vocabulary to convey their ideas (such as yours truly) :messenger_loudly_crying:
What I think this highly educated fellow wanted to say is a more fancy "lol tl;dr", which is a higher uber form of intellect many of us peasants can't aspire to comprehend one day no matter how badly we would want to.

I agree throwing nazi accusations willy-nilly is very unethical, intellectually dishonest (tries to defame the opponent instead of engaging, with guilt by association, very loose association at that) and a perverse watering down of its established historical meaning (tied with racial supremacy, advocating for totalitarian expansionist ethnostates, eugenics, political violence, hatred of jews)...
It's unfortunate some people's morals are so corrupt by "their ends justifying the means", that they can't grasp this basic fact of decency. But you have to set realistic expectations when dealing with people openly advocating for political violence, and demographic replacement of whites as a desirable income (1), etcaetera.

Actually saw this on the other forum, not as a mockery of the conspiracy theory of white genocide, but as a genuine opinion. It was the thread talking about how in Sweden a right leaning party that was the only one to advocate for stricter immigration, suddenly and unexpectedly polled higher than ever in voting intention polls. It was even from the perspective of other leftist parties lamenting this throughout the article and doing some soul searching for the issues they failed to address the public concerns properly so that this rise of the right doesn't happen again.Which is, by the way, the same thread where someone was banned for posting statistics.
One of the posters said not immigration (a sensible point of debate with pros and cons like more workforce but less benefits, etc), but outright demographic replacement (an openly racist point of view that advocates the country would look better if the colors of the population within is changed just for the sake of it, who do you hope to convince anyone with this? it's not like "gentrification" isn't a thing already) is needed and a net benefit.
The party line there is raw lunacy.
 
Last edited:

brap

Banned
That's just the thing. I said I would only date someone of the opposite SEX. Sex means genitalia. The mod that started the thread said I was "denying gender identity" and permanently banned me. Before that he called me out on it and I asked him to point out when I ever even said the word gender. He couldn't and then banned me. Is what it is. It's a shit site.
So you'd date a dude with a pussy?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom