@AFTSOV hoes out here hoeing for the love of the game. No need to spend an ounce of emotion on it
I bet you consider this to be one of those "personal challenges". Sad.
@jwayne I don't think you understand how this site works. I'm not just the "public square" moderator and I'm ok with it getting removed. I am being lenient.
And no, not one of you "challenged" me personally. Every one of you devolved into mensuration with nothing to do except make up stories about me, imagine you've won something and then cry. Its pathetic, just like you're being here. This is why I feel we should be more lenient. TRP. red does not have to compromise with a userbase, especially not such a self-important one.
@jwayne There's nothing cryptic about any of this. There were a lot of bad actors who skirted the rules and then cried foul when they got caught- telling half truths to try to poison the well.
For instance, people who tried to throw the "muh free speech" line at me, as though I had enacted censorship site-wide. I haven't. Therefore anybody who has repeated this line to me is definitively a troll and will be regarded as such by me.
Anteros did what I told him to do. Ban flagrant offenders from the public square to set an example. When those same people came back and tried to ride the line as closely as they could, he counter-trolled them. They were not here to contribute and make the site better. They wanted full reign and would accept nothing less. When the word "faggot" got them in trouble, they tried insulting people with other words instead of grasping the base concept which was that the insults themselves are what we did not want on the public square.
I hear a lot of bitching and complaining but the fact is, @-Anteros- only gave it back to the people dishing it in the first place. It was an experiment to see if we could meet the fire with fire. And frankly, it kind of worked, regardless of your feelings on him. The trolls cried out as they struck him.
There's no cryptic message about lawyers. My lawyer is very good at what he does. Trying to muddy the waters with hearsay and halftruths suggests to me- once again- that we're not dealing with somebody trying to cooperate and understand in earnest, but instead somebody trying to sow discord and malcontent among the userbase.
My lawyer explained free speech like this: There's a fine line that you can defend in court, but it costs money to defend that fine line. The best method to stay above water is to draw the line ten feet to the left of it so that you don't have to spend the big money fighting things in court. That's why telling somebody to "kill themselves" is against the rules, even though it could probably be defended in court. In the unlikely chance some unhinged kid decides to off himself, we don't have to defend some troll who made an offhand comment as such.
I have always been fair and balanced, since the day I took over /r/theredpill. I have not changed in my mission nor my purpose. Even when trolls tried to take over the front page of my website, instead of simply kicking them from my platform (which many, many, many people suggested that I should do), I saw it as a chance to investigate the best way to engender free speech among groups that are in disagreement with each other.
If nobody owns the neutral space, everybody owns it.
And so, everybody decided to test it to the limits, immediately. And when certain folks who broke the rules complained that it was unfair, non-troll members took the bait and started complaining, which got them banned as well. It was a runaway effect, exactly what the trolls intended.
I'm not worried because anybody who falls for this farse and continues to complain past today is probably right in lock-step with the trolls who left.
But anybody who can reasonably see what my purpose was, what the experiment was, and how we're learning from it to move forward to "default tribes" can understand it was a necessary evil given the troll population dominating the userbase.
This is not to "appease" the userbase. This is a method of A/B testing, to see what works and what doesn't. It is clear to me now that the number one thing a free-speech platform cannot tolerate, is a place where people are friendly to each other. I have learned that lesson and will now design the platform in such a way that different free speech groups will need to learn their own outreach to gain exposure to other free speech groups.
Read MoreAnother day without the male feminist cancer. Feels good man.
mercy killed the cancer? fuck if I would've guessed that one
@redpillschool it was too much for the magical diamond path super alphas to handle, the poor babies.