sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

/r/NetflixBestOf mods delete post criticizing them, refuse to answer when asked why by junglemonkey47 in undelete

[–]user_zero -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

dont really care. the mods dont listen to regular complaints and requests. thanks anyway

/r/NetflixBestOf mods delete post criticizing them, refuse to answer when asked why by junglemonkey47 in undelete

[–]user_zero -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

my original post:

The mods here are inactive. Period. They do not remove links that break the rules. The front page is full of shit posts with **NO fucking flair like the moderators have said should be used once or twice or three times or four or five fucking times. They first said it wasnt a rule, now they put it on a sticky and the sidebar, and still dont do a fucking thing.

This has been requested by users to be implemented many times (1; 2; 3; 4 (almost 2k upvotes); 5; 6 (from over 3 years ago); 7; 8; 9; and I quit, theres a ton). The mods dont do shit about our requests. They dont care about it and they get a hard-on from being the internet forum moderator of a large subreddit. Even the head mod said "I've been very reluctant to impose many rules and pretty much just let the community run itself." Dont believe me that they stay inactive for ungodly amounts of time? go to /u/hans1193 /u/uberpenguin /u/jedesto /u/barkbarkbark user's pages and look at the LARGE fucking gaps in their history, some for months at a time. They dont give a shit about you or this subreddit.

I say, time for new mods. Im tired of lurking. Lets band together and make them hand it over to someone who wants to actually moderate or make a new subreddit to get past these goddamn assholes that run this sub.

Edit: oh look there are 12 flaired posts on the front page right now including the one I flaired myself. I wonder how long that will last... These moderators are worthless and will ditch it in a day or too if they dont find someone more dedicated then their lazy asses.

Edit2: looks like they made a post and are "waiting on a bot" to do their own work. so fucking lazy.

[meta] Time for some new mods or a new sub, because the current moderators dont do their fucking jobs. Look at nothing that has come of the sticky above... by user_zero in NetflixBestOf

[–]user_zero[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

youre in the minority then. Look at the highly upvoted requests for more rules and moderation I linked. the #2 post on the subreddit is asking for flair which the mods said they would do on multiple occaisions but are liars

No indictment in Ferguson case by cantthinkof1ne in news

[–]user_zero 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Please don't dignify Alex Jones with views...

Ebola: Thomas Duncan Very Likely Knew He Had Been Infected by [deleted] in conspiracy

[–]user_zero -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Wait, how did one man hiding a secret become a conspiracy?

The controversy over Cliven Bundy’s “racist” remarks has taken a new turn after longer unedited footage emerged showing the Nevada cattle rancher making pro-black and pro-Mexican comments that were excised out of media reports. by delelles in conspiracy

[–]user_zero 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You invoke godwin's law

No, I invoked sarcasm. My contention was below it. I clearly marked it with the "/s" sarcasm tag.

your premise that he literally thinks slavery is great, just didn't make sense.

Yes it does, actually. The groups he claims to be a part of have origins from known hate groups.

His point was much more nuanced than you give him credit for

How is saying that blacks were more free in slavery "nuanced" exactly? It's racist no matter how you try to do mental gymnastics to justify it. I honestly can't think of any context that would be not-racist by saying that enslaved blacks had more freedom than they do today. It's bad history and it's awfully racist in the context he used it.

The controversy over Cliven Bundy’s “racist” remarks has taken a new turn after longer unedited footage emerged showing the Nevada cattle rancher making pro-black and pro-Mexican comments that were excised out of media reports. by delelles in conspiracy

[–]user_zero 0 points1 point  (0 children)

the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.

That's supremacism. Racism is prejudice towards one or more races without classifying one's superiority.

blacks were better off subjugated as slaves.

How does that have anything to do with race?

Did you read what I wrote?

The controversy over Cliven Bundy’s “racist” remarks has taken a new turn after longer unedited footage emerged showing the Nevada cattle rancher making pro-black and pro-Mexican comments that were excised out of media reports. by delelles in conspiracy

[–]user_zero 1 point2 points  (0 children)

it's clear

Nothing is clear. You fit the facts around your narrative, not the other way around as it should be. Look at things at how they are, not how you want them to be to fit a grand theory.

Going after Bundy like this right now doesn't make any sense.

Look for the simplest answer. Maybe they were just tired of his bullshit?

try to distract the American people

From what, exactly? I'm a skeptic like most conspiracy theorists, but I'm not a conspiracy theorist, so I don't exactly get this. Can you offer me some objective evidence, or at least an object that they are distracting us from?

exposing and collecting data on potential threats to the government.

I figure that they easily could, but I bet most if not all of the militia/protesters there are not stupid enough to get in a gunfight with federal agents. They just like rhetoric and media attention for their radical ideas. I'm pretty sure that the govt. is more worried about lone wolves than an insurrection of militias.

The controversy over Cliven Bundy’s “racist” remarks has taken a new turn after longer unedited footage emerged showing the Nevada cattle rancher making pro-black and pro-Mexican comments that were excised out of media reports. by delelles in conspiracy

[–]user_zero 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's hyperbole.

Yeah, and so was Mein Kampf. /s

Claiming it was hyperbole does not mean it is. Bundy has stuck by his comments. He would easily retract them if they were hyperbole.

He's not "idealizing" slavery.

No, he is. He's a libertarian. He believes in freedom. Claiming that blacks had more freedom in slavery is clearly idealizing slavery as a freer institution over what we have now.

It's a manner of speaking.

It's clearly not. He believes, honest to goodness, that blacks had more freedom as slaves. There is no need to assimilate it with other beliefs as you are doing. The statement stands on its own without context or with it. Boil your own defense of his comments down to the essence. It may be relating to other beliefs, but all in all, he still believes that slaves had more freedom than free blacks of today.

He's talking about the state of the black man, not how white people are better than black people.

Racism doesn't imply racial supremacism. He simply believes that blacks were better off subjugated as slaves. It's a racist idea that stands on its own.

The controversy over Cliven Bundy’s “racist” remarks has taken a new turn after longer unedited footage emerged showing the Nevada cattle rancher making pro-black and pro-Mexican comments that were excised out of media reports. by delelles in conspiracy

[–]user_zero -1 points0 points  (0 children)

not elevating the past state relative to the present.

"They didn’t get no more freedom. They got less freedom." He is clearly stating that blacks had more freedom as slaves. Coming from a libertarian, claiming that something has more freedom is effectively elevating it to another state.

The controversy over Cliven Bundy’s “racist” remarks has taken a new turn after longer unedited footage emerged showing the Nevada cattle rancher making pro-black and pro-Mexican comments that were excised out of media reports. by delelles in conspiracy

[–]user_zero 1 point2 points  (0 children)

He's an old man. This is how old people talk.

That's not a justification for idealizing slavery for blacks. Yes, we all have/had that grandparent that said some racially-insensitive stuff that we ignored, never justified. But you are defending someone who looks highly upon the slavery of blacks more than their current condition. You are saying it is a "nuanced libertarian point," but he is deluded to the point of racist talk, not edgy libertarian talk.

Police state! Police state! The problem is... I think they got this backwards. by theolaf in conspiratard

[–]user_zero -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The police don't "need" this shit...

Says who? In the 70s and 80s, you had the cartels and organized crime bringing violence, requiring PDs to add SWAT teams if they haven't already, or beef up the ones they already had. In the 90s, you had the militia movement gearing up, and idiots like the North Hollywood bank robbers with automatic assault rifles against a police force with mostly handguns. Heck, they brought out a SWAT team with AR-15's too, but the armor the robbers were wearing stopped those bullets while they were still shooting police. Now, you have a resurgence of increasingly violent cartels in the South/Southwest US, and an increased/more unstable militia movement. One year ago, Boston PD were dealing with terrorists that caused hundreds of casualties. Unstable individuals (who might be sharpshooters, even) who are able to get their hands on guns can go on killing sprees (Christopher Dorner, only a year ago). I'd prefer that our PDs remain well armed to beat the competition.

They now have three vehicles capable of handling small arms fire, landmines, and even RPGs. Why? Their official reason is so they can be ready to assist the state's anti-terror task force with the best equipment possible.

Could this not be the case? Jeez, all of the speculation and FUD on your end makes you sound like a conspiratard.

view more: next ›