Moderators for v/Conspiracy ( conspiracy )

submitted by fenixrisin

I think it is about time to share the responsibilities, (there are none because we have no rules!), so that those interested can be more invested in this community. I'm not going to make any rules until the community decides on what they should be. I'd also prefer someone else do the 'enforcing'.

There has been a bit of discussion about protecting the site from shills, I think this is most important to the users (I could be wrong), and those who want to help moderate should offer solutions on this subject.

I'm in the EU, based on traffic, I'd say we first need some folks who are in the States.

Canalize

Lets be really careful in who we mode. I am more for the people that we have known on the sub the longest. Axolotl__peyotl (2 "_") maybe salvia_d or Grippinthagrain. This all depends on if they want it but at least I have seen there names on the old r/con thread for a long time and have seen they are not there to destroy our sub. Just my 2 cent. I for one am way too busy.

casualwhoaversereade

We should have "moderator tryouts":

  • Link us to your user profile on Reddit
  • Full disclosure: what forums do you moderate on Reddit?
  • Tell us why you would be a good moderator
  • Tell us how you would deal with shills/trolls
  • Tell us about a disagreement you had with someone on the Internet. How was it resolved?

fenixrisin

As an example....what is everyone's opinion about user/CarlaSimian 's comment....should that be removed from this thread?

shill

Also, I believe before mods are added rules should be made/voted on. Otherwise the mods will just have a free for all reign. Also I made a thread saying how the mod log should be made public. I don't believe that's a built in feature but a bot could be made that posts every mod decision in the mod log to a separate subreddit for transparency.

spasticbadger

I concur.

fenixrisin

I second that e-motion. I'll put a thread together with rule propositions/suggestions based on the information I've gleaned from the users here over the past week.

Transparency...I am currently wasting my time deleting the fire started by u/pyro . This is the only rule that I'm, unwillingly, enforcing....the removal of spam.

IntellisaurDinoAlien

Downvotes say enough to me.

shill

Agreed. Let the users vote.

alllie

I want to be a moderator here. You know I should be. Or do you plan to bring over the same people? I have about 100k karma on reddit conspiracy and have been very active them. I'm easy to check.

What to do about the shills. Hmmm....

I don't know. On /r/socialistart I just ban them. But there was only one.

It is the corporate media take over of reddit, and the censorship, that was the killer for me.

casualwhoaversereade

I think that being a fair / unbiased moderator also includes being politically agnostic. People who continue to push the two party system (especially one party over the other) should not be allowed to be a moderator. Most people in the conspiracy forum think that the 2 party system is rigged. There's no difference between Democrats or Republicans. So, pushing or submitting stories that advance the 2-party narrative should be banned from conspiracy. Moderators should be watched closely for this type of behavior.

shill

Bullshit. You're asking for censorship. If you have a problem with the system, make your points. Don't burn the books.

casualwhoaversereade

If you look at someone's history and see a pattern of pushing one political ideology over another then they won't be a good moderator. Eventually, it will turn into a giant circle jerk. (See: /r/politics )

shill

You can literally look at any mod from /r/conspiracy and see what ideology they're pushing. If you're confused with one of them let me know which and I'll help you figure out what narrative they're trying to sell while simultaneously banning whoever speaks against their narrative.

That aside, mods are humans. Humans will have opinions. So it's ridiculous to say that you want a mod that doesn't believe in anything.

Or are you saying you want mods who believe in what YOU believe. You obviously believe the two party system is horrible (I happen to agree with you on this one issue). So you want mods who don't believe in the two party system.

What system should they believe in? Are they okay as long as they're not Democrats or Republicans? Who gets to choose what ideology the mods are "allowed" to belong to?

I think you can see how this is a flawed way of picking mods.

All of that being said, I don't really wanna see Allie as a mod.

IntellisaurDinoAlien

I know we had a silly argument over nothing once but I agree to your nomination.

spasticbadger

I nominate u/axolotl__peyotl (may have spelt that wrong). He is a mod on r/conspiracy who we all asked for and he posts great content. edit /s

grandmacaesar

Just so we're all aware:

There is a difference between axolotl_peyotl and axolotl__peyotl (2 underscores).

grippinthagrain

that is my vote as well

IntellisaurDinoAlien

If he has the time to do more modding I agree.

shill

He was being sarcastic.

Peglius

I would be more than happy to help out, i mod several smaller forums on reddit, and am very interested in keeping this forum a level playing field for all points of view!! im on all the time as well =P east coast day hours

PrivateJoker

I was a mod of r/con for 24 hours last year during modgate 2013 lol (might have been 2012 actually). I work from home and i'm online for 8+ hours a day (pacific time which is like 8 or 9 hours behind GMT).

My main concern, especially for a new forum, would be cutting the thread derailing out immediately. Nipping those people in the bud is something that needs to be done. I'm not talking about debate, I welcome debate, that's why I love conspiracy forums. I'm talking about the people that come here and immediately resort to personal attacks while offering nothing else to the subverse.

shill

You seriously do not welcome debate BipolarBearsExperiment. You are a pretty shitty person and I would be completely shocked if you became a mod. I for one vote that you never become a mod of anything.

KittyGlitterSparkles

You sound like a conspiratard with a vendetta against this user, DuckVimes?

PrivateJoker

Werd. Either him or redping, they both specialize in generic attempts at character assassination.

shill

I'm neither, your account is disliked by a lot of people. You shit post, stalk, and character assassinate yourself. In fact that's about all you do. This subverse would become the biggest joke in history if your idiocy was allowed to moderate.

shill

I think he was a shitty user who often said things a moderator should never say. There's more than one user who disliked him and what he did.

AssuredlyAThrowAway

I can help out in this regard. I moderate /r/conspiracy and /r/worldnews on reddit so I have a decent amount of experience dealing with trolls.

casualwhoaversereade

Anyone who is a moderator of /r/worldnews should be exempt. That place is the epitome of "shill takeover" where free thought is banned. It's too late to apologize now. You guys have been censoring the news for far too long.

AssuredlyAThrowAway

I was brought on to worldnews to quell any censorship that might occur. Whenever users pm me with regards a removed thread I bring it to the attention of the mod team in an attempt to hold individual mods accountable for their actions.

casualwhoaversereade

So, why didn't you try to stop the censorship?

AssuredlyAThrowAway

I do try; any submissions you want me to look into in particular?

casualwhoaversereade

No, I am just disappointed with /r/worldnews as a whole. It's not your fault specifically. There's been a pattern of censorship and moderator abuse there for a long time now.

shill

I for one do not want to see a single mod from /r/conspiracy over here. You were all terrible. Also PrivateJoker is BipolarBearsExperiment and was a pretty hateful user a lot of time. Please do not let these users into power here, it'll only turn the place into another censored cesspool.

KittyGlitterSparkles

Good thing you're just one person with an opinion because you have a shitty one.

shill

So you think. But truth is most people do not want the /r/conspiracy mods over here. Reddit is gone. Leave the mods with it.

salvia_d

I disagree that they were/are all terrible. Some were awesome.

/r/worldnews though, wow that sub was/is one of the most censored subs on reddit.

AssuredlyAThrowAway

What can I do to make /r/worldnews better? You can always PM me on reddit if you find your submissions being removed unjustly from /r/worldnews and I will look into it.

casualwhoaversereade

Why don't stories about countries banning GMOs/Monsanto ever make it to the front page of /worldnews?

shill

Why are all the posts about the pope and marijuana being removed from /r/worldnews ?

AssuredlyAThrowAway

I must say I don't know, but I'll look into it.

casualwhoaversereade

That's kind of like Eric Holder saying he'll investigate Fast and Furious and let you know what he finds.

AssuredlyAThrowAway

Well I heard a little bit about those stories being removed but didn't look into it, now I will.

Worldnews is an interesting sub to moderate; lots of different mods with lots of different opinions. Consensus is not always asked for.

AssuredlyAThrowAway

I am saddened that you think I am a terrible mod. I have worked quite diligently to protect the free flow of information from trolls and shills alike.

PrivateJoker

It's duckvimes, nothing more needs to be said

shill

I don't even know who that is. I have plenty of reason to think AATA is a shit mod and you have a personal relationship with him and have reason to think he's a great mod. He definitely lets you break the rules constantly. I can't believe you even had the gall to ask to be a mod.

shill

Trolls and shills by your definition. You just banned all dissenters and made sure the subreddit fit into the narrative you wanted to push. The entire /r/conspiracy mod team was horrible.

Edit: Also I love how polite you are now, that you don't have power. You and others in this thread were far less polite in /r/conspiracy .

AssuredlyAThrowAway

We certainly ban crossposters and those who attack users and what not; but I have never removed a dissenting opinion made in earnest.

As to your edit; when have I ever been impolite? I strive for civility at all times.

casualwhoaversereade

Occasional cross posting is sometimes a good thing.

AssuredlyAThrowAway

Certainly, but the malicious nature of most crossposts meant a lot of bans were handed out. Not something I see happening on this site for a long time.

Non malicious crossposts never drew a ban from me, in fact I'm still a bit upset that Wax is top mod of bestof and /r/conspiracy yet somehow /r/conspiracy submissions are banned there.

raka_defocus

You can't ban someone based on someone thinking they're a shill. The best way to defeat these people is by backing up your arguments with facts. If you can offer an intelligent argument for your case , they go away and the truth grows.

fenixrisin

I agree.

Others have pointed out that this gets old and goes no where since there not here for discourse but to create division.

There are many views on the topic and I'd like to see something implemented that works. That might also mean doing nothing.

casualwhoaversereade

My idea was to have a forum (e.g. /v/shillreport ) where users can nominate people who are exhibiting shill-like or trollish behavior. One name per thread. The community can research, and discuss the problem then upvote / downvote. The highest-voted trolls/shills in that forum should be investigated by the admins and mods. There will (of course) be petty bickering and people accusing each other of being trolls. But, those will only get 1-10 votes each. We ignore those. The REAL trolls/shills will gets thousands of upvotes. Just focus on people who have over 500+ upvotes.

GoyzIIMensch

This is an interesting idea. Would be nice to have a place where the users/accused can go and focus on the presented evidence for a suspected shill. Then all of the arguments and debates could take place in that forum instead of in the conspiracy sub. If a user refused and insisted on just spreading bullshit in the conspiracy verse then I guess we would know where he/she stands.

Persona_Manager

Shills don't care about facts! Why is that so hard to understand? You can write a 200 page dissetation and they won't care about your facts, they'll ignore and continue trolling. They need to be banned outright. If you can't tell shill behavior then maybe you need to read a little more and get informed.

they go away and the truth grows.

Bullshit. This has never been the case.

shill

So censorship is your answer. Who gets to decide what's censored? Do we really want this place to just be an echo chamber where any dissenter is silenced? That sounds like a shithole to me.

casualwhoaversereade

There's a difference between a "dissenter" and a professional troll. The shill's job is to spread disinformation, slide the forum, and create fights. Most normal people will just say: "Fine, we agree to disagree" and the argument ends. But, trolls/shills will keep pushing their agenda even after they've been asked to stop.

shill

When have you ever seen "Fine, we agree to disagree" on /r/conspiracy ? It's literally a sub for controversial topics. Please show me one time that happened.

casualwhoaversereade

Maybe they didn't say those words but they stopped fighting. I've had arguments with people on /r/conspiracy and eventually told them "Believe whatever you want" and then stopped talking to them. They stopped talking to me. I added them to my RES ignore list and never dealt with them again. That's how most people deal with other people they don't like. A paid troll will keep coming back and picking the same fight over and over again with everyone (e.g.. Sandy Hook or 9/11 "debunkers" who won't accept any form of evidence as truth.)

shill

Fine, let's agree to disagree on this subject. I believe the voters should pick the content and the mods should keep their hands off conversations and "trolls" which on /r/conspiracy has just turned out to be anyone with a dissenting opinion. You believe the opposite. That's fine.

Persona_Manager

Censorship has nothing to do with it. Pay attention, kid. Read again what I said.

shill

I did read it kid. you want censorship.

casualwhoaversereade

Why would you purposely name yourself "shill" in a conspiracy forum? That seems like trollish behavior to me. Kind of like the user who named himself "ConspriaciesAreFake". Anyone who picks a username designed to inflame or start fights should be auto-banned. The only reason you chose that name is because you knew everyone would hate it.

shill

It's supposed to be facetious. This name wasn't picked to start fights. I made it ironically because everyone who doesn't follow the hivemind in /r/conspiracy is labeled a shill. I definitely do not follow the hivemind so I'm just beating them to the punch.

So you're wrong, there's more than one reason to pick a name. You don't know everything.

Edit: But I guess you were just trying to derail the conversation, congrats casualwhoaversereader. You did your job at derailing.

CarlaSimian

yes, the shills are out to get you