Toggle Dark Theme
235,172 posts archived


It's about what you'd expect from an administration that's cornered by reason. Ignore, deflect, and continue pushing the ambiguous rules and pretend they could actually be followed. When someone's wrong, they just keep repeating the same thing. Because what they really mean but can't work up the courage to say is: "We don't actually have a rational argument against your appeal."

Thank you for your message.

To be removed from quarantine, you may present an appeal. The appeal should include a detailed accounting of changes to community moderation practices -- as that is not what you are presenting here we cannot review this as a reasonable appeal.

Our Response:

You haven't told us what moderation practices are in question.

We remove all content that violates the Terms of Service and Content Policies. We do not allow breaking reddit's rules on our subreddit. People who violate the rules are given warnings or banned, their comments removed.

We comply with every request from the admin if and when they occur.

We pre-emptively ban all inter-reddit links with automoderator to prevent possible brigading.

Please tell us what moderation practices are in violation so we can make a "reasonable appeal."

For those following the appeal:

In other news, we are working diligently to bring BIG updates to, including opening the forums VERY SOON. We've been putting those donation dollars to work, here's a sneak peek of what we've been working on behind the scenes. To answer questions here are details on what else is coming:

  • Fully functional API for app developers
  • Site will be Mobile friendly
  • Developers forum for continued work
  • Moderation tools for other forums who are going to be joining our life raft.

If you want to help, the dev forum will be announced soon, or you can donate on our patreon or with bitcoin: 1Hyyva2G5aCJwNqYToGoCCGATVNMB81zk7

[–]∞ Mod | RP Vanguardbsutansalt[M] [score hidden] stickied comment (19 children)

Did anyone else notice their response admits our quarantine isn't to do with the content?

I found it highly interesting that in their hamfisted attempt to deflect they instead shifted the fault to our moderation, which they've clearly failed to cite any infractions of the site's ToS. Well then fine, presto! we're squeaky clean, all infractions are now nonexistent. See how that works?

[–]justpickanyusername 231 points232 points  (15 children)

Seems a little hypocritical for Reddit to push so hard for "net neutrality" and then create fast lanes and slow lanes on their own website.

Per Reddit CEO Steve Huffman (aka spez): “If we don’t have net neutrality protections that enforce tenets of fairness online, you give internet service providers the ability to choose winners and losers.”

You can argue what an internet service provider is, but it isn't hard to see the hypocrisy here.

[–]Polishrifle 94 points95 points  (3 children)

It amazes me that people feel the need to censor ideas. If ideas are bad, then shouldn’t they be easy to defeat? It’s the type of mindset that someone knows better for the whole that is frightening.

[–]Senior EndorsedMattyAnon 12 points13 points  (1 child)

If ideas are bad, then shouldn’t they be easy to defeat?

The problem is that some ideas are good for population A and bad for population B. Eg "don't get married". There are winners and losers with this idea. It's an idea that has to be suppressed.

100% of women and 95% of men support beta ideals and blue pill programming.

Young women also fuck Chad and then pretend they haven't / wouldn't. But for us to say it makes us somehow anti-women. And in a way we are: the best female sexual strategy is duplicitous and deceitful: fuck Chad and then declare that she isn't "that girl any more" and marry billy beta. Billy has to believe that he has "won in the end". Society as we know it depends on men willingly paying for women through marriage, alimony, taxation and child support.

We undermine that, because it's a shitty deal for most men. Noone can disagree with the facts, but most people hate the facts because the lies are easier, prettier, and most people are heavily invested in them.

So that's 97.5% of the population with either a vested interest or are fooled into supporting the narrative and the status quo. The fact that we speak the truth and give men options makes us more hated, not less.

Noone is opposing us on factual grounds. Noone is saying what we say is untrue. We are attacked on ideological grounds: claims we hate women, claims we're all oversexed virgins. Lies to suppress our ideas not because they are bad ideas, but because they are bad for women and for the status quo.

This is an ideological war, not a fight for the truth.

[–]Loverofalifetime 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And actually it is a fight for the truth because a lie is being perpetuated to the vast majority of men (I know I believed those lies for YEARS!!!)...

Thus the world we have today where men can pretty much GURANTEED to be screwed in divorce court and put in jail for non-payment of child support (How is someone suppose to pay child support if they are in jail??)

[–]eclectro 6 points7 points  (6 children)

push so hard for "net neutrality"

Kinda interesting. I used to be in favor of net neutrality. But I say there should be no net neutrality for sites actively engaged in censorship. Which are mostly all the big websites pushing for it.

[–]NEM3S1S 6 points7 points  (0 children)

They want their site treated with "neutrality", but don't really care about the people on their site. Fancy that, a website that cares about getting business and not caring about their users.

[–]DamiensLust 0 points1 point  (4 children)

But I say there should be no net neutrality for sites actively engaged in censorship

This is nonsensical. You either advocate net neutrality or you don't, advocating it for some websites based on your criteria is exactly the same as being against net neutrality.

[–]eclectro 0 points1 point  (3 children)

This is nonsensical.

By a technical definition it might be. But I'm also practical. Let's call it something else if you wish then. If your website is actively engaged in censorship as determined by some esteemed panel, then the big ISPs can bill whatever they want. But if your website acts impartial to differing voices, then the ISP will need to act like a utility towards you and they are not going to bill traffic users.

Let's not call it net neutrality even. Call it freedom neutrality. Your website gets treated neutral if you actually are.

Here's a similar but more draconian take on this - Digitally Assured Destruction (nsfw language)

[–]DamiensLust 1 point2 points  (2 children)

This is a slippery slope. Websites are private entities, ISPs provide a public service thats these days akin to water or power. Why shouldn't websites be able to have the content they want? Should they also be forced to have Nazi propaganda or host political views that they disagree with? Should TRP be mandated to also provide the feminist argument lest it also be accused of "censorship"?

[–]eclectro 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Should TRP be mandated to also provide the feminist argument lest it also be accused of "censorship"

Let's say then that net neutrality exists for all websites with less than X million users. If you have more users than that, then you would fall under "freedom neutrality."

I'm sure that any number of objections could be made, and a solution could probably be found for most of them.

Nothing's ever perfect, but the rewards would outweigh the difficulties.

[–]DamiensLust 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's hypocritical to the core. You are suggesting we punish censorship with what amounts to censorship.

[–]lentils12 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is one of the most bizarre cases of censorship

[–]3CainPrice 120 points121 points  (23 children)

Quarantine is, by design, a subjective tool for use by the Reddit administration to segregate undesirable content from the view of general users.

If content violates Reddit's rules or content policies, it gets banned. Reddit didn't ban The Red Pill.

If content is not in violation of Reddit's rules or content policies, but in the subjective opinion of the Reddit Administration, an "average user" would find it "shocking or highly offensive", quarantine is the appropriate tool instead of banning.

There's no way to fight a quarantine, because it is, by design, a subjective opinion from someone who already doesn't like or agree with us. What's an "average user"? What would somebody who is "average" find "offensive" or "shocking"? Hell, I found The Red Pill shocking when I first read it. Most of average frustrated chumps who weren't getting laid did.

I'd say that's a pretty strong argument that an "average" person would find our content "shocking", actually. Most of us were "average" and were pretty "shocked" by what we read here.

Since quarantine is a subjective Reddit administration decision, by design, it can't be combated with an "appeal" that says "We don't violate your content policies". Because Reddit already knows we don't. That's why The Red Pill isn't banned, just quarantined. And it can't be combated with an appeal that says "We're not shocking or offensive", because they've already reviewed our content and subjectively decided we are.

There's literally no way to overcome a Reddit quarantine other than to actually change the content and moderation practices and demonstrate to them that this has been done for a period of one month. Which is stupid. The big guys on The Red Pill have no intention of doing that. This whole appeal thing is just designed to make the Reddit administration look silly. They already looked silly before, and nobody cared. But maybe they'll look sillier after this goes on for a bit.

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 34 points35 points  (7 children)

But maybe they'll look sillier after this goes on for a bit.

It certainly is starting looking worse as more people around reddit talk about the sham of the appeal process.

[–]ThePantsThief 7 points8 points  (5 children)

Where else is the appeal process being discussed besides this subreddit?

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 13 points14 points  (4 children)

I've been talking about it in subredditcancer, mensrights, and with mods of about a dozen other subs. I've seen it discussed in pussypassdenied, PPD, advice animals, (obviously announcements) , rooshV forums, Rollo's blog, Paul Elam's podcast, and a few other places.

And I certainly couldn't stop people like you from talking about it where discussion of censorship happens.

[–]ThePantsThief 3 points4 points  (3 children)

People like me? I subscribe here, man, lol

[–]Modredpillschool[S] 6 points7 points  (1 child)

I can't condone talking about it elsewhere. But I can't stop you. ;)

[–]ThePantsThief 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Oh, I thought you were saying I was in favor of censorship haha

2&&(n[t].style.display="none")}else{e.innerHTML="[–]";for(var n=document.getElementById(,t=0;t2&&(n[t].style.display="")}}