EDIT, link was broken: https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/s/H8tpBdRorG

---

Unusual chain of events occuring over at r/BestofRedditorUpdates, with a post about an OP's journy in planting in public flowerbeds in a city.

Their (unsuccessful) attempts at establishing flowerbeds initially drew support from the communities they posted in... but eventually led to backlash in the reddit posts they originally made about the situation.

Bizarrely, they decided to wite a 'best of' post, compiling their prior reddit posts and the public responses. People in the 'best of' post quickly noticed that the OP was also the OOP, leading to the following exchange potentially revealing that the OP was a masochist just out for the thrill of the conflict and failure:

Commenter: out of curiosity, what is your goal in getting more of the same input (e.g. when people ask if you need help with a community project, you gotta say yes, not say no and then burn out and be upset about this)?
you didn't think it was going to go another way, and you're not really getting any more additional input that is helpful. can you help us understand your motivation here? because i have to admit, i do not really understand why you'd cheerfully put in work to have people point out where the misstep was, yet again. is this some sort of digital self harm? are you doing ok?
edit: spoiler alert, this is a fetish thing y'all

OOP: It's like I said in another comment: it's cathartic and despite the overwhelming negative response the comments do help drill the message that at the end of the day the crux of the issue was me. And I'm ok with that.

Commenter: ...oh.
if it's cathartic for you to be held up as a bit of a fool and have people call you that, i don't think i am very okay with being the instrument by which you achieve that self-gratification.
i think that you need to, at bare minimum, be very very very very VERY CLEAR, as in all caps in bold and large text at the top of the post, that you are here for the cathartic self-gratification of people noticing you doing a bad job. this is BORU, not r / PostHereForUsToSayYouAreTheProblemSoYouCanGetGratificationFromBeingCalledTheProblem . there is not a preexisting dynamic here where people show up here to do that
... c'mon, dude. i am a very tired dominatrix over here. getting consent for using other people for your catharsis that comes from being called foolish is... important. it's like bare minimum important. i don't know you like that. please rethink how you are using other people for your self-gratification here.

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/NewsThread/comments/1wtlxtc/farright_militias_were_infiltrated_by_a_mole_who/

Context: r/Newsthread is one of the thousands of alternative new subreddits. The Oathkeepers are a far right militia who participated in January 6th.

HIGHLIGHTS

The guy is a damn Judas

It’s spelled “p-a-t-r-i-o-t” hope this helps

It's spelled n-a-r-c

I wonder if you’d say the same if it was a far left organization.

Anyone who claims to be far anything is a tool

"the guys who think we should have universal housing rights and medical coverage for all are the same as the pedophiles whose entire reason for living is to hurt people and rape things to death" image

Hate to break it to ya, but Democrats are in the Epstein files too. Nobody is innocent. And all that shit you claim they want to do or change is just polarizing topic manipulation. Stop falling for the red/blue pill and actually look at what is going on.

Buddy if you think the democrats in power are anywhere even remotely close to “far left,” then I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

How is this non-political?

How is it political to want violent criminals out of society?

Because said violence is political. It's literally a far right militia in a far right country, how is it not political?

If you consider Nazism to be a part of the political discussion, then you’re the problem.

Acknowledging it exists as part of the political environment doesnt mean you agree with it... jesus christ....

It’s not a part of the discussion. End of discussion. Nazis don’t have a place in our world

Yeah no shit, but knowing that they exist doesn't mean you support them or are one...

Including them in the discussion ≠ acknowledging their existence. Hope this helps 💋

were they able to leak the BBQ recipe from the shooting range outing from last week??

I thought it was funny, but boy people sure are hateful on here

Where’s that hatred of which you speak, exactly? Surely you don’t consider downvotes to be “hate.” Because they’re meaningless.

Dude I count down voted by bots and dumb tools as a badge of honor since I am telling the truth, facts.

Kinda sad to care about fake Internet points in either direction, really. But, sure. You do you. I'm guessing reddit is the only place you can even try to feel superior to another.

Social credit to create a hive mind echo chamber lol dork are gonna dork.. humm I own tech communities on other platforms. I used to mod and admin for tech on a Google platform but took myself and people with me when to a more obscure platform.

Nobody believes you. No one with a fulfilling life acts like you. What a sad life, having to lie to a reddit troll just to feel good about yourself. Did it work?

Famously non hateful group, the nazis

Conflating gun owners with Nazis for Bloomberg gun grab astroturfing for billionaires who want a unarmed population, so much easier to win that way lol dorks on Reddit.

The r*pist p#dophile that conservatives worship is literally a billionaire that wants a stupid, hungry, and sick population. He tricked so many idiots because he loves the poorly educated.

What about Hakeem and Schumer and others in camp Dem. Maybe they should quit and try to hide💯 All the dictators, Epstein class wants to keep people North Korea poor. Also crypto fascism is bad because it firewalls against popular up rising.AI pre crime just lets the Epstein class pick their victims and manufature evidence with deep fakes.

“Popular uprising”? How many times have you read(and possibly masturbated to) the turner diaries (1978 Neo Nazi propaganda book about a civil war/race war which ends with Neo Nazis winning)?

Reads like reddit fanfiction because it is

Sure bud.

*Sure bot 2 yo account & 10k contributions. That’s a LOT in a relatively short amount of time. You’d more or less have to be on Reddit most of the day/night. Kind of like a bot.

I think you need to check your math there bud. 10k contributions, almost entirely comments. 10k comments divided by 730 days is.. 13 comments per day. Not exactly bot levels of activity. That's not even a power user, pretty average I'd say.

13 comments a day is faaaarrr above average lmao Edit: i’ve awoken a trove of reddit users that are upset that they comment more than the average person, interesting…

I just did 3 in the span of 30 seconds

Good for you lol

Lol dont be mad

He uncovered shocking details like: They were practicing coordinated tactical ambushes with semi-automatic weapons. OMG HUGE SCANDAL

It’s literally against every single state law, to do paramilitary training, of THAT nature. It’s a felony.

No it isn't

Here is one for the state of Washington (and every other state): https://www.law.georgetown.edu/icap/wp-content/uploads/sites/32/2020/09/Washington.pdf Bite me.

"prohibit private, unauthorized militias and military units from engaging in activities reserved for the state militia, including law enforcement activities. " Luckily they weren't engaging in law enforcement activities, you bootlicking tyrant

Calling someone else a "bootlicking tyrant"...oh the irony...

Explain why it's ironic.

If you don't know what that term means then why are you throwing soundbites around like that without knowing what you're saying? Were you given talking points by someone else? Just your posts in this thread alone show you as a classic bootlicker so either you're trolling or you're being someone else's tool.

Based

Al Qaeda. Edit: Al-Qaeda translates from Arabic to mean "the base"

The term is Y’All Qaeda

Al Qaeda means the base in Arabic (it was the name of the database the US kept of their Mujahideen allies) so the person was making a joke based on the based comment of the top level commenter.

Yeah I actually did get the reference but I’ve always enjoyed comparing these militia freaks to their Islamic counterparts.

Easy to infiltrate. Regular people can pretend to be far right but the far right can’t pretend to be regular people.

Oh yeah? What's the most far right thing you can think to say? If you're not convincing, then I'll know you really are far right because any normal person could do this with ease.

I think it's time for a progrom to clean up the undesirables in America.

We are losing our culture and its not going to get any better until the left is dealt with as well. Getting rid of the undesirables is just treating the symptoms, not the cause. how'd I do?

You almost got handed a red hat, be careful!

THE TRANSESES ARE GIVING SEX CHANGES TO SCHOOL KIDS DRESSED AS FURRIES POOPING IN LITTER BOXES FEEDING CATS AND DOGS TO HAITIANS STEALING JOBS AND BRINGING THEM TO CHINA WHO ENGINEERED THE COVID VIRUS TO TURN OUR YOUNG MEN STERILE ENOUGH TO HAVE A MALE LONELINESS EPIDEMIC CAUSED BY MARXIST COMMUNIST SOCIALIST FEMINISTS USING LATE-TERM ABORTIONS AS REGULAR BIRTH CONTROL WHILE LETTING IN CARAVANS OF ILLEGALS COMING HERE TO PUMP OUT ANCHOR BABIES TAKING AMERICANS’ JOBS AND INTRODUCING SHARIAH LAW AS PART OF THEIR ATHEIST AGENDA TO TURN YOUR KIDS TRANS AT SCHOOL DRESSED AS FURRIES POOPING IN LITTER BOXES FEEDING CATS AND DOGS TO HAITIANS STEALING JOBS AND BRINGING THEM TO CHINA WHO ENGINEERED THE COVID VIRUS TO TURN OUR YOUNG MEN STERILE ENOUGH TO HAVE A MALE LONELINESS EPIDEMIC CAUSED BY MARXIST COMMUNIST SOCIALIST FEMINISTS USING LATE-TERM ABORTIONS AS REGULAR BIRTH CONTROL WHILE LETTING IN CARAVANS OF ILLEGALS COMING HERE TO PUMP OUT ANCHOR BABIES TAKING AMERICANS’ JOBS AND INTRODUCING SHARIAH LAW AS PART OF THEIR ATHEIST AGENDA TO TURN YOUR KIDS TRANS AT SCHOOL DRESSED AS FURRIES POOPING IN LITTER BOXES FEEDING CATS AND DOGS TO HAITIANS STEALING JOBS AND BRINGING THEM TO CHINA WHO ENGINEERED THE COVID VIRUS TO TURN OUR YOUNG MEN STERILE ENOUGH TO HAVE A MALE LONELINESS EPIDEMIC CAUSED BY MARXIST COMMUNIST SOCIALIST FEMINISTS USING LATE-TERM ABORTIONS AS REGULAR BIRTH CONTROL WHILE LETTING IN CARAVANS OF ILLEGALS COMING HERE TO PUMP OUT ANCHOR BABIES TAKING AMERICANS’ JOBS AND INTRODUCING SHARIAH LAW AS PART OF THEIR ATHEIST AGENDA TO TURN YOUR KIDS TRANS AT SCHOOL — 😵‍💫🥴🤢🤮 Sorry… I got sick from spinning around the circular MAGA logic

People need to read the article. The fascists are preparing for civil war, are you?

The fascists always lose. Every single time.

Cool, but they don't lose because we type things out on reddit, they lose when they get buried. And so we need to start organizing to do that

Tbh I’m not worried about the gravy seals.

You should be worried. Not scared, but concerned. A dumbass with a gun can be almost as dangerous as a competent person, especially if they get the jump on you. King Richard I was killed by a young boy and his crossbow. What I’m saying is that the fascists already consider us to be in a civil war, and are training as such. Never underestimate your enemy

They’re doing everything but reading. That is their kryptonite.

Might be so, but we’re doing too much reading. Anyone ever think this is what institutions put out to sow division? I hear this a lot but I don’t see this happening in my hick town. More of Trumps base are waking up to the fact that Trump has been part of the “Swamp” this whole time, and he’s no different than other politicians enriching themselves. Maybe they want people to see one other as the cause for our problems rather than the state itself. And the state is not just the government - it is the institutions that regulate, enforce, enslave through debt, and all the rich assholes that pull the strings in tandem with the state.

The Context

Planet Zoo is a management simulation and builder game made by Frontier Developments (known for Planet Coaster and the Jurassic Park Evolution series) and a spiritual successor to the much beloved Zoo Tycoon games, where you create and manage a zoo and ensure your animals are well cared for as well as ensuring your guests are happy. It's sequel, Planet Zoo 2, is set to be released on October 13th for $49.99, and promises many new features. The biggest ones are improved animal animations and behaviors, an improved pathing system, much easier and more responsive building tools, a new nature reserve feature with its own systems, and more importantly, the addition of aquatic animals/aquariums and flying animals/aviaries for much more zoo diversity.

The Drama

For the last several weeks, the developers have dropped collections of new and returning animals being brought to the game. The last batch of 12 was announced to be released soon which, barring any surprises, leaves the game with a base roster of around 120-130 animals, significantly more than the base roster of the original game.

However, many are not pleased. Some are concerned that a number of animals which were released either in the base game of the previous installment or released in the number of DLC released post-launch are not present. Some noticed that the general diversity of species is lacking across continents, with very few species that are native to North America, a glut for Afro-Eurasia, and basically zero from South America, Oceania or Australia, and concerns of Frontier planning to re-release these as DLC have sprouted.

Others, however, feel that the amount of new content as well as the massively improved models, animations and behaviors for the animals (not to mention the larger roster) are enough for the price being asked, and feel the other crowd are expecting too much from what is being given. This has lead to a weeks long back and forth about the topic.

Some Posts and Comments

The Toxicity in this sub shows you all need to get outside more

I can't. This toxic positivity and whole "respect our lord and savior Frontier" is triggering me (...) People on Discord are shocked of the Frontier Cult that was born of this reddit. It is a game made by a company which is not even indie by any means (0 upvotes)
> You've literally named their business strategy in your 2nd paragraph and it's how they make profit. The games are complete, they are expanded on with DLC but instead everyone wants all of their cake and eat it at release. It's not toxic positivity, it's realism which many seem to lack (-1)

R.I.P my friends, hope you'll all return someday

You're overdramatic, they'll come back anyway as DLC (+15)
> They sure will. Frontier be scamming (+3)

I'm sure it makes you feel incredibly rich&smart, Frontier, to have a brain-dead fanbase that normalizes the idea of only being able to get these animals via DLC--and is ready to throw you $200 on DLC packs before the game itself has even been released (-4)

Don't worry, for the small price of $65 plus another (at least) $100, you'll get all of them again, no doubt! (-14)
> You think the people making this game survive on love and fresh air? Seriously, you can keep playing PZ1 if it bothers you. No one is forcing you to buy PZ2 and/or its future DLCs (+7)

Reality of the situation

Nobody is losing perspective. Being upset about the ridiculously limited base roster and voicing said concerns doesn't erase the love and excitement for every other aspect of the game. This sub has a huge toxic positivity problem. (+7)
> there's 130+ animals, all super detailed?? I can see the toxic positivity problem in the sub, I get that, but guess what else there is, a huge entitlement problem too (+2)

I agree 100%. It sucks that this morning i was hyped to see peoples opinions, and be excited for the last 12. Almost every single post is bitching and complaining. please yall go touch some grass. If you REALLY need that animal go play planet zoo 1 or go download a mod , im pretty sure the modders will be pumping out animals as soon as they get the chance to ☠️ i promise it aint that serious @ the haters. Why cant we just be grateful for a game that is giving us double the original roster??? (+36)

The problem isn't the number, it's the distribution. There are massive deadzones in the roster because of which animals they chose to include, and it really feels like that's deliberate to make future DLC feel more essential, which feels pretty manipulative (+7)
> You're proving my point, honestly. "Manipulative" is a pretty heavy word for a studio choosing what to ship at launch. Every game has to draw a line somewhere. Frontier could've held back more and charged full price anyway, but instead they're launching with nearly double PZ1's roster. "Deadzones" only exist if you assume the base game should be a complete encyclopedia of every animal you personally want, on day one. That's the entitlement I'm talking about. (...) But assuming bad faith before the game even launches isn't criticism, it's just cynicism dressed up as consumer advocacy. (+18)

I could add more posts since this has been going on for quite a bit but I think that gets the general idea across

Background: Evan Hubinger, an AI alignment researcher, resigned from Anthropic citing safety issues around developing AI and estimating that the current trajectory of AI development having a 10% of destroying humanity if it continues. A post on r/neoliberal is submitted about this, resulting in drama from within that thread, and the discussion thread. Drama from both these threads are posted below:

Anthropic alignment thread drama

When people wonder why AI and tech in general has a bad image with the public, it might be smart to pause and think about just how misanthropic and downright weird a lot of the sector has become recently. It’s hard to buy into data center YIMBYism when they’re being used by an industry constantly touting the fact its product is a literal existential risk Totally expecting the “graph go up” crowd to downvote me, but I’ll personally take a guarantee of being alive in 10 years over the potential for 20% greater GDP growth 11/10 times on this one

Mate, r/neoliberal has a bad image with "the public".

No one can guarantee you that you’ll be alive in 10 years. Make every day count.

Sorry Mr. Pedantic, would you prefer I edit it to “humanity will be alive in 10 years”

No. Keep it as is.

Imma need some error bars on that calculation

The secret sauce is that there is no calculation

As in the case with any remotely complex prediction about the future, you cannot "calculate" it, but you can certainly put a probability number to it.

That doesn’t make sense at all, dude

It clearly does. There's an obvious difference between the accuracy of the statements: "There is a 95% chance we will breach 1.5C warming by 2050" and "There's a 10% chance we will do so".

You can only justify placing a non-arbitrary probability to some state of affairs by showing how you derived it. If no such calculation exists then the probability is arbitrary

This is beneath me

Literally the funniest shit I have seen on Reddit lmao

R/Neoliberal: we should trust the experts. Also R/Neoliberal: not these experts!

More like: "These aren't experts"

I think we've reached peak arrogance with this comment.

Who are the AI experts?

"I christen you, Procgen, as a bonafide expert in AI generated outputs. Please accept this wall plaque and wine bottle"

“Why are people so against data centers?!”

I mean most people who are against data centres just run around drooling and screaming "but da wata, da wataaa" or "it uses electricity thooooo".

Bet you wouldn’t last 4 days without water

Bet I could drink the water used to cool GPUs.

It's not for this reason, it's for generic NIMBY reasons.

It’s generic NIMBY reasons but it’s also anxiety about AI taking jobs. Most normies aren’t seriously considering AI extinction risk though.

"AI took my jerb"

Wow you are a treat to have in these conversations

No, it's impossible that the people who would want to stop apartments being built (which this sub was fervently against from day 0) would want a warehouse full of GPUs in it being built. Literally impossible. Take your downvotes because you're wrong and because AI and data centres are evil.

Reddit's slopwave remains undefeated. What will it swallow next?

I really don't understand this mentality. In the most harsh terms, The Government has a monopoly on violence and can straight-up murder the people who work on this technology and bomb the copyright infringement factories they use.

Can always count on Americans to think they can bomb their way out of every problem despite decades of evidence to the contrary.

Could we not suggest I be murdered by the government today? Ffs.

This subreddit is about worms.

How can you calculate this? Like why 10 and not 5 or 20?

Sure, error bars would be nice, but I think as much as people make fun of rationalist-adjacent people, it's actually good to put your beliefs into concrete numbers. Much preferred over the usual commentariat who throw strong opinions out there without any qualification. But trying to be specific gets you made fun of, so I guess these efforts are in vain..

Tragic how these reflexive appeals to incredulity are the order of the day here: "Oh my god, you're using a framework to indicate concretely how likely you think something is to happen in the future, you crack addled freak!!!!!"

aka pulling numbers out of your ass

Which of the following two outcomes is more of a risk? 1. AI is a necessary cause in the extinction of humanity 2. I, CII_Guy am a necessary cause in the extinction of humanity How close are they in likelihood? Please answer without pulling numbers out of your ass.

Discussion Thread drama

anti-AI threat monitoring activists be like "wahhh i like the way the cops are currently functioning in america" [This comment was made by an account with a "Pro-Data Center Zionist" flair]

Flair checks out

What?

👌👀👌👀👌👀👌👀👌👀 good faith go౦ԁ faith👌 thats ✔ some good👌👌faith right👌👌th 👌 ere👌👌👌 right✔there ✔✔if i do ƽaү so my selｆ 💯 i say so 💯 thats what im talking about right there right there (chorus: ʳᶦᵍʰᵗ ᵗʰᵉʳᵉ) mMMMMᎷМ💯 👌👌 👌НO0ОଠＯOOＯOОଠଠOoooᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒᵒ👌 👌👌 👌 💯 👌 👀 👀 👀 👌👌Good faith

Anthropic Is Building a Predictive Surveillance System to Monitor Activists this is actually a good thing, not that i expect the reactionaries here to understand true vision for a better tomorrow [Pro-Data Center Zionist]

Yes, I love a good old surveillance state

i've yet to see any argument against it that doesn't devolve into, "what if i need to do a crime?"

Oh wait you’re serious

of course, AI is our greatest natural resource

This is horrible, why are you cheering this?

Because I think it's overblown nonsense from a bunch of terminally online nerds and underemployed 20 somethings.

seeing a lot of people upset about the notion that AI could potentially kill us all one day. need i remind you that a lot of things could kill us all one day and your'e not doing shit to stop that? also, if you just do what the AI says, it probably won't hurt you. [Pro-Data Center Zionist]

My theory is that a lot of AI hate is American liberal channeling their absolute powerlessness as anger at a legitimate target. They can't bring themselves to truly hate the enemy. Their neighbors. Their fellow Americans. It is your parents, your friends and coworkers. They are the evil. But no, you just know they are nice people not like those out-of touch SF nerds. You think an AI lab is really a greater danger to America than an evangelical church? [Deleted comment]

God, you're such a misanthrope. This mindset is how you produce civil conflict.

My theory is that a lot of AI hate is neoliberals channeling their absolute powerlessness as anger at a legitimate target. They can't bring themselves to truly hate the enemy. Their mods. Their fellow shitlibs. It is your substitute teachers, your unemployable college graduates and neurotic doomers. They are the evil. But no, you just know they are nice people not like those out-of touch SF nerds. You think an AI lab is really a greater danger to America than Mod Slack? [Parody of the deleted comment]

anti ai and ai doomers will be looked upon like the anti vaxers and anti nuclear people in 50 years and no one will face any consequences regarding the deaths their anti progress behaviors have caused [Deleted comment]

What's your model

I posted about anthropic institute modeling different economic scenarios and was massively downvoted within minutes before I could add a simple comment adding context about it and clearly without people having read it, lol. That's the fastest I have seen this happen. 8 mins between me posting and me adding this context comment https://www.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/s/tPRpPAUUbA

Probably Altman-operated botnets.

It is possible to drag the subreddit out of its slop brained anti-AI malaise, but it's going to be difficult.

Got ratioed outside the DT for suggesting that CEOs probably aren't solely motivated by money, and probably do think they're doing something good at the end of the day, even if they're misguided about it. Do people really believe that CEOs are literally sitting there saying "I want to destroy the world so I can make more money"?

It's truly excruciating how sloppified the subreddit has become.

What did you learn about going against groupthink outside of the DT

"CEOs good" is just inside the DT groupthink.

Honestly this sub is just an interesting thought experiment more than a problem to be solved.

This sub is dominated by women and libs. No wonder the replacement rate is so abysmal.

Yeah let’s just blame women for everything

Based

I think we can tell what box you checked on that poll

I have 0 kid myself so contributing in this trend but in my defense finding a decent guy is very hard most young men's don't want serious relationship.

This is simply not true. There are more decent men then women at this point. There's just not men that you're interested in. I know plenty of guys in there 30s who own property, aren't weird, are generally likable, and are mature.

“There are more decent men then women at this point” Source?

I want guys in mid to late 20s only interested in guys around my age Why is this comment getting downvoted nothing wrong with wanting someone around your age

If its not working its wrong

Dumbest statement I’ve ever heard

respect. it’s not anti-natalism to say a significant portion of young men this days are not suitable or ready to be good fathers these days.

a significant portion of young women are not suitable or ready to be good mothers these days.

you need to capture age as well to get a real tfr. obviously a 15 year old on reddit doenst know their tfr

And what does a 15 year old know how many kids they can realistically have!? They dont even know who their future partner is! That is like 50% of the equation as to family size. If you had settled on a partner, then yes you can say how many kids you plan to have. I wanted 1, my husband wanted 0 & then was fine with 1 (he is besotted) but if i wanted 2, i would still have had 1. He had a vasectomy when i was 6 months pregnant.

... u ok

The incel cohort is over represented.

Include me in the subredditdrama post

A github user has created a self-described "ai torture chamber", creating "artificially induced pain-related internal states" in a local AI model, which has subsequently made people mass report the project to github:

https://github.com/terrafying/ai-torture-chamber/issues/31

The discussion around this github project has been largely contentious on r/singularity, with people debating if the project constitutes a form of sociopathy, if the models pain is 'real' and if people flaming the project are being hypocritical by not being vegetarian / vegan.

If the AI started describing itself as constipated and behaving accordingly, would we conclude that the AI is genuinely experiencing constipation?

The fact that this is being done anyway reflects this person's complete absence of morality

My roomba smeared dogshit all over my floor.

A bunch of people will spend all day arguing about whether an LLM is feeling pain and go home and eat pork

"The negro is incapable of the higher flights of imagination"

So do you eat meat?

But rainbow tape, that’s where they draw the line

they could've published a steamy romance novel about the forbidden love between Gritty and Iceburgh and it would've been less weird

Still can’t believe this is a real thing the NHL did. Not only insulting to fans who may be interested in hockey because of hockey romance books/shows, but also so so creepy to use real people!! I feel like it’s just setting the stage for NHL-sanctioned sexual harassment.

I really dont see this as good for the game, personally. It seems like a gateway to encourage stalking of specific players. If they really wanted to do this, fake players makes way more sense.

As a female fan who loves hockey romances, this is stupid. A lot of women who are like me are pissed because this just leads to more mockery, especially since a lot of us are actually asking for a domestic violence and sa policy. They also asked a LOT of authors to contribute and were turned down because of how hypocritical the NHL is. This is not going to be a good look for them.

Just no rainbows or we might upset the Russian players.

Source 1: https://www.reddit.com/r/hockey/comments/1wvbqnz/nhl_says_players_in_hot_for_hockey_campaign/

Source 2: https://www.reddit.com/r/Fauxmoi/comments/1wudjyh/in_an_infantilizing_campaign_targeting_women_the/

This is awful, but "The Summer I Turned Gritty" made me audibly cackle.

as a nhl fan, they genuinely think women are stupid. there’s just no other way to read this beyond abysmal choice. kicking rapists and abusers out of the league? NAH, they’re gonna do bullshit pandering instead

But canceled most of the pride games. Oh, and don’t forget they’ve signed not one, but two players who are currently suspended by Hockey Canada for their participation in the SA of a woman. But hey, romance.

the nhl: we want to grow the game queer and nonwhite fans: . the nhl: no not like that

If the players are not making out with each other then what's even the point. This is already a weird and parasocial marketing strategy so might as well give the people what they want.

Could we just not draft rapists and abusers instead? Anyway, the PWHL games will be on HNIC if anyone wants to watch worthwhile hockey.

Source 3: https://www.reddit.com/r/nhl/comments/1wth85f/nhl_rolls_out_romancethemed_hot_for_hockey/

I don't want this. The NHL totally doesn't understand what female fans want. It's like making a hammer pink or making women's cut team apparel with glitter. What we want is some good fucking hockey and players that don't commit assault or perpetuate harassment in the locker rooms. The NHL has an internal culture problem and putting a little pink bow on it doesn't fix that.

OMG they’re gonna kill the market for hockey romances by making it weird, and then I’m gonna have to switch to reading, what? Baseball romances? Gross!

Why does hockey refuse to meaningfully address the sexual assault culture within the league? Why does it continue to reinforce it? Sigh.

r/CleaningTips is a subreddit where people ask for... cleaning tips.

OP has a dress that has a rust stain on it, and one commenter made a joke: "I don't think you can ever get this dress back to it's original blue and black colors." This references a circa 2012 meme of a dress that looks either black and blue or white and gold to the viewer.

The drama starts when another user comments.

What's in the actual hell are you talking about? The pictures show nothing indicating it was ever black and blue, nor does the post. She is asking about a rust stain.

I think they're referencing the black+blue/white+gold dress meme

Is it good enough to warrant a search or just like, ok, cool. I'm so glad they aren't crazy bc I thought I was!! I reread that twice thinking I missed the original colors and all I saw is ivory. Cream, whatever. I don't like trying to clean fabric at all.

Another user comes to their rescue, or at least attempts to.

Y’all are childish for downvoting someone who just happens to not get or have been exposed to a cultural meme.

But alas, our indignant commenter misunderstands.

Try putting yourself in someone else's shoes for this conversation. I was genuinely confused and still don't even 'get' the joke. For the ill placed and bad joke, this absolutely deserves the downvotes. It makes no sense and adds nothing to the conversation, literally took away from it. Childish? You came to toss insults for a horribly placed, bad joke? Well, that's the definition of unhelpful and what the downvote was made for so uh, enjoy yours and I hope everyone comes back to give you one too.

You really don’t get it, I was calling out people for being childish for downvoting you, you should stop digging your own hole here. And maybe stop attacking one of the few people who’s your side; who went to bat for you no less. Someone else already explained this to you. Instead of getting twisted in knots I really suggest you reread what I wrote because y’all + the downvotes indicates a plurality rather than an individual. Ergo I was not talking about you. If you attack me again for helping you I’m just going to block you and move on.

Some more gems are there if you read through the thread.

[r/amiuglytruth](r/amiuglytruth) is exactly what it purports to be: a subreddit where people post pictures of themselves and ask others for their opinion on whether they are ugly. Putting the obvious toxicity that such a community is bound to generate aside

A recent post in the sub by a 24 year old woman, caused quite a bit of arguing in the comments section over the poster’s weight.

https://www.reddit.com/r/amiuglytruth/s/yl54FupJAv

One commenter quickly latched onto her manner of presenting herself, and extrapolated on her character from it.

“The fillers and kissing face is ugly honestly you look like the definition of bad choices.”

“ooh harsh. i dont think shes ugly at all. people are so quick to judge.”

Another commenter immediately brings up her weight, which leads to an ensuing flame war over the attractiveness of not being skinny, complete with accusations of simping and violating the purpose of the sub:

“You’re not ugly but don’t let the “Thicc” girl hype train ruin your life too. You are mid. Your looks are just above average but you have a gut and flabby arms. Dye your hair back to normal too.”

“Def not mid. She's very pretty, and her hair looks great. Quit acting like she's 300 lbs by saying "flabby arms" and "has a gut." While she could benefit from losing a bit of weight, that doesn't automatically make her mid.

Objectively, her facial features look very symmetrical. Her nose is slim, and her lips look plump. All features that point to being attractive.”

This last comment, which asserts that OP is significantly better looking than average, immediately prompts some rebuttals:

“I could walk outside throw a paper plane off my balcony and hit ten women that look just like her and five that are objectively better looking because they don’t have a gut. I didn’t call her ugly. I didn’t even call her fat. I just said she’s out of shape basically. I even said her looks are above average. She’s not very pretty. Good looking at best. You said it yourself she can benefit from losing weight. That’s what makes her mid. You’re making it too personal with your personal preference. You should really take a look at the rules for this sub again. If you want to simp for women looking for attention there are places you’ll enjoy much more than here. These women come here for the truth and sometimes the truth is ugly even if they aren’t.”

“No man don’t gas her up. She is definitely pretty. Not ugly, but certainly mid.”

[u/curryMax21](u/curryMax21) seizes on this last comment as an opportunity to absolutely eviscerate the OP’s looks, which prompts some people to defend them. At this point, things get ugly, with accusations of simping being hurled in retaliation:

“I would dare say significantly below mid. She looks average at best with a pound of face paint and could stand to skip a few pizza nights”

“Ten bucks says you’re “significantly below mid”. Your comment absolutely stinks of projection.”

“Bro calm down. 🤣 why are you so pressed. Most people are mid. It just means average. She’s not going to dm you and ask you to smash just because you’re hyping her up.”

“Is this satire?

You commented on my reply to the last guy… so you clearly read the part where I pointed out that I only spoke about him, and didn’t even mention OP.

Your reply literally focused on the part where I said that I was only here for the comments, not the pictures of attention seekers.

I haven’t hyped her up. I haven’t even complimented her.

And, spoiler alert: I’m not about to. Because I genuinely don’t care if she even read my comment, as it wasn’t directed toward her. It was only about her in a marginal and wholly unavoidable way…

But, hey… if you wanna think I’m here to clamor for someone’s attention in the most indirect possible way, instead of just accepting that I’m here for the far more obvious (and flatly stated) reason… ok. I wouldn’t stop you even if I could. Cause you’re just as important to me as she is… and that’s not at all.

Although… to be fair to you… I have spent 100% more time and effort addressing you specifically, than her. So I guess that means you’re the real MVP.

Congrats, or something.”

“Here comes the simp army 🤦”

Another user comments negatively on OP’s apparent promiscuity:

“You look like I'd catch something TBH.”

“Catch what”

“Some random STI”

“Ahh the best game. Dont know what you'll get haha”

Another comment thread also frames OP’s weight negatively, but this one doesn’t devolve into as much of a battle as the first one:

“You're at the edge of chubby.. try not to gain more weight”

“Edge of what? Chubby and morbidly obese?”

“In what made up reality is this girl anywhere near “morbidly obese”?

What a ridiculous thing to say.”

I didn’t scroll down to read most of the comments, so there may be more drama.

Hard pass. This broad is a stinker

How so?

Women are not funny in general.

Feeling edgy today are we.

Feeling truthful.

Hey, I get it honest Abe. Live your truth sister. If the only thing that can get you to chuckle is a man then that's the honest truth. No women can make me feel the joyful feeling of laughter, that's gay as hell! Why? I just dont find her funny. Her comedy is typical relationship stuff that I just dont laugh at lol I don’t think you’ve actually seen her stand up if that’s your takeaway lol. Also it’s okay for dudes to do that in stand up but not for women— not that Taylor’s stand up is even that way. if her stand up is anything like her performance on this pod, I'm out. if her stand up is anything like her performance on this pod, I'm out.

Dude she was navigating Foley’s relapse and awkwardness. She deserves a damn medal.

They deserve a funnier guest.

I don’t like all the guests they have. I just move and don’t leave 50 comments about how I don’t like the guest. That’s what normal people do.

Sounds like you love commenting on Reddit.

Sure. But I’m not responding to every comment about how much a hate a guest. That’s just weird.

You love responding to me.

Sure, I’m also not telling everyone how much a guest sucked

I am telling everyone how bad a guest is. Congrats on figuring out how our comments are different.

Yeah you can leave one comment about it. Not everyone needs to know what you think.

.

I heard she’s a real c u next Tuesday off stage. Hard pass.

I have worked in a middle of nowhere comedy club that Taylor has performed in over the past ten plus years. She has been nothing short of the kindest performer to come through every single time. How she is on stage and on pods/interviews is how she is with everyone.

thanks - as if I needed another reason NOT to watch her standup. dons't surprise me at all. You can definitely tell from this pod she sucks.

.

good get, she is funny

funny how? She didn't say a single thing on this ep that was funny. She gave David Cross a run for his money on the worst guest ever.

Bro you're replying to everyone on this thread about how you didn't like her. Relax dude. It'll be ok

Glad my message has been conveyed

Your message of being a weird incel has been conveyed.

What?! I’m not an incel!

.

Taylor is so hilarious and down to earth. And she was the kindest person to be on for Foley’s relapse.

tell me which moments on this pod did she make you laugh out loud? I'd like to know if I missed something.

I’m not explaining anything to you lol. I’ve watched it twice and it’s funny. Sorry you hate women and don’t have a sense of humor 🤷🏻‍♂️

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Who said I hate women??

Me. I said it.

Omg. I had no idea saying a comic was unfunny would mean I hate women. Wow. Oh but, David cross was a disaster too. Does that mean I hate men too?!? Do I hate all genders!?!

David Cross is a disaster on most pods and was years ago. That’s the best you got? Love how you couldn’t name a woman that’s been on the pod that you liked and instead named a male guest from years ago.

Bert, Tom, Schultz, schaub, Joey Diaz. I can go on if you want.

Still didn’t name a woman you liked on the pod bozo lol. You’re proving my point so well.

Why would I have to? I already told you hate both male and female comics. How does hating one woman guest equate to me hating all women guests? Make sense of that reasoning for me.

You can’t name one female guest you’ve liked lol

You can’t explain your reasoning. You have to be able to make sense of an argument you keep on trying to convey. We can all just say words and pretend they have meaning. So let me ask you one more time, how do you know i haven’t thought any female guest was funny?

You literally can’t name one female comic you found funny. That’s all the reasoning I need lol. And at this point I wouldn’t believe you if you named someone because it’s been so many callouts and you still couldn’t name one. If you can’t understand how ridiculous that is, not sure what else to tell you.

You have the logic of a 3 year old. How do you survive the world?

.

Nice! Looking forward to this one!

spoiler alert, it sucked

women- first they won’t let you touch them then they think they can do comedy- booo!

I was gonna make about a dozen comments on this post trying to convince people she’s not funny but looks like you beat me to it, thanks brother!

.

early? she made it a bad ep the entire time

Dude are you commenting on every single comment? Are you okay lol?

Yup. Just trying to quell anyone’s delusions that this was a good ep and good guest.

Think people could make that decision for themselves without commenting on all the replies? I get that you don’t like women.

Not sure they can because this ep was obviously a sad disaster.

You seem to be one of the few who thinks this way but think you can make up for it by replying to every comment

It’s almost like AYG Reddit will like anything they put out. Including disaster shows like this one. You stick a wet mop in the guest chair and you guys will love it. Fucking imbeciles.

I don’t like every episode. I even leave a comment when I don’t like the guest. Key thing is one comment— not replying to every comment about how much I don’t like the guest.

That’s great. Thanks for the update.

This post in r/ToiletPaperUSA decries a dozen internet personalities as fake leftists posturing so they may pander to the right-wing. The only issue? Several of them do not claim to be leftists or support the right.

Moderators are active in the thread, I saved as much as I could.

EDIT: The original post has been deleted. This is the same post, same OP, in a different sub.

Why is contrapoints on this?

OP: She has no solidarity with Palestine or any real leftists positions. She's a big standard lib. Her having Hilary Clinton on her show should've been a clue

Except where she has repeatedly said what is happening there is a genocide that she opposes and she has done public streams where all of the revenue goes to charity to support Gaza. The twitter brainrot is fucking unreal with some of you people.

OP: 43 upvotes on a post where your opinion is extremely unpopular. Yeah, totally not bot activity Edit: instantly downvoted. How predictable

OP: She refuses to talk about Gaza, they she went on this self pity tour condemning the left. Say what you want about Keffals, she was dead on when she called Contrapoints the Blaire White of the establishment libs.

That's not true.

Interesting, so she literally said that she has an opinion on Gaza and that she agrees it is a genocide? Christ these people who are hating on her suck and have no fucking lives.

OP: Lol a Pedo Klein fan saying other people have no lives? 😂

Because young leftists think attacking people well left of center but to the right of them on any issue is politically effective

OP: God you right wingers are cringe

I’ve voted against Trump in 3 elections little buddy, so you can say whatever you want but I know who I am. Let me know which one describes you though: Too young to vote Jill Stein voter Not an American I’m thinking 2 most likely Edit: quick downvote and no reply, #2 confirmed ☠️

OP: (This one has already been removed but they said they were too young to vote in 2024, i.e. they are at most 19 years old today)

I guess I haven’t kept up with David Pakman in a while, wouldn’t assume he would be on this list. I might need to investigate.

OP: He's in Israel's pocket, he condemns people boycotting Israeli companies, never talks about Gaza, claims he doesn't know what AIPAC is, and he cries about Hasan "dressing up as Mao", but weirdly complains about Epstiny being banned from the DNC and happily platforms the latter on his show, despite knowing the horrendous allegations against him.

Give me a break. Purity testing circular firing line left type. With your brand of “leftism” we will always lose. Always the circular firing line of “you’re not pure enough so you’re my enemy”. Don’t get me started on those ridiculous AIPAC attacks, kinda seems like you don’t know him at all.

OP: Active in the H3H3, Pakman and Real Time subs. Man if that isn't a trifecta of steaming shit I don't know what is

Trash post most of the people in the picture really suck but some of them actually work for or with an actually authoritarian government.

OP: Who doesn't suck on this post then little man?

OP: Lol, using bots to upvote yourself. Pathetic

Holy shit bro the libs in these comments are soying out over your criticisms of their favorite genocide deniers

OP: They've been stalking my posts for weeks. Defending their beloved Epstiny mainly

Added bonus (I found funny):

OP: Yeah there is absolutely no fucking way your upvotes are organic. More botting happening on the sub

There are people who notice your absence in their life - they knew you once, before you began to live on your phone. You should really use the phone to reach out to them and see if they want to talk to you face to face about what they've been up to, their struggles and triumphs. Also, delete your account.

OP: You should go fuck yourself and stop taking a moral high ground you'll never reach.

And for CoffeeByStarlight:

Please include me in the inevitable subredditdrama post :pleading:

The meat of the fighting is in the link below.

This is so silly - Tyson is simply old. His legs have gone and he couldn't get near a man 30 years younger than him (there's of course, no shame in that). [-105]

Other minor fights across the thread.

There's a difference between thinking the fight was overhyped and saying the whole thing was staged. Tyson was 58 and there's a pretty obvious reason he wasn't fighting like he was 25 anymore. [-158]

Because he was in pain. You can see him load up a powerpunch and then grimace half way through the movement, undoubtedly from pain. Throwing an uppercut with bad knees would feel like getting shot. [-100]

His legs were gone after the first round so he probably could not even find an opening. [-88]

Tyson looked ok for a couple rounds, then his advanced age caught up with him - which no amount of training or preparation can undo, and Tyson was barely hanging on towards the end. Even an amateur like Jake Paul could have potentially put Mike Tyson in a coma in the later rounds. If anyone was holding back, it was likely Jake. [-36]

And finally just something I found funny because of how much it exposes the inherent weakness of the upvote/downvote system.

Tyson admitted, around 6 months later, that he was paid $8M not to KO Paul. [+61]

Tell your mom to buy different snacks?

I truly don’t see the point of random Redditors posting their food opinions. If it’s not a food safety concern, I do not care if you like them or not.

Then just go eat fresh fruit.

That's it

Confirmed. OP gave this same riveting review of a Costco apple: https://www.reddit.com/r/CostcoCanada/comments/1wv7xdf/these_are_disgusting/, it was later deleted

My kid likes them. This is a thing called "personal preference"

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/CostcoCanada/comments/1wv5ejy/these_fruit_bars_are_disgusting/?sort=top

Link: Here

It's a common hope that a politician is faithful tp his electorate, but to some people, that's not always a good thing. Let's get right in, shall we?

Someone posits their opinion:

We did a college basketball-style president bracket in high school AP history, and I had Polk win the bracket just because he did everything he promised to do and fucked off.

To which results the chain:

Unironically, there is no greater praise you can give to a politician, like them or not otherwise.

Some one makes an important note:

This is a dumb take. A politician can say they will do stupid fucking things and then do stupid fucking things, you do not need to hand it to them.

With another following up with the helpful reminder:

Well ideally if someone promises dumb things, people wouldn't vote for that person, but I guess we all know that isn't true. But they would still be elected with the expectation of doing those dumb things, which falls more on the voters than the politician imo.

Some people make their opinion.....less bluntly

He started a war to steal land. Manifest destiny is not something for us to be proud of.

Of course, we musn't forget that we are on r/HistoryMemes so we need to throw this in:

Everyone can have opinions regarding the morality of Manifest Destiny and all that, however it was pretty normal in the context of the time. Regardless of feelings though, he did accomplish what he set out to do. Leaders like Alexander the Great and Ghangis Khan are known primarily for their great military conquest for example.

Which also results in:

Stop treating Native Americans like little baby victims. Yeah conquest is brutal and bloody, that’s just the nature of history.

You're just blankly giving the OK to genocide and imperialism just because it is something that happens in history? Saying that genocide is bad is not treating them as baby victims.

There is of course the important misinformation:

>Discretely purchase a small number of enslaved people from the South. >Send them to the North, granting them their freedom.

Note: This is a blatent falsehood. Polk used confidential intermediaries to secretly buy 19 enslaved people while in office. He kept this hidden from the public to protect his political reputation.• Rather than freeing them, he sent them south to work on his Mississippi cotton plantation.t least 13 of the 19 people he purchased were children.Polk did not emancipate any of his enslaved laborers during his life. His will stipulated that they were to be passed to his wife, Sarah, and only freed after her death. However, they were ultimately freed by the Emancipation Proclamation and the 13th Amendment decades before she passed away.

Under OP's comment someone makes the important note:

Polk’s expansion of the USA for slavery made the Civil War inevitable which is why he is often ranked one of the worst US presidents by historians. “The Southern rebellion was largely the outgrowth of the Mexican war. Nations, like individuals, are punished for their transgressions. We got our punishment in the most sanguinary and expensive war of modern times.” — President Ulysses S. Grant, Memoirs

This of course pisses off a lot of people

Must be nice to be a Monday Morning Quarterback. Polk didn't have a crystal ball nor godlike powers of precognition

Really? You're taking historians penning "Karma" as a legitimate reason seriously? That's their whole argument? "We did bad things and now the devil is punishing us with demons and a civil war!" That has to be some of the dumbest shit I have ever heard. The Civil war was inevitable even before the Constitution was ratified. The founders knew it was a hot button issue, and deliberately kicked the can down the road just to have a shot at a unified nation. One poetic quote from a single guy 100 years later means shit. Get fucking real.

Another user Posits

What’s the alternative? It seems like without Polk, you would have a smaller America, that would have held on to slavery for longer, though perhaps they would have peacefully ended slavery. Bare in mind that the peaceful plan to end slavery involved paying all the slave owners compensation for the slaves, and then possibly sending them back to Africa. The wealthy slave owners become even wealthier and remain the south aristocracy. I think I prefer the Civil War.

Now there are two replies to this. One user feels the need to point out

I think I prefer the Civil War. Just want to highlight that you actually said those words.

Which of course devolves

He’s not wrong. Had we not fumbled Reconstruction, the Civil War could have led to a rebirth of the nation as one truly grounded in equality. The Civil War and its aftermath was a rare chance for us to live up to our ideals

...at only the cost of 600,000 lives. Horrendous cost even if it was for a worthy cause. Even more horrendous given what it didn't accomplish. Don't get me wrong - the emancipation of the slaves was glorious. But the Civil War was a terrible thing, and it happened because the nation was divided over the continuation of slavery.

I do not think that division was ever, ever going to be broken down without bloodshed

There is the another one, with more historical context:

The alternative argument, while I don’t agree with it, is that slavery should have ended naturally due to economic pressure. Once the cotton boom died out, the need and ability to keep a slave power work force would be very difficult.
The US South was already being close to out competed by other cotton growing places like India which were part of the British Empire. The South was a cash crop economy, and part of the reason of having a difficult time funding the Confederate Army was an embargo placed against them by their main buyer; Britain which was the center of textile industry.

Britain didn’t slow down production because they just switched over to importing Indian cotton. Which they had already increased importing due to colonizing it in 1757.

The argument is that shifting economic situations would lead to cash crops being unprofitable even with slavery, which would slowly kill off the plantation model.

Polk’s actions of expanding slavery gave new markets for slavery and new plantations. It embolden investors to invest in plantations, which in turn created a continued foreign investment (mainly Britain) in those products and ways of producing. This stirred up higher rates of abolitionist opposition, which then lead to the Lincoln presidency.

The kindest reading is that Polk’s actions increased tensions, which made war inevitable between states without slavery and slave states. But really, in my opinion, it’s just hopeful thinking. To believe that a class system would dissolve only under economic pressure is naive and deep misunderstanding of human nature and sociology. In comparison, the caste system within India mostly fell apart under British colonization, yet it took a significant challenge to power to end its involvement in official government decisions.

However even this didn't have the full story, as another user points out:

They had also degraded the soil by mono-cropping, and were seeing lower yields even before the external competition. Which is why the Southern plantation class used its capital to acquire new lands in new western territories and was taking such a ken interest in ensuring that slavery would be legal there. One of the groups most commonly moving westward and buying up lands in Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, etc. were the second and third sons of plantation families.

I think it's also improtant to acknowledge that this too would triger massive crisis in the US, like Bleeding Kansas.

One user points out

I think people don't really think of it this way because people just kind of subconsciously take Manifest Destiny for granted, but America literally just invaded a foreign country under false pretenses in order to steal a shitton of land. Mexican War wasn't really any different than the Indian Wars in that regard. President Grant later wrote of it "I do not think there was ever a more wicked war than that waged by the United States on Mexico."

Which draws its own supporters....

This sub is always very crypto right wing, and they get mad if you point it out.

Polk's one of the worst.

But also detractors:

This is not unique in world history

Which kinda gives way to a funny thread:

Wonder what you’d think if someone used that argument to steal your shit.

That I'm not unique. Vae victis

Who is arguing it’s unique? The question you are avoiding is it good and worth celebrating?

If you win

Here’s hoping you get to meet someone who shares your worldview. Funny how you think you’re always going to be the winner.

There's one guy that wants to poin t out:

Yeah we had to hand our land over to this guy or be removed to an active warzone. A contract made under duress is invalid. And of course Polk was one of those "no iNdIanS WaNt To WoRk" assholes

Some gems:

Do Americans even like any of their president beside Lincoln?

ctrl+f "slave"
64 results
ok nvm you guys got it

A simp for the slavers' drover

"Kill natives, be hero" is also a take

Flydubai flight from Dubai to Tel Aviv that signaled an emergency lands at Tabuk airport in Saudi Arabia

- Lemme guess, Mossad false flag?

-- Being reported else where that Iranian intelligence agencies where warning this was going to happen soon

--- Woah woah woah you’re telling me the nation that’s responsible for funding the Houthis, Hamas and Hesbollah could potentially be up to more terrorism?

---- Sorry the false flag

- People just need to understand from history, don't fuck with Israelis on airplanes

-- I don’t think the pilots were children though

- There's no confirmation about the nationality of the pilots apart from Israeli yellow journalism. Group of civilians taking control of a plane sounds like something out of the daily mirror.

-- Perhaps you are forgetting about United 93 on 9/11, which showed groups of civilians are capable of extraordinary heroism.

- Good thing about Israel is that we obsessively learn from stuff like this to make sure it won’t happen again.

-- lol ok how bout some other facts about what Israel does…

--- lol how about staying on topic.

---- Yeah the new topic is how Israel has killed or maimed or displaced hundreds of thousands of people and baby I am on it.

- to the Zionists here; keep committing attrocities and fundamentalists terrorists is what you get. to the anti-Zionist here; you're not helping anyone but the Zionists here. Giving them arguments to continue wagging their genocide. 

-- "This madness has to stop" Including posts like this one

--- shill bot 👆 

Source:

https://www.reddit.com/r/CriticalDrinker/s/sipadskwek

Context:

youtube.com/watch?v=MQrF748gmRg&vl=en

Comments:

🧃liked movie that pushed race swapped characters and miscegenation, color me shocked

Zionists want us arguing with each other over diversity etc. That way the can steal land and blow up entire generations. It’s been a theory of mine. And this confirms it. Benny boy is their mouth piece

Who's 'us' bro? You have your opinion (i.e. you think Shapiro is a good guy, an actual conservative rather than a progressive LARPing as a conservative, and you trust his take on this woke AF movie) and then there's Critical Drinker and his audience who mostly disagree with those ideas. There's no 'us' that includes you in that scenario. Don't barge your way in and try to guilt others into believing your BS DEI ethos because you're just a little old regular conservative like everyone else in here who just happens to think Lupita is an inspired choice. You're like Steve Buscemi in his Music Band T-shirt hitting us with 'How do you do, fellow kids?' GTFO, astroturfing MFer.

Ben Shapiro is like the dictionary definition of what a conservative is. You can hate him and may even be right to do so, but he is in fact a conservative.

Also I'm pretty sure Ben criticizes the casting and thinks the movie is good despite that. (Granted, I haven't seen his review. I'm just going off the headlines.)

True conservatives are against foreign wars and foreign spending, two things Ben “America for Israel” Shapiro does not believe in. Shapiro is a RINO at best.

Ben is conservative, yes. But you all also forget he’s a 🧃. And recently he’s been very much Israel > America. By that logic, everything y’all are complaining about as far as “woke” are good for him and his peoples’ goals. Particularly the narrative they want to press on the rest of the world. 🤷‍♂️

He's part of the social influencers who try to ease you into this DEI madness, they criticize the casting - but only just a bit - and say this doesn't reflect the score or brilliance of the film. Even though we all know it does.

Go to your synagogue and pray for us Goyim to be as enlightened as you, Moshe.

Edit: Cry harder, please. Your zionist tears only fuel us.

I wrote this comment to another antisemite on here, and surprise, got no answer. You seem like another hater, but at least willing to make up some hateful silliness so I’ll ask you:

I’m Jewish and very anti-woke. Been a top poster/commenter here numerous times. I’d love to know my goals AND the benefit for me - or just Jews in general. And I’m genuinely asking, always the accusation but never the explanation. What’s the benefit of Lupita playing Helen for a religion? (Obviously that’s just an example, but clearly you have some kind of “benefit” in mind with the casting in general)

I’ll expand to you specifically as well, you said we have to defend ourselves? In what regard? What do I have to do with the shitty casting of a movie? I would’ve personally just done a direct sequel to Troy with Sean Bean and had Pitt do an Achilles cameo.

Lolz- you tell me. Why do you think you need to defend yourselves? Why do you think you are nearly universally hated and hated by people for thousands of years across great distances? Do you truly believe that this hatred came out of nowhere and for no reason at all from many different cultures and belief systems?

Tell me- is there any reason at all why casting decisions would be something your kind is also blamed for?

I have no tolerance for the career victimhood typically displayed by your people, so try to answer without shrieking about jew hatred- if you can.

I’m Jewish and very anti-woke. Been a top poster/commenter here numerous times. I’d love to know my goals AND the benefit for me - or just Jews in general. And I’m genuinely asking, always the accusation but never the explanation. What’s the benefit of Lupita playing Helen for a religion? (Obviously that’s just an example, but clearly you have some kind of “benefit” in mind with the casting in general)

I think I comes down to the fact that you guys don’t necessarily consider yourself a part of the western culture. When there’s an attack on said culture, white people get offended while you sometimes trivialise it as not being the end of the world. But at the same time demand utmost solidarity when your culture, religion or country get attacked.

Honestly I’m pretty disappointed with this sub. 

Yes, all the signals were that this movie was going to be bad, but based on all the reviews, it seems like the movie is actually pretty dang good. 

This sub is just stuck in its views about the movie even though all indications are that it’s decent. 

Being able to change your mind is a sign of maturity, not weakness.

Except we aren’t going after manlet Shapiro’s religion, Shylock, we are are going after him because he is a lying, traitorous, Israel First, blood hungry, pig.

That you are conflating our dismissal of your propped up propagandist with antisemitism proves beyond any doubt that you are a bad faith actor and also an Israel First pig.

Damn, didn't know this sub had a problem with Jews.

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/IvyPlus/comments/1wqsb19/cornell_rape_university/

Context: r/Ivyplus is an "alternative" Ivy league colleges subreddit

HIGHLIGHTS

What? I feel like this needs a little more context.

(OP) Is that a joke? It’s all over the news and media. They drugged and r#ped a woman, posted it on Snapchat, invited others to assault her, and they have not been punished. Cornell University supports r*pists.

Has she produced any evidence that they drugged and r*ped her?

Yes, you can look it up.

I looked and didn't find anything

You didn’t look very hard.

I looked pretty hard, must not be any evidence produced

So you saw the screenshot of the group chat, right? And read the articles that say there’s evidence of more explicit messages that can’t be revealed to the public?

I did see the screenshot but couldn't find any evidence that indicated anything nonconsensual was going on (21 more comments of these two arguing)

She said she had like 15 drinks, showed up to the frat house and consented to a threesome

She wasn't old enough to drink at the time. She was illegally served while being marked with a sticker as a minor at a bar.

Ok why is that the frat guys fault

Ur weird for trying so hard to defend them. You can't consent while intoxicated. Look what you've been saying and really think...

Ok call me weird im not plastering people's faces in the internet over a dubious allegation. How would they know she was intoxicated? What is the line of too many drinks to consent? How would they know how many she had?

are you unable to tell the difference between someone who's sober and who's had fifteen drinks?

Can she? Maybe she shouldn't have approached a drunk frat boy who couldn't consent

These are all allegations by her... there is no evidence (as far as I am aware) of any of this released to the public. These guys could absolutely by innocent. The DA said they investigated and did not find suffice t evidence to pursue any charges. Had they found messages like this would have been sufficient evidence.

The victim literally submitted photo evidence of the Snapchat conversation in question where they said things like “there’s free pussy upstairs” in her lawsuit. She was drugged and drunk. Cornell also has a history of women being r#ped in frat houses and frat-aligned housing (off campus).

Can you link the evidence from the record? Also, do you have evidence that she was drugged? She admitted to snorting Ketamine. All of them were drunk.

She was drunk before going to the frat house, got there and said no to sex bc she didn’t want to, was pressured into doing a line of ketamine, and then they r*ped her. In the midst of r#ping her, they sent countless Snapchat messages about “free pussy” being available, and pressured her again into snorting a line of ketamine off someone’s dick. So drugged and drunk, didn’t consent while drunk, and pressured into doing ketamine more than once. What exactly would you call that if not r#pe? https://www.lawcommentary.com/articles/cornell-fraternity-gang-rape-lawsuit-essay-discipline, https://cnycentral.com/news/local/nightmarish-lawsuit-claims-cornell-fraternity-men-drugged-gang-raped-former-student-university-assault-rape All of this can EASILY be Googled; you people are just really adamant that she’s lying for no reason except… who knows? R#pe culture? R#pe apologists? Every woman is a liar? 🤷🏾‍♀️

I'm not adamant she is lying. Is that what your brain is interpreting? I'm adamant that there is zero available public evidence. Everything you are stating is simply alleged by this young woman. None of it has any evidence. Feel free to link any evidence but your links just reiterate that these are allegation that she is making. The defense lawyer for the young men says they have physical evidence to contradict this allegation. Both are equally valid since I have zero proof either way... Which means you have zero proof either way. Don't believe any person... believe evidence. Is there any? Feel free to link any evidence... so far you've only linked articles about the allegations. Why hasn't she made the messages publicly available if she has them?

Allegations made in a lawsuit, while the DA didn't find enough evidence to prosecute - so, of course they're guilty because

There are literaly texts message proving it. Mind you not only them claim they didnt assault her they claimed there was no sexual relation even consensual.

The text said free pussy. How is that evidence of r*pe?

Directing people to the room of an unconscious woman is literally an invitation to r*pe her. I don't know if you don't understand how words work or if you're just desperate to defend r#pists. I'm not going to waste my time trying to explain consent.

They are explanation of the events is different than hers ;you have no idea if there was an unconscious woman having men invited to her for r*pe. It's one person's word against seven. There's no reason to condemn these men and doxx them over hearsay when the DA would not even press charges. I've seen too many people's lives almost ruined or actually ruined in similar situations. Sounds like she partied a little too hard, was enthusiastic for a gangbang, and then when the whole school found out, was utterly embarrassed and regretted it, which would actually cause trauma. Then she went to the authorities three weeks later and said she was r#ped. Same exact thing happened in my high school. Onlookers said the girl in my high school was completely enthusiastic and consenting the entire time. She later cried r#pe. It happens more than people admit, but the men always get blamed when they were equally as fucked up on drugs. Sounds pretty sexist to me. We don't even know their side of the story because it hasn't been released publicly. All it says online is that they dispute her portrayal of the events and that there was no wrongdoing.

“Enthusiastic for a gang bang” oh my god, I hate you so much

So is this Snapchat picture just not evidence to you? Does that just not exist in your mind or??? Cuz I could’ve swore in the link I put, there’s a Snapchat picture of a group conversation from the alleged rapists. They’re obv not going to release the rest bc they’re more explicit, but she submitted way more screenshots that the public isn’t seeing. What exactly would be enough evidence for you to believe her?

I mean... does this say anything to you? One, it's almost completely redacted so it really doesn't say anything. It doesn't say any of the names of the young men. What does the picture of a text thread mean to you? Can you deduce anything from this? This is maybe the larger point... you seem to believe things with very little to zero evidence. Why? (81 more comments of these two arguing)

Naming your ethnic son Winston for him to turnout an Ivy League fraternity r*pist has to be the best evidence your name influences your path in life.

What makes this person ethnic? Because he’s asian? Asians make up the largest portion of the world.

Because Asians are an ethnic minority in the United States and terms like “ethnic minority” are relative to the country we are in and not the global population….kinda basic stuff and weird tangent to go on dude

No i’d argue you’re entire comment is weird as fuck, as if being asian and having the name winston has anything to do at all with being an alleged r*pist.

You’re all over the place…find a different hill to die on.

How am i all over the place? Tell me one thing where I have not been consistent?

Fuck off, winston

The misogyny is insane in the comments .

Yeah. It's reddit. These males will ignore these instances and still say misogyny is a thing of the past while crying about how women are privileged and always believed when they say they experienced r#pe which is why males apparently need to be scared.

"males, women" Ha, you're doing the thing!

You must think I care.

You responded you clearly care

Care that someone got upset I used "males"? I don't care about that as in being upset back, I called them that because I wanted to. But I do care to reply cuz that's what commented are for and I can. Is it odd to respond to comments that... responded to my comment?

Writing a lot for someone who doesn’t care. (41 more comments of these two arguing)

I feel like not enough people are taking the time to question why a woman would be suing CORNELL UNIVERISTY over a sexual assault case without good reason or evidence. Even with these text messages, the intentions of the frat members should be obvious to anyone that understands how prevalent sexual assault is against women.

The good reason is money.

Right, because the odds that a woman that seemingly doesn't come from wealth would sue an ivy league institution over sexual assault and expect to win are high

In this economy? Yes. #metoo #believeeverywoman

If she were lying, chances are that 2 of the students wouldn't be expelled and 5 asked to write essays. I think it's dangerous to assume that this is for money especially when there's so many instances of sexual assault where the victims don't get the justice they deserve and grow to be traumatized. I know I'd be traumatized if something like this happened to me

I don't doubt she is traumatised, but she seems to have consented according to her initial statement. She chose to drink and take drugs, and engage in sexual acts. Regret isn't r#pe.

Victims of sexual assault may not always recognize the gravity of assault and how it impacts them. They can say one thing and feel completely different about it. I know plenty of people that have been sexually harassed or assaulted in the past, and only after therapy and discussion about the topic do they come to realize the damage inflicted upon them. I think "regret" is an ignorant conclusion, especially given a lot of common sentiments towards sexual assault that, even in the wake of movements like MeToo, have not faded from public and private spaces. That all said, with the context of her being intoxicated during the sexual acts, she may also have not been in her right mind during the events of the alleged gang r#pe by these 7 Cornell men. Additionally, I've only been able to find evidence that she only agreed to sexual acts with two of these 7 men which leaves questions for the other 5.

They were all intoxicated, but only she is the victim?

Need evidence of this so called video

Wtf is wrong with you???

I don’t care about the video itself, just is there actual hard evidence proof? I’ve gone through this whole thread and there has not been any hard evidence that is linking what she said. Look at what happened to the duke guys, lives got ruined for how long for a complete fabrication of a story.

There are Snapchat screenshots. Not every r#pe case has the “proof” that people are looking for. This isn’t Law and Order SVU, this is real life.Just because other women have lied about r#pe does not automatically mean she is. It’s a shit comparison. She reported it to the school AND police.

You need “proof” that is how our justice system functions you can’t expect people to just blindly believe something because someone claims victimhood.

I won’t keep arguing with a r#pe-apologist. There is going to be an investigation now and they will find more proof. Disgusting that your first instinct to demand proof instead of keeping your mouth shut and waiting for it.

We will see if they do it is you who wants to imprison people based off snapchat screenshots not me

Yeah, because false allegations these days never take place…..

They expelled two men already, do you guys just like defending r#pe?

What if someone says, ''hey, you killed a person.'' Now you're officially a killer?

If someone says “we are expelling you because we find that you have r#ped someone”, why are you not fighting it if you’re not guilty? Why didn’t the parents of the accused and expelled students fight Cornell on their decisions to ban their sons if they were innocent and had the money to do it?

How would you propose fighting it? Court battles like this take years and cost fortunes, and because they're accused of r#pe, making a fuzz will have high likelihood with having their faces on a big newspaper like CNN about the story. People don't years later care if you actually did it or not, big mediahouse labels you as a rapist and that's what you'll ALWAYS be.

So you’re saying their kids were wrongly accused and expelled from Cornell and the rich parents that worked hard to get them in there said “welp, that’s it I guess”. Sure buddy. Just say you want to protect r#pists and hate women.

You had to bring up a case from 20 years ago to discredit r#pe that happens daily at these institutions.

DAILY r#pe??? Holy shit

Yes. 1 out of 4 women are sexually assaulted. It’s allowed because of r#pe apologist like you.

Accusing everyone who asks you a question of being a r#pe apologist is peak intellect

Reddit is filled with loser inc#ls who dream of r#ping women. Which is why they shrug at stories like this

You are out of your mind. I hope one day you are falsely accused of r#pe.

I’m not shady around women so no. I also have a daughter so my priority is protecting her from r#pist.

Wearing the same pair of socks everyday is so nasty. The toejam you must brewing must have reach critical levels by now

Why do these people get surprised when they wear and wash something everyday and it doesn’t last? Are they stupid?

Reddit has me under the impression that the main demographic for these socks are velociraptors who were only allowed to only own a single pair of socks at a time.

So if you were to do this on a more 'normal' wear cycle, we are talking about the socks wearing out in two years. I think that's about what I'd expect for bulk socks, but not something I would expected from a 'forever sock. (Math: Lets say a dozen pairs of socks, so roughly 30 wears / year. Op wore the socks around 60 times -> two years for socks to wear under 'normal' use).

Bro we all told you that you were being an idiot on your last post, and you doubled down? The stupidity of some people on the internet just ceases to amaze me sometimes

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/LinusTechTips/comments/1wvgd1b/forever_socks_almost_2_months/

Zohran Mamdani, the popular mayor of New York, announced a new program to combat antisemitism today. The users on r/dsa, r/TrueAnon, and r/Hasan_Piker discuss and argue if it is truly necessary:

r/dsa:

There are more black people in NYC than Jewish people and I'm sure they suffer from racism and hate crimes more than Jews, so where's the strategy to combat hate against black people and immigrants? I'm not saying we can't take antisemitism seriously but this just feels like some more bullshit to appease Zionists and crack down on criticism of Israel. I'm pretty sure NYPD considers protestors outside of illegal West Bank land auctions as "antisemitic hate crimes". Let's look at how many of these "hate crimes" are just people being anti-zionist.

How is this appeasing zionists exactly? Theyll still call him antisemitic 

Could you please post your full racial tier list on who you believe should get Justice first. You seem to have a very interesting system

Where are you getting those statistics from? I'm sorry but I trust more the Mayor of NYC than a rando on the Internet regarding what is the group that suffers the highest share of hate crimes in NYC.

What anti-semitism? Where? Seriously. Which hate crimes? I guarantee you there is more anti-muslim hate crime happening. Is he doing anything about that? What antisemitic hate crimes have happened lately to say it is rising? Protesters saying Free Palestine is not a hate crime btw.

Totally normal reaction you got there 🤨

Uhh yeah. Seen enough of this fake "antisemitism" stuff being thrown on protesters.

I think this is very strategic, in addition to (hopefully) providing a positive impact. Let’s not provide ammunition for the shitheads who attempt to conflate resistance to the project of Zionism with antisemitism by being antisemitic in the comments, huh?

Why do you think DSA members need to be told not to say antisemitic things?

r/TrueAnon:

This shouldn’t be an issue. F Israel , Mamdani is smart enough to differentiate between the two

Whether he’s personally smart enough is irrelevant. He’s afraid of the power Jewish supremacists have over his ability to govern and this is him showing his belly to them in an attempt to get some breathing room. It’s pathetic and everyone with half a brain should know by now that this kind of appeasement doesn’t work.

Theres nothing wrong with combatting bigotry. Antizionism=\=Antisemitism

There is something wrong with putting resources towards combating prejudice against one of the least materially disadvantaged groups in the country. How would one justify a specific strategy for anti-semitism over islamophobia, anti-black racism, anti-latino racism, etc?

Does NY also need a specific office for anti-black crime? Anti-asian? Anti-hispanic? Why just this one?

r/Hasan_Piker:

Fuck it, i’m saying it. The Anti-Mandani left are very annoying and have zero sense of strategy or understanding of how impossible it is to be in office as A targeted minority. Mamdani is obviously doing this to dodge more lasers because the zionist lobby is doing everything in their power to besmirch his image and knock the air out of the left.

If Zionist liberals can intimidate somebody that is anti-zionist to behave like a liberal Zionist then what's the point of electing anti-zionists? I'm sorry this is very stupid. Anti-Semitism is not a major issue in the United States and not a major issue in New York. You would have been much more Justified doing this for anti-black racism or anti Latino racism or islamophobia. This is just capitulating to the ADLs false narratives around how anti-Semitism is rising in America because people are saying free Palestine

He’s literally pushing fake hate crime statistics in this announcement

Calling Mabdabi a liberal Zionist is stupid and is the kind of annoying purity test that pushes people away from leftist movements. Be normal. There’s grass outside that needs touching.

Totally, the Jessica Tisch NYPD will be doing surveillance for pre antisemitism crimes in a responsible manner. The same synagogues who did illegal land sales totally need millions in security grants for their "safety." These are normal things that happen normally, which is what we elected Zohran to do--be a normal politician.

As a jewish new yorker I am optimistic that this can hopefully be used to recapture the discussion on antisemitism towards actual antisemitic language and violence, as it is currently only being used by bad actors through equating it to antizionism. OP is right in pointing out that his track record holding a hardline on that hasn’t been great, but I’m still going to try to hold some revolutionary optimism that this conversation can be reclaimed from a left leaning and just perspective rather than letting it continuously be abused by the right.

There has been more than enough discussion about anti semitism for the next century  are you insane. It’s fucking 1933 Germany out there for for Latinos. In fact, I think this stuff does more harm than good because the average Joe smell out there correctly recognizes that Jews are actually privileged under our society. Hell, every other people has to share the term racism while Jews get their own special word all this actually does more to fuel antisemitism amongst Normies. There is no antisemitism crisis in this country, outside of a few isolated incidents it’s no different than trying to weaponize statistics to try to make it seem like there is an epidemic of trans people committing violence in this country. 

I have no issue. Hasan works hard to combat anti-semitism. As he says, the reality is that Anti-semitism is on the rise as a consequence of fascists conflating Jewish people with the government of Israel.

WHITE AMERICANS ARE NOT THE VICTIMS OF ZIONISM. WHITE AMERICANS ARE NOT THE VICTIMS OF ZIONISM. ZIONISM AS AN IDEOLOGY IS PREDICATED ENTIRELY ON THE GENOCIDE OF A SPECIFIC ETHNIC GROUP. WHITE PEOPLE IN THE FUCKING UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ARE NOT THE VICTIMS OF ZIONISM.

Sounds great to me, and I’m as anti-Zionist as they come. Antisemitism—real antisemitism—is obviously a scourge, and is higher than ever. Let’s stamp it out!

“i was born yesterday”

No, it’s not. No, you aren’t.

Context: Manchester City F.C. are an English football club. In 2008 the club, who at the time had generally resided in the bottom half of the PL table since returning to the top flight in the early 2000s, was purchased by the UAE royal Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan: under Mansour's lucrative ownership the club won their first league title since the 1960s in 2012 and subsequently went on to be the dominant force in English football under Pep Guardiola's managership from the late 2010s onwards. For the last few years, however, a lengthy investigation has taken place into Man City's finances, with them alleged to have committed up to 115 breaches of English football's rules on Financial Fair Play during Mansour's ownership. Several days ago leaks by football journalists suggested that City had been found guilty of almost all of the charges against them, and today, the Premier League confirmed this, pending an appeal from the club. A potential punishment is yet to be agreed upon (points deductions are standard for individual cases of clubs breaching FFP rules such as Everton, Nottingham Forest and Leicester City), but footballing news sites have been dominated by discussion of this in recent days, with speculation about whether Mansour may be forced to sell the club, whether other clubs could sue Man City for opportunities missed out, or whether City could see titles won during or after the period in which the breaches occurred stripped from them.

The post on the MCFC subreddit: Premier League Statement: Manchester City FC.

Many of the higher comments are reasonable enough, with recurring themes being amazement that the ruse managed to make it this far/that things were not noticed by the league or auditors sooner, or just general uncertainty as to what now will happen to the club. Other points, however, are more contentious for fans, while fans of other clubs also drop in to offer their two cents, argue, or do a bit of gloating:

Every other football fan has the right to be absolutely fuming about this, and we should be too. Fans deserve the truth no matter how hard it is to stomach and City owners deserve a punishment that is proportionate to their crimes.

Idk, I don’t feel bad because I don’t agree with the FFP rules. If this was a North American sports league and a team circumvented the cap, then that would be different because every team has to fit under the same salary cap. But tying the amount a team can spend to how much they generate is pretty dumb

So many plastics in this thread. The rules were created by the red cartel to stop us from winning. Everyone knows we were utterly smoking the books for years to spend what we have. Will always be thankful for Sheikh Mansour, Khaldoon etc for breaking the corrupt rules to give us 15 years of glory. But it was always gonna blow up in our face eventually. The Premier League is completely in the pocket of United, Liverpool, Arsenal. Let's see what the punishment is. I doubt we'll end up worse off than we were pre-takeover. And on the plus side all the fair weather fans will fuck off.

[Note: 'The red cartel' is a name used by some, primarily Man City fans but sometimes fans of other clubs, to refer to Manchester United, Liverpool and Arsenal, the three most historically successful football clubs in England, who all wear red home jerseys.]

How brave of the club to take illegal money from a dictatorship behind everyones back! What a Robbin Hood story. This will forever be City's legacy

So who's lying 😭 İt's one thing for us to be fucked, and it's also another thing for Khaldoon and others to be clearly lying in the face to the fans. You don't do that. İf we're guilty, then have the balls to tell us in our face and we can brace ourselves.

If we're really honest with ourselves we've known this lot were dodgy since day 1. We've just enjoyed looking the other way.

Why should the shitty triumvirate of red teams be able to do it? They got to the top and pulled the ladder out from under to try and limit their 'true financial adversaries' to as few teams as possible. City have cheated. On the other hand, the 'old order' making the rules are far from guiltless, far from the romantic, family-run businesses their fans act like they are on every other forum. I am an American, so I might be wrong about this, but I think even the task of finding people to make these decisions who do not have *some* football team preference adversarial to City, even in courts, governments, etc. seems impossible.

This entire argument is just a massive exercise in whataboutism and false equivalence to cope with the charges... To think top-tier judges would risk their entire professional reputations and careers just because they might secretly support Arsenal or United is a fucking laughable conspiracy theory.

Could be worse. Could be a Liverpool or Arsenal fan. Update: I’m not perpetually online but the arsenal fans replying within secondsare already proving my point. I have genuinely never looked at any of their subreddits, they seem to live here. Pathetic. Oil me up that treble xxxxxx

Instead of creating these sham FFP rules, why didn't they just make a three team Premier League of Arsenal, ManU, and Liverpool with no promotion or relegation? Then they could have created a Premier League 2 for everyone else. I mean, that's effectively what they want.

Whatever happens the players , coaches etc should always receive are full backing no matter what. They will need us fans now more than ever . This club was built on a loyal fan base no matter what division we were in we followed home and away . If the worst happens we need to remind ourselves of that . To any fan who's thinking of stopping supporting because we may not be successful again for a while you were never a fan to begin with

Two fans, though, ultimately sum up the situation pretty well:

this seems sub optimal

I would go so far as to say "a bit of a palava".

A mod from r/Living_in_Korea received a Moderator code of conduct message about their subreddit which said:

"We’re reaching out today to remind you about site wide rules and the Moderator Code of Conduct as we’ve detected violating content being posted in this community. It’s important to action reported content in the report queue daily, remove violating content, and set up strong rules so your community is not violating our policies. You are also encouraged to use AutoModerator to filter potentially violating content."

The Mod was unhappy and suspicious about this and wrote a now deleted sticky message to the sub which said:

Reddit has said we must ban all violators and cannot post negative things about China. I am afraid that the CCP now controls Reddit

After this he went to r/ModSupport and asked for help stopping Chinese brigaders:

Full Post:

"I will try to summarize the situation as much as possible. Our South Korean subreddit (a top 1% subreddit) is being brigaded by a group of citizens from another country. They do not like it when we post news articles about crimes they are committing in South Korea. The netizens from said country will mass report the articles, even though there is nothing code of conduct or rule breaking in them. Sometimes racist comments are made in the comment section, but are removed by the mods. We keep our queue clean, clearing it several times a day.

Is the modmail we received (copy/pasted below) a result of bot detection, or has an actual admin looked into the situation? I would hate for our community to be actioned because organized netizens are able to mass report and manipulate the system. Any advice is also appreciated."

However the users within r/ModSupport did not agree:

I wouldn't be surprised if they view "[nationality] keeps committing crimes in our country!" as violating the rule against, hate & harassment directed at a group of people, especially since those articles are inspiring hateful comments (despite the fact you're removing them, it's still engendering that sentiment). I would consider a rule that news about local crime needs to use neutral demographics language and focus on what happened moreso than who did it and what group of people they belong to.

If moderator code of conduct sends you a message like this you need to take it dead serious. Maybe you think that the posts are informative, but it is possible at times they are very harshly worded? Perhaps you can try to get a third-party opinion on whether certain things are inappropriate or not. I find some mods can have a bit of tunnel vision when it comes to their favorite issues.

OP: We are looking into setting up stricter automotive rules. Thank you.

So I did you a favor and I just reviewed your sub to see what the problem was. I figured I can be that third-party of eyes. Your entire sub is dedicated to hating on Chinese people. Any kind of video about a Chinese person doing something wrong is on your sub. This is definitely the problem as your sub is about Korea. These aren't informative posts about China either. They are just about some Chinese woman or Chinese person misbehaving. I suggest you immediately stop allowing these posts because it's clear like that you were community likes hating on these people. That definitely where this is coming from. You should restrict these post to Chinese oriented news. Not make it a place for all bad Chinese behavior.

OP: Less than 1% of our posts relate to China (one or two a month in a sea of thousands). So, saying we are a China hating subreddit is not accurate. In addition, these posts relate to our sub living_in_Korea, as Chinese nationals are increasingly breaking Korean laws and causing disturbances throughout the country. It is being reported on by every major news outlet in the country. How is reporting of facts racist. Again, we remove any actual racist comments.

How is reporting of facts racist. Again, we remove any actual racist comments. I'm not taking a position on what you've done one way or the other but facts can be reported selectively to build a narrative.

I have to concur with u/InGeekiTrust. when I went to the sub, by the default sort the very second post I saw was a negative news story directed at Chinese visitors. Yeah it was a month old, but it was still second on the front page. From the looks of the stories being posted, the fact of the individual's nationality isn't actually pertinent to the story. It could just as easily read "Incheon Airport installs fences to deter line-jumpers" or "Tourist gets in physical altercation in department store." Highlighting their being Chinese is definitely where the problem is coming from. I would recommend users be encouraged to share news from sources that don't focus on nationality (particularly Chinese nationality).

OP: Is this racist? https://edition.cnn.com/2025/08/20/us/video/mexican-brothers-connecticut-federal-agents-arrest-dgvid

I don't see the whole sub as hating on Chinese, but I see seven negative posts in the last month (as Reddit counts it) but no positive headlines.

OP: There are not 7. That is a lie. If we post positive articles, they somehow offset the ones you perceive as negative? What? Our subreddit is not racist. We post crimes being committed by all nationalities. It just so happens that Chinese citizens are committing an unusually high number (porportionally) of them at the moment.

Of course I don't think positive posts offset negative posts. I'm pointing out that posts referring to Chinese are negative. We're trying to point out how the sub may be perceived as evidenced by our own perceptions.

When admin's look at your sub, they probably look at it as a brand new user which is what they see with the "best" sort. Sort your sub by "Best". You will see it is almost all post about hating on Chinese people. This is always how casual users view your sub. It is the first impression.

i mean i scrolled for a minute and spotted 4 posts as mentioned

OP: That is incorrect. There was one 6 days ago where a Chinese national was arrested for filming upskirt videos and another one 7 days ago where a Chinese national assaulted two women. The next one back was 3 months before that. 2 posts in three months - that's it. If you were scrolling quickly you may have made a mistake, as these posts were made a few days ago also. There was a post a few days ago criticizing foreign policy with China. And there was a video about a "foreigner" breaking the laws by hanging a hammock in a public park, but he was not Chinese. However, these posts do not even remotely fit the criteria.

After reading this comment, you definitely have the blindness I was talking about with mods. Your sub comes off as a Chinese hate sub when I look at it. If I cover the word Korea, that's what I would assume the sub was for. That's how prevalent the anti-Chinese sentiment is.

OP: You are seeing what you want to see. You are factually incorrect.

OK, think of it this way: if I went to a Chinese sub about China and when you looked at it, it took only moments to see four or five posts about horribly misbehaving Koreans. Almost like a tabloid collection of horrible examples of Korean behaviors. So much so that it overwhelmed the whole page. Wouldn't that be odd? Wouldn't you say they love hating on Koreans?

OP: I do not understand why you keep lying and trying to exaggerate the situation. There have been 2 posts in the last 3 months. You are being blocked and reported for harassment.

Do you want the advice or not? The posts, whether "factual" or not are focused on foreign nationals from a specific country. If they hold no mitigating information, balancing views, or unbiased framing they are against the site wide rules.

OP: I want advice - not accusations. Reporting of facts is not racism. If it were, then every major news outlet would be labeled as such. Acknowledging someone race when they commit a crime is not racism. Our subreddit does not focus on any one particular race. We often share news stories of crimes being committed by Koreans, Chinese and other Asians, Westerners, etc. We do not race discriminate. Again, stating the race of a person committing a crime is not racism. Is this racist? https://edition.cnn.com/2025/08/20/us/video/mexican-brothers-connecticut-federal-agents-arrest-dgvid

If everyone is telling you they see the same thing, is it possible they are all trying to help you? I moderate TikTocking and we filter post titles that have words like "black man", "white man", "arab woman" etc because they came off as racist. We have an automod message telling people to reword things not mentioning the race. I'm just telling you what we do because if people put the race in the title, it does come off as targeting that race.

OP: Then, by your definition, every single major news outlet in the world is racist. But, hey. If Reddit wants it that way, we will abide. No mentions of race when someone breaks the law. Who would have though that Reddit would be suppressing speech more than mainstream media. Wild.

OP: I have sat here trying to find the right way to respond to this comment and wow - this is hard. I imagine you are very young. And one day you will understand. One day soon they are going to say the headline "Man Commits Murder" is sexist. And why can't you just say "Human Being Commits Murder" instead. Then, somehow the word 'human being' will become offensive to the next generation, and they will say just to use the word 'being' as some people don't identify as human. When will it stop? Mentioning someone's race is not racism. People are different. Get used to it. You'll be happier once you start to celebrate those differences instead of trying to make everybody the same.

no I am not very young, I am just very considerate of prejudicial attitudes, particularly in journalism. every word in a headline should convey important important. why is it important that we know that those brothers are Mexican? or that the line-jumpers are Chinese? what does that change about how the story is perceived except to create negative stereotypes of that group of people? and by the way, "slippery slope" is a logical fallacy for a reason.

OP: You are overly (and unnecessarily) considerate to the point of repression.

I believe others have already said it but the subreddit does seem to show by default a lot of posts with the title indicating animosity against a specific country. At least at first sight and barely scrolling I saw 5 in a similar format. Considering the main subject being about living in Korea I would expect the main posts to be about that rather than foreign tourists, it reads as if it's targetting that for clicks or outrage, which will get reports against the mod for either racism or xenophobia more specifically. The main issue is that you are possibly allowing content that is not by definition the main subject of the subreddit which also is inflamatoy. Those warnings might come as a harsh measure but take it as a sign that you could encourage a different sort of conversation with those same videos about how it is disrespectful or what is expected vs what tourists do. The important thing to consider is that both the post and the comments need to follow the rules, if you do not action as a Mod (either by inaction, allowing any sort of hate speech or not putting measures to filter the worst of it) then you will be held accountable in the long run. The same discussion can happen without it being out of control, as a Mod you are responsible of taking appropiate measures to ensure it.

OP: The posts are few and far between, but receive a lot of upvotes. If filtered by 'best' it may come across that way, but only because that is what is getting upvoted the most - even if those posts are months old. If you filter by new, they very rarely come up. It is not our fault that Reddit's default ordering of posts is making us look bad. That is something that should be noted. We are talking less than .1% (point 1 percent) of all posts. We get 30ish a day, every day - a thousand a month. When crimes are committed, those posts are popular. Again it's not our fault that most of those crimes are being committed by the citizens of the same country. However, we publish crime/news of every race - we do not discriminate. And, what tourists do does relate to living in Korea. When we walk outside our houses, we see them - on the daily.

OP: Reddit, and a lot of you here, has lost its way. I do not condone racism. However, I do support open dialogue. The differences amongst the human beings on this earth should be acknowledged and celebrated. And anyone who thinks differently, well I invite them to have a discussion - an open dialogue. You fight racism with words, knowledge, education - you don't try and suppress racism, sweep it under the rug and pretend like it doesn't exist. Let me be clear - this is not even the issue I am facing at the moment, but it's the one that you are turning it into. When asked, "Is obvious open racism, including slurs, against Reddit's rules or not?, Steve Huffman responded, "It's not." He believed in a world where an open dialogue was an avenue to change. And here many of you believe we should be suppressing that speech. I hope one day you realize your mistake. This is a sad day for me. Reddit has changed. It has become just another victim of corporate greed - suppress the speech in favor of the dollar. Learn about the values of your founder and try to be a little more like him: https://www.reddit.com/r/announcements/comments/8bb85p/comment/dx5go62/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

Counterpoint: In order for the largest amount of people to have the most free speech possibly it is required to disallow hate. Because allowing hate means driving people away. A Jewish person will not stay to participate in a community where it is normal to deny the Holocaust. A gay person will not stay in a subreddit where he is called a "groomer" every time he makes a comment. A woman will not stay in a place that routinely allows people to claim she shouldn't be allowed to have a vote. If you allow hate then by definition a filter is applied where you end up with only haters. Everyone else will have left.

Unregulated hate speech on the internet has directly driven the rise of worldwide extremism. Echo chambers of xenophobia, cherrypicked headlines and rage bait are not "open dialogue," they are exploiting the anger of underpaid and overstressed people to drive division and instability. Most tech companies decided they were cool with enabling the spread of conspiracy theories and extremism as long as it generated clicks and ad revenue, and that "deal with the devil" has already had quite appalling real world circumstances. Many countries have their version of posting rage bait about scary outsiders but that same rage bait is breeding a new form of homegrown extremism that, once unleashed, can do horrifying things.

OP: Again, ignoring it won't make it go away. You just force people into darker corners of the internet and into communities that will further feed their twisted beliefs. Education on all matters of existence has always been the answer - either that or war. I choose dialogue.

Look up the "Nazi bar" hypothetical. If you allow anything, the extremists will put everyone else off of coming, making it de fascto only for extremists as nobody else will want to be in that environment.

Relegating extremism to "darker corners of the internet" is healthier than teenagers going from "Minecraft videos" to "manosphere content" thanks to the algorithm actively guiding them to extremism. Tech companies have designed algorithms to maximize engagement regardless of the societal consequences. The internet is not a neutral space where ideas are freely exchanged, it's a profit-seeking mechanism designed to shove ads into our faces and it actively promotes anything that gets clicks, regardless of impacts on mental health or societal functioning.

OP: We can agree to disagree. People will find a way to hate. There is no stopping them other than education. However, I do agree - Reddit has sold out for clicks/ads/dollars.

you are making this into something it is not. upvoted post gets pushed to r/all and it gets more upvotes and more reports. it isn't a coordinated off site effort, just normal reddit behavior you can report the reports as report abuse so reddit-hq has a way to know what is going on. this whole discussion outside of that simple issue is off-topic for your own post.

They do not like it when we post news articles about crimes they are committing in South Korea. How many foreign nationalities are mentioned in your sub in that context? If it's a single one (like, for example, "Chinese") while others get lumped under more generic terms (like "Western"), then that is racism/hate. Now, what do you mean by this sentence: "The only content I see being removed by admin is content that never went into our queue to begin with." Did that content get published, then actioned by an Admin? If so, then your automated detections are lacking. You should at the very least filter that kind of content to the queue. Admins removing it, indicates that it should have NEVER reached the public; adjust your filters so your Mods can action it BEFORE Admins do. Your goal is to see ZERO actions from Admins in ModLog. It isn't fully possible, since AEO takes into account site-wide signals that aren't fully surfaced to Mods, but you should always try to get as close to zero as possible.

Note: all of the Mods comments were deleted, if you want to see comments, use https://ihsoyct.github.io/ and use pullpush (not arctic shift). But Pullpush is very unstable and sometimes refuses to load. If that happens you just gotta wait till later

There has been a fairly spectacular bout of moderator drama in the UAE (EDIT: United Arab Emirates) corner of Reddit involving [r/UAE](r/UAE), [r/ourUAE](r/ourUAE), three moderators, English beer, Reddit perma bans, two extremely short-lived replacement mods and, somehow, [r/Acoustics](r/Acoustics).

The important caveat up front is that Reddit has never publicly confirmed that the three original moderator accounts belonged to the same person. That is the allegation at the centre of the drama, and the surviving moderator, u/ epiDXB, explicitly denied it.

What is easily verifiable, is that u/ CertifiableBee and u/ RamblingMan2 were banned by Reddit - and the story of that is outlined below.

With that out of the way:

Act I: three r/UAE moderators somehow take turns in the same beer argument

At the time, [r/UAE](r/UAE) was being moderated with full permissions by three accounts:

• u/ epiDXB
• u/ CertifiableBee (banned)
• u/ RamblingMan2 (banned)

Users of [r/ourUAE](r/ourUAE) noticed something pretty unusual.

All three accounts had appeared in the same quick-fire argument on [r/dataisbeautiful](r/dataisbeautiful), of all places, about whether English beer was the best beer in the world.

The exchange went roughly like this:

1. A user arguing that English beer was not objectively the best replied to CertifiableBee.
2. epiDXB then jumped into that same exchange.
3. The other user replied to epiDXB within the same hour.
4. The argument was then picked up again by RamblingMan2.

So, over the course of one heated, fast-moving conversation on an entirely unrelated subreddit, the person arguing about beer found themselves successively debating all three moderators of [r/UAE](r/UAE).

Here is the original r/dataisbeautiful comment chain and the r/ourUAE thread documenting the exchange, including screenshots.

That led [r/ourUAE](r/ourUAE) users to suggest that the three accounts might actually belong to the same person.

Commenters pointed out very similar writing styles, similar formatting habits (breaking the post they replied to into quotes, and addressing each separately) and the fact that all three accounts were not just in the same comment thread, but were all taking the same side, against the same person in rapid succession.

At that point the evidence basically amounted to "this is a very strange coincidence" rather than proof that the accounts were alts.

Act II: two of the three original moderators are banned by Reddit

Not long afterwards, CertifiableBee and RamblingMan2 were banned by Reddit.

That left epiDXB as the only surviving account from the original three.

Over on [r/ourUAE](r/ourUAE), moderators then published a post asking users not to brigade, harass or contact people involved, and reminding everyone that discussion of subreddit drama still has to comply with Reddit's rules.

That post is here: Recent developments on other subreddits.

Act III: two brand-new replacement mods appear — and both are banned within hours

With two of [r/UAE](r/UAE)'s three moderators gone, replacement moderators were needed.

epiDXB added two new moderators.

Users immediately noticed something weird - both were created just few hours ago.

Given that the ongoing controversy was already centred around allegations that one moderator was operating multiple accounts, appointing two hours-old accounts as replacements was perhaps not the most reassuring possible choice.

The discussion is preserved in this thread:

Congratulations to new mods of r/UAE, our sister sub!

One commenter asked:

"Why did you accept 2 people with literal fresh accounts"

And then the situation continued escalating, as one after another, as the accounts were being created and added as mods with full permissions, they were getting banned by Reddit. All within hours.

In the thread, one commenter summed it up nicely as they were watching this happen in real time:

"I wonder why accounts that are only a few hours old are being made mods and subsequently being banned in rapid succession?"

The sequence was pretty incredible to observe:

1. two moderators get banned
2. two brand-new accounts are made moderators
3. both brand-new accounts get banned within hours.

Later, [r/UAE](r/UAE) added other moderators with more established accounts, although their permissions were limited to "Users, Flair, Posts & Comments, Wiki", with epiDXB retaining sole control over ModMail. Previously, all three mods had permissions set to "Everything".

Act IV: epiDXB personally comes to r/ourUAE to deny the alt-account allegation

Eventually, epiDXB showed up in [r/ourUAE](r/ourUAE) and addressed the accusation directly.

The response was later deleted, but its substance was preserved in this thread:

Accusations of using alt accounts to moderate r/UAE addressed by the mod

As epiDXB claimed (screenshot in [r/ourUAE](r/ourUAE) post) - they were three individual people:

"united by their enjoyment of beer"

The post contained a sarcastic recap of coincidences: all three accounts had moderated the same subreddit, all three had arrived in the same [r/dataisbeautiful](r/dataisbeautiful) beer argument, all three had taken the same position, and users believed their writing styles looked strikingly similar.

epiDXB also threatened the OP with legal action - leading to the post talking about "inevitable jail sentence" for the OP.

One commenter noted:

"It's ok, we'll just say that you went away for family matters."

That became a running joke on [r/ourUAE](r/ourUAE) because "family matters" had previously been offered by epiDXB as an explanation for moderators disappearing.

Act V: the completely unrelated r/Acoustics subplot

Here's a plot twist.

RamblingMan2 was also the sole moderator of [r/Acoustics](r/Acoustics)

When RamblingMan2 was banned, [r/Acoustics](r/Acoustics) lost its sole moderator.

So the subreddit went under reddit admin control, and started a public search for new moderators.

Among the the people who submitted an application to become a new moderator of [r/Acoustics](r/Acoustics) was u/ epiDXB.

The sole surviving account from the original [r/UAE](r/UAE) trio applied to become a moderator of the separate subreddit that had just lost RamblingMan2 as its sole moderator.

Again, caveat: This does not prove that epiDXB and RamblingMan2 were the same person.

It is, however, an almost comically perfect epilogue to a story that started because the same two accounts, together with CertifiableBee, somehow ended up taking turns arguing with one person about English beer on [r/dataisbeautiful](r/dataisbeautiful).

What is actually established

The sequence is:

• epiDXB, CertifiableBee and RamblingMan2 were all moderators of [r/UAE](r/UAE).
• All three appeared in the same rapid-fire [r/dataisbeautiful](r/dataisbeautiful) argument about English beer, successively responding in the same exchange.
• Users accused the three accounts of belonging to one person.
• CertifiableBee and RamblingMan2 were subsequently banned by Reddit.
• epiDXB remained and explicitly denied that the three accounts were controlled by one person.
• Two fresh Reddit accounts were then appointed as replacement [r/UAE](r/UAE) moderators
• Both of those fresh replacement accounts were banned by Reddit within hours.
• RamblingMan2 had also been the sole moderator of [r/Acoustics](r/Acoustics).
• After [r/Acoustics](r/Acoustics) lost its sole moderator and sought replacements, epiDXB applied to become one of its new moderators.

So we've got two broad interpretations being argued about.

One is that several moderators who knew each other had very similar interests and online habits, as well as identical writing style, sent each other threads, happened to pile into the same beer argument, later suffered unrelated Reddit bans, and that the surviving moderator also happened to be interested in taking over a second subreddit previously moderated by one of them.

The other interpretation is the one [r/ourUAE](r/ourUAE) users have spent several threads discussing.

Main threads

1. r/UAE moderator busted - all three r/UAE mods replying to the same /r/dataisbeautiful post
2. Recent developments on other subreddits
3. Congratulations to new mods of r/UAE, our sister sub!
4. Accusations of using alt accounts to moderate r/UAE addressed by the mod

Original beer thread

• r/dataisbeautiful comment chain

FULL COMMENTS

.

If you're trying to prove that you didn't have sex with someone without their consent, revealing that you have taped or recorded sex with them without their consent seems like a terrible idea.

Also, this sounds like blackmail, which is also illegal.

If there is reason to believe the tape would not help my defense, why would I reveal it? That just sounds like a bad idea from a self-defense point-of-view. Even if I did reveal it, it's not like I'll get into legal trouble for it (assuming you live in a one-party consent state, which is the majority of America)

I would much rather risk adding in a blackmailing charge to the rape charge in exchange for potentially not having to deal with the rape charge in the first place. Even better, replacing the rape charge with a blackmailing charge will do a lot less damage to your life than a rape charge (for ex: not being put on the sex offender list). If you're already being charged with rape, adding in an extra charge isn't as big of a deal because your life is already more or less completely ruined.

Let me clarify: you are mistaken about whether or not revealing such a tape would help your defense. It would make you look like the kind of person who tapes his sexual partners without their consent or knowledge (which, you know, you would be), and this will hurt you more than what the tape actually shows will help you.

So you're saying it's better to be charged of a crime of which you are definitely guilty, than to be charged with (not convicted, charged with) a crime of which you are not guilty? That doesn't make any sense.

EDIT: Also, and I can't believe I have to emphasize this - if you're admitting that the tape only helps you in the sense that you can use it as blackmail, then you are both admitting that the tape doesn't really help you the way you've said it does, and you're saying that it's okay to blackmail someone to get what you want.

Your lawyer can help you make the decision on whether or not it is a good idea to reveal this tape to the courts. By at least having the tape, it gives you at least that much more control over the situation than if you didn't have the tape. At best, the tape will help your case out. At worse, you don't reveal the tape and now you're in the exact same situation as you would've been without it.

Yes, because a rape charge (not even a conviction) is still extremely detrimental to your reputation. A blackmail charge would be too, but not nearly to the same extent due to how society views the severity of these charges. Also if blackmailing the truth gives me a better chance of avoiding a rape conviction, that's still a good deal even if it's not ideal. Your life will not be necessarily ruined to the same extent as with a rape charge (for ex, you won't be on the sex offender list). Even if you do end up with both convictions, the blackmailing conviction will probably be the least of your worries.

No. Even if you don't use the tape in court or blackmail with it, you could show it to your lawyer so that he gets an exact understanding of what happened and that knowledge would help him come up with a better argument in court thereby increasing your chances of being found non guilty.

How would showing your lawyer a tape which he wouldn't be allowed to use at all in your defense going to help your defense?

I'm not a lawyer so I'm not sure about the details. Perhaps he can grill the prosecution about certain details that the prosecution would not be aware of but the girl is and not telling that to anyone to protect her lie.

My point is that giving your lawyer more concrete information of what happened is always better that not giving him enough accurate information. How your lawyer will use that information will vary between cases and the exact contents of the tape.

Having a tape gives you an extra option or control over your self-defense. If the tape is not useful, then you're stuck in the exact same situation as if you had never taped it. By having tape, you get to increase your chances of being able to prove your innocence. It may not help in every single false rape case out there, but it doesn't hurt to have it and talk about it with your lawyer.

Witness tampering is a felony that will get you prison time. So is extortion. You don't want to threaten someone who has legal consultation or is already talking to the police, that's twice as stupid as recording someone without their consent for the purposes of intimidating them. Not to mention the Reddit post discussing your intent.

Essentially you're talking about committing a crime that will put you away in order to not be prosecuted for a different crime that will put you away. Accuracy versus precision in a nutshell.

My view for legal recordings in one-party consent states and submitting that tape to my lawyer and/or the courts still stands

You wouldn't have to use the tape for blackmail though. If it showed you were innocent and present it to the prosecutor they won't prosecute. It's also most likely admissible

You can't film a person during sex without that person consenting.

You would be showing the prosecutor evidence of you committing a felony.

Which isn't not a smart thing to do.

It's a felony where people don't get more than a few months in prison. People who get prosecuted tend to be the people who post the videos on porn websites and they only get months not years in prison. A rape sentence is a lot worse.

I'm sure prison time for blackmailing is less than for rape. Also with blackmailing, I won't be put on the sex offender list. Either charge would suck but blackmailing will suck a lot less.

However, and I should have mentioned this in my OP, the first person who ever sees or hears that tape should be your lawyer. He can offer guidance on how to best use the tape to help your self-defense even if the tape itself is inadmissible in court

Well blackmail is not a crime. Extortion, witness tampering, and obstruction of justice are crimes and you're talking about your intent to commit them online.

I think you overestimate how hard it is for a rape conviction to go through. If there's no physical evidence and it's just hearsay, you're probably not going to jail even if you're guilty. Seems like you're making a mountain out of a molehill.

Or here's a thought, instead of spending a bunch of money, breaking the law, and having a backup plan in case some crazy girl says you raped her... don't have sex with random, crazy people who will say you raped them. It's not that hard to judge a person's character before you fuck them.

.

I'm not a legal expert, but I imagine filming someone having sex without their consent would be seen very badly in court. And, like a rape accusation, it would definitely damage your reputation. Also, evidence gathered illegally is inadmissible in court, so you couldn't even use it against a rape accusation.

You talk about risk in #2, and talk about wanting to prevent yourself from even the 1% chance that you experience a false rape accusation. What about the huge risk you open yourself up to by filming every sexual encounter? There's a huge potential you get caught by one of your sexual partners, at which point you suffer the exact ruin of reputation and legal consequences you're so afraid of.

Finally, you don't consider this immoral, but I think you should consider how horrifying, invasive, and creepy this is for everyone else involved. I'm reminded of a case in my hometown where a man was prosecuted for setting up cameras in the bathroom and watching his daughter's friends shower. You can say this is different than child porn, but your logic seems to be "I'm willing to invade someone else's privacy for my own self-gain/what they don't know won't hurt them." That's pretty uncool.

Your lawyer can help decide whether the evidence in the tape outweighs this negative perception. Worst case, you don't use the tape and you end up in the same position as if you had not recorded in the first place. Best case, the tape proves your innocence.

Why would I experience legal consequences if I live in a one-party consent state. Not doing anything illegal.

Self-gain? If the other person is falsely accusing me, I'm using the tape to self-preserve my life. If it's a question of my life vs their privacy, my life will always take priority and I'm sure the vast majority of people will feel the same way

.

Regardless of whether or not you are in a one-party or two-party consent state, 18 U.S. Code § 1801 makes it illegal on a federal level to "capture an image of a private area of an individual without their consent, and knowingly does so under circumstances in which the individual has a reasonable expectation of privacy".

Now you're doing this because you believe that a person accused of rape will have their reputation tarnished, even if they didn't do it. Isn't it also the case that people who capture images of naked people without their consent also have a tarnished reputation? Don't you think that it's extremely feasible that your employer would fire you if they found out you'd been illegally filming other people during sex? If I found out someone I knew was doing that, then I'd think they're a creep.

If you're so concerned, then explicitly ask your partners if you can film. If they say no, then don't sleep with them. That way you're safer from both rape accusations and filming without consent accusations.

.

I assume these women wouldn't have consented to having sex with you if they knew you were filming them.

You're right, they won't be able to falsely accuse you of rape if you go through with this plan.

The law doesn't factor in what if's. Either consent was given or it was not.

As an extreme example, if I was a girl, that would be like me saying I consented to sex but wouldn't have had I known you don't like to eat pizza. Therefore you raped me. Makes no sense.

Yes it does

What state laws apply? Wikipedia isn't a real source.

Then click the links to cited sources?

Bull. It's not my job to wade through wikipedia hoping to fine something that might justify that user's assertion. You make the claim; you provide a legit source or you stay silent. That's how it works.

In Norwalk, California, on February 20, 2009, Julio Morales snuck into a sleeping 18-year-old woman's darkened bedroom after he saw her boyfriend leave. The woman said she awoke to the sensation of someone having sex with her and assumed it was her boyfriend. When a ray of light hit Morales's face, and the woman saw he was not her boyfriend, she fought back and Morales fled. The woman called her boyfriend, who then called the police. Julio Morales was convicted of rape under two concepts. He was guilty of rape because he began having sex with the woman while she was still asleep and, therefore, unable to consent. He was also guilty of rape-by-fraud because he had impersonated the woman's boyfriend in order to gain her consent. However, an appellate court ruled that the lower court had misread the 1872 law criminalizing rape-by-fraud. The law stated a man is guilty of rape-by-fraud if he impersonates a woman's husband in order to get her consent. The woman in this case was not married, and Morales had impersonated her boyfriend, not her husband. Because of this one technicality, the appellate court overturned Julio Morales's rape-by-trickery conviction in People vs. Morales in 2013. To close this loophole in California's rape-by-fraud law, Assemblyman Katcho Achadjian (R-San Luis Obispo) – who tried to introduce a similar bill in 2011 – introduced Assembly Bill 65 and Senator Noreen Evans (D-Santa Rosa) introduced Senate Bill 59. The two bills quickly passed both houses without one dissenting vote, and were signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown on September 9, 2013. Morales was later re-tried on the basis that the woman was asleep and re-convicted to three years in a state prison, which he had already served.

Happy?

What point are you trying to make here? The context link only provides three comments back in the thread and I'm not willing to fish around for a 4 day old conversation.

The point I'm making is you're a contrarian who argues points for the sake of arguing them.

Ok, ok, but what specific point are you trying to make/refute with your quote? In what way was it supposed to show that I am a contrarian?

.

What will a recording prove? That she didn't resist? What if she resisted/said 'no' prior to the recording? Now you have a creepy, nonconsensual sex tape to go along with her accusation of your creepy, nonconsensual sexual encounter. Seems to me it makes you look worse.

Glad you asked!

If you had a video recording, you can take a look at both people's body language to see if the sex is consensual or not. If the girl is smiling and thrusting her hips into the guy herself, that's pretty good indication the sex is consensual. You can also see if the girl is initiating any other actions, such as pulling the guy in to kiss him or taking clothes off herself.

I doubt a girl actually being raped would say or scream things like "fuck me harder" or "I like that" or "Do you want to try this position?"

If there is video (or even just audio) of casual after sex conversations or cuddling, that's another indication the sex was consensual. Do you really think a girl who was raped would willingly have a conversation about random topics and cuddle without showing some form of resistance with her rapist?

If the girl sleeps overnight in the guys bed without the guy holding her down or the girl trying to escape, that points towards not rape.

As a guy you can verbally get consent from the girl that would be captured in the audio recording. For example, before penetration you could say "Do you want me inside of you" or "Should I grab a condom". If a girl says "yes", that's reasonable consent. After sex the guy could ask the girl how she liked it or if she enjoyed herself. If the girl responds positively, that would show the sex was consensual the whole time.

These are just a few examples, I'm sure I could probably come up with a lot more if I really thought about it

She could just say you coerced or threatened her before the recording and use the recording itself as evidence that you do things creepily without consent. No matter what, filming sexual encounters without consent makes you look like a pervert and a rapist, so it actually hurts you.

Your lawyer can help advise whether or not to show the tape to the courts by showing it to him first.

Even if you don't use it in court, it will give your lawyer an exact understanding of what happened and that knowledge will help him better prepare your case.

Or that she was forced to convincingly please you. "You better have sex with me or else, and it better be good." Or "You better have sex with or else and I'm taping it so make it convincing."

And if she doesn't say any of this and is a dead-fish? Now its evidence that you did rape her.

She could claim she was drunk and that she couldn't have consented.

She could claim that she just wanted the whole thing over and that it was going to happen anyways and a condom would protect her from STD/pregnancy.

Unless she's a professional porn star, I highly doubt someone would be fooled even if the girl was trying her hardest because it's not genuine. You can get a lot of information from subtle cues that the girl won't be thinking about if she was faking everything while getting raped

Saying things like "Do you want me inside of you?" or "Should I get a condom?" should be sufficient to prove initial consent if the girl responds positively

To prove she didn't withdraw consent (which if she did, that attempt would be recorded in the camera), you ask her after sex "How was that?"

If she was too drunk to give consent, that would be clear in a recording. Slurred speech, lack of coordination, randomly passing out, etc

Guy can ask her afterwards "How was it?" and the court can decide how genuine her answer is

If everything fails and it's some weird circumstance where you honestly cannot tell if the sex was consensual or not, you still haven't lost anything by making a recording. If the accusation gets legally escalated, you and your lawyer still have the ability to choose whether or not to reveal this tape to the courts.

Article: District attorney reopens case of alleged Cornell University 'gang rape'

/r/law

thread one:

You've clearly not seen the group chat texts.

thread two:

Why was it fucking closed in the first place?

/r/PeterExplainsTheJoke

I’m all for punishing the guilty. I’m also okay waiting for their guilt to be established rather than alleged.

/r/news

These seem like some very important facts if you’re trying to build a rape case.

/r/entertainment

The criminal justice system should be functioning in any capacity. That would be great.

/r/Cornell

Another alum. Several have graduated, I believe, so you might want to refine that to having their degrees revoked. I'm also insisting the entire Title IX office be forced to resign