Propaganda and political operatives in PS sub

[Jet Cash]

OK I've tried posting in the political forum, but it looks as if nobody is interested in discussions of the real issues that may contradict the globalist agenda. That saddens me for a crypto enthusiasts forum.

[1714824699]

1714824699

[1714824699]

1714824699

[1714824699]

1714824699

[1714824699]

1714824699

[1714824699]

1714824699

[cryptohunter]

OK I've tried posting in the political forum, but it looks as if nobody is interested in discussions of the real issues that may contradict the globalist agenda. That saddens me for a crypto enthusiasts forum.

Most people choose not to discuss issues that in public contradict the agendas of those they perceive to be in power. Generally they will align with them or just pretend there are no issues.

[r1s2g3]

I tried to introduce sex into my coffee lounge thread, but people seem to prefer politics.

Maybe I should try religion next. I could start a discussion about Wicca, I think we may have a few secret adepts here.

I somewhere read that every man has either of one of these two weakness.  Either he fall on trap for sex or he/she can give life/secrets in name of religion.

[Quickseller]

It appears that terrorist propiganda is being posted in various P&S threads. Hamas is not only designated as a terrorist organization, but is also subject to OFAC sanctions.

The propaganda is not limited to one thread. There is another thread advocating for the mass murder of Jews whose replies contain pro-terrorism propaganda.

[DireWolfM14]

It appears that terrorist propiganda is being posted in various P&S threads. Hamas is not only designated as a terrorist organization, but is also subject to OFAC sanctions.

The propaganda is not limited to one thread. There is another thread advocating for the mass murder of Jews whose replies contain pro-terrorism propaganda.

Anything can be called "propaganda," even sentiments that support your point of view.  You wouldn't propose censoring opposing arguments, would you?  Something tells me that you shouldn't hold your breath if that's what you expect.

If you see something that's in violation of the forum rules, report it.  Global mods are still monitoring reports from P&S.

[suchmoon]

Anything can be called "propaganda," even sentiments that support your point of view.  You wouldn't propose censoring opposing arguments, would you?  Something tells me that you shouldn't hold your breath if that's what you expect.

I don't think he expects that. But he's sockpuppeting hard with at least two accounts to shill his "point of view", which is about as disgusting as any propaganda.

[hilariousandco]

It appears that terrorist propiganda is being posted in various P&S threads. Hamas is not only designated as a terrorist organization, but is also subject to OFAC sanctions.

The propaganda is not limited to one thread. There is another thread advocating for the mass murder of Jews whose replies contain pro-terrorism propaganda.

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. One man's propaganda is another man's truth. Many people would say Israel is a terror state and Palestine is practically an open air concentration camp. Who is right and who is wrong? Who gets to decide what is propaganda or not? The mods? Misinformation and propaganda is rife from both sides and both have committed war crimes. Neither can be trusted and both are as bad as each other but I'd say usually the bigger terrorist is the one with the bigger weapon. Should we count both Hamas and Israel as terrorist organisations? What about both the US and UK governments which also commit war crimes and atrocities far bigger than both Hamas and Israel, but we allow both pro and anti arguments regarding them. I don't see anything wrong with the image posted above regardless of whether you agree with it or not but the other thread which is arguably calling for genocide could certainly be removed. Did anyone report it because I can't see any reports on it? It's probably a troll account either way.

[TwitchySeal]

It appears that terrorist propiganda is being posted in various P&S threads. Hamas is not only designated as a terrorist organization, but is also subject to OFAC sanctions.

The propaganda is not limited to one thread. There is another thread advocating for the mass murder of Jews whose replies contain pro-terrorism propaganda.

It would be nice if we could know for sure who was intentionally spreading misinformation and stop them.  But we can't.  It spreads because people believe it.  And if someone believes it, they aren't intentionally spreading misinformation.  And people should be able to post what they believe.

Even posts like this one, that I'm almost certain the user is fully aware that they are spreading misinformation about a terrorist attack only to suit their own personal political stance, I don't think it should be removed.

[DireWolfM14]

I don't think he expects that.

I don't think he does either, I was being facetious.  I'm sure QS is smarter than that, hell PN7 is probably smarter than that, lol. 

But I wasn't asking just to be a smart-ass; this is Meta.  If he is not asking for censorship, then what's the point of bringing up the issue in this section?  The only other reason I can see for it is to spread his political debates into a board were they're off topic.

[Quickseller]

It appears that terrorist propiganda is being posted in various P&S threads. Hamas is not only designated as a terrorist organization, but is also subject to OFAC sanctions.

The propaganda is not limited to one thread. There is another thread advocating for the mass murder of Jews whose replies contain pro-terrorism propaganda.

Anything can be called "propaganda," even sentiments that support your point of view.  You wouldn't propose censoring opposing arguments, would you?  Something tells me that you shouldn't hold your breath if that's what you expect.

If you see something that's in violation of the forum rules, report it.  Global mods are still monitoring reports from P&S.

The definition of propaganda is:

information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.

I am not necessarily advocating that posts be censored, but am rather highlighting a problem. I don't think the posts in question violate any current rules.

It appears that terrorist propiganda is being posted in various P&S threads. Hamas is not only designated as a terrorist organization, but is also subject to OFAC sanctions.

The propaganda is not limited to one thread. There is another thread advocating for the mass murder of Jews whose replies contain pro-terrorism propaganda.

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. One man's propaganda is another man's truth. Many people would say Israel is a terror state and Palestine is practically an open air concentration camp. Who is right and who is wrong? Who gets to decide what is propaganda or not? The mods? Misinformation and propaganda is rife from both sides and both have committed war crimes. Neither can be trusted and both are as bad as each other but I'd say usually the bigger terrorist is the one with the bigger weapon. Should we count both Hamas and Israel as terrorist organisations? What about both the US and UK governments which also commit war crimes and atrocities far bigger than both Hamas and Israel, but we allow both pro and anti arguments regarding them. I don't see anything wrong with the image posted above regardless of whether you agree with it or not but the other thread which is arguably calling for genocide could certainly be removed. Did anyone report it because I can't see any reports on it? It's probably a troll account either way.

If the argument that Palestine is a "concentration camp" that would be the fault of Hamas, not Israel. Israel is giving away free electricity and water to Palestine. Hamas is occupying the territory.

There are authoritative sources that say Hamas is a terrorist organization (as cited in the post you quoted). The mods do not need to make independent judgements, but can rely on a set of reliable and authoritative sources. If, over time a particular source proves itself to be unreliable, it can no longer be relied upon.

I think it would probably not be best to remove the propaganda posts in question, but would probably be good to perhaps have warnings applied to posts linking readers to authoritative sources of information about the subject, so the readers can make their own unbiased judgments.

It appears that terrorist propiganda is being posted in various P&S threads. Hamas is not only designated as a terrorist organization, but is also subject to OFAC sanctions.

The propaganda is not limited to one thread. There is another thread advocating for the mass murder of Jews whose replies contain pro-terrorism propaganda.

It would be nice if we could know for sure who was intentionally spreading misinformation and stop them.  But we can't.  It spreads because people believe it.  And if someone believes it, they aren't intentionally spreading misinformation.  And people should be able to post what they believe.

The best cure to misinformation is more speech. However some malicious actors are able to produce a lot of speech, either by generating content that many are sympathetic to, or via automated means. If authoritative, neutral sources of information are linked to certain posts/threads, the effectiveness of a lot of misleading speech would be reduced.  

[suchmoon]

I think it would probably not be best to remove the propaganda posts in question, but would probably be good to perhaps have warnings applied to posts linking readers to authoritative sources of information about the subject, so the readers can make their own unbiased judgments.

Wasn't that what twitface did to one prominent politician and some users here were screaming "sensor ships!!!!!!!!!!!"?

It's amazing how you can unironically post shit like that.

[DireWolfM14]

I think it would probably not be best to remove the propaganda posts in question, but would probably be good to perhaps have warnings applied to posts linking readers to authoritative sources of information about the subject, so the readers can make their own unbiased judgments.

Freedom, or no freedom?  There's no grey area here.  Should people be able to say what they want on this forum, or should all posts be reviewed against QS's definition of propaganda?  Who gets to review the "Authoritative Sources" to determine whether they are valid, or if they are just spreading more propaganda?  Who gets to review the reviewers for bias?

My suggestion is that you engage in calm, rational discussions, provide references that support you position, recognize that your opinions are just as biased as your opponents, and allow others the same freedom.  You won't convince everyone.  You may not convince anyone.  Just don't take it personally.

[Quickseller]

I think it would probably not be best to remove the propaganda posts in question, but would probably be good to perhaps have warnings applied to posts linking readers to authoritative sources of information about the subject, so the readers can make their own unbiased judgments.

Freedom, or no freedom?  There's no grey area here.  Should people be able to say what they want on this forum, or should all posts be reviewed against QS's definition of propaganda?  Who gets to review the "Authoritative Sources" to determine whether they are valid, or if they are just spreading more propaganda?  Who gets to review the reviewers for bias?

My suggestion is that you engage in calm, rational discussions, provide references that support you position, recognize that your opinions are just as biased as your opponents, and allow others the same freedom.  You won't convince everyone.  You may not convince anyone.  Just don't take it personally.

Of course, I favor freedom.

With the kind of propaganda I am referring to, particularly the kind being published by Ljunior, I would say the publisher (I am intentionally not using the word 'person' as I have my doubts he is writing in his personal capacity, or even if it is a single person behind the account) does not necessarily believe what is being published, and he is taking steps to make it difficult to counter his statements. For example, he is making his posts full of images, so a casual reader will not be as likely to read the post immidiately after his post. This makes it difficult to counter what he is saying.

The authoritative sources should be chosen by someone who is responsible for the reputation of the forum. If authoritative sources are chosen that are not reliable, or are too biased, the forum's reputation will suffer. I don't think the forum should say that anyone is right or wrong, or that the linked authoritative sources are right or wrong, but I do think some of these posts should contain links to additional information so readers can decide for themselves.

There is a distinction between someone like Ljunior, and someone like jrrsparkles, who very well may believe what he is posting, and IMO is repeating what someone in his family, or friend group taught him. jrrsparkles is not doing anything to impede discussion, while Ljunior is via his very long posts.

We don't allow people to post about bcash in the bitcoin subs, claiming that bcash is bitcoin. We also don't allow inauthentic behavior that might artificially increase their threads or posts visibility.

[DireWolfM14]

There is a distinction between someone like whogivesafuck, and someone like someothershcmuck

I knew it.  All you're trying to do is extend your political debate into Meta.  It's not going to work, but I will say that if you're afraid of memes then your argument is shit.

We don't allow people to post about bcash in the bitcoin subs, claiming that bcash is bitcoin. We also don't allow inauthentic behavior that might artificially increase their threads or posts visibility.

Those are specific rule violations that exist because this is a Bitcoin forum.  If you want to discuss Israeli politics with those kinds of restrictions find yourself an Israel forum.

[Quickseller]

There is a distinction between someone like whogivesafuck, and someone like someothershcmuck

I knew it.  All you're trying to do is extend your political debate into Meta.  It's not going to work, but I will say that if you're afraid of memes then your argument is shit.

I am not trying to extend my political debate. One person that I cited likely actually believes what he is posting and one is likely sponsored, directly or indirectly by terrorists, both are posting misinformation. Each can potentially be handed differently.

We don't allow people to post about bcash in the bitcoin subs, claiming that bcash is bitcoin. We also don't allow inauthentic behavior that might artificially increase their threads or posts visibility.

Those are specific rule violations that exist because this is a Bitcoin forum.  If you want to discuss Israeli politics with those kinds of restrictions find yourself an Israel forum.

It is currently against the rules to post about bcash in the bitcoin forums. In 2014, this would not be against the rules because no one had thought to create such a rule. The purpose of this thread/bump is to generate debate that will hopefully lead to a new rule being created against posting terrorist propaganda.