/gulag/ - Gulag

Meta Board. Where you belong

catalog
Mode: Reply
Name
E-mail
Subject
Message

Max message length: 8192

Files

Max file size: 20.00 MB

Max files: 3

Password

(used to delete files and postings)

Misc

Remember to follow the rules


IRC: Rizon.net #bunkerchan
https://qchat.rizon.net/?channels=bunkerchan

(1.95 MB 237x240 9a2.gif)
A rant about the moderation Sputnik##SgNipD 11/11/2019 (Mon) 16:42:42 No. 2657
I've already said this before on here but I may as well make a thread dedicated to it.

The mods on /leftypol/ are trash, extremely trash and I think the moderation team on this part of the site needs to be completely changed I know I'm probably pissing in the wind but in all honesty but one of the benefits and points to an imageboard is anonminity and the lack of a circlejerk, the mods don't respect either of these aspects and because of that this site has been seeing less and less users coming into this site the few users that do show up now are mostly redditors, remember that this place isn't Reddit nor is this the moderator's personal circlejerk and that was the main problem with the original /leftypol/ when it went to hell, not the fact that it was run by a tankie or something like that.

tl;dr the mods suck
>>4880 I also re-read the mod logs and realized I was banned for evasion literally two minutes after the initial ban, meaning most likely the vol banned one comment and then looked for another one to mount on a month for good measure
Moderation is actually pretty good compared to elsewhere.
You guys are fine. It's not easy. Eat pizza rolls, not hot pockets.
never in my life have I seen "good moderation"
>>2718 mods are really shit at banning sectarian shitflingers >>2719 this, I never got a post deleted or banned, but I didnt see quite as much sectarian wrecking, lib US state dept propaganda, and obvious bad faith polyp trolling staying up during old bo days
Can moderation ban bump-fags? Like nigga I've been reporting people reviving dead (and absolutely useless) threads out of spite and mods aren't doing shit.
>>5216 They only delete posts that trigger them personally.
I know that for some it may be only distraction, but I fell I need to rant about this. Why threads like these: >>>/leftypol/688085 are still up? They are bringing people that spite this site to shit up the whole board. And we literally have more potential on fucking twitter that on board dedicated to hate communist that is full of braindead boomers. Damn, if atleast it was /lit/ or something....I dont know if I am wrong in this, but I think these tryhard threads should be atleast anchored to the shadow realm
>>5394 It's called raiding, a long time past-time by channers, and for /leftypol/ our main target tends to be reactionaries. The point is to sow fear and paranoia while sharpening our arguments and testing our memes. We also give any /pol/ newfags the chance to convert and, give /leftypol/ newfags the chance to experience the first-hand knowledge of baiting /pol/ into traps and rants. SUre, they might come on this site but A) that gives us more PPH B) the mods tend to be good at taking out nazis (even being overzealous) C) It gives us more attention and subsequently more exposure to people.
>>5399 What a stupid reasons. Like a said, why not focus on a better places like /lit/? There are better place to advertise your garbage site than a fucking /pol/. And you can sharpen your arguing skills directly on /pol/ without cloak of raid. And with the conversion argument, motherfuckers threw tanturums when there was couple of chapofags coming on this site but somehow theres potential in the people that hate you instead. And artificialy inflating pph for couple of minutes aint big win either
>>5401 >/lit/ Yeah m8 you've either never been there or you're deep in that shit, because A) boards like /lit/ /a/ /his/ and others are all used by /pol/yps or people with similar ideologies, As proven by trying to post anything communist in either, threads are either deleted or bumplocked and spammed with angry "communism doesn't work" faggots, and since they're not a shitposting board like /pol/ replying in kind ges you a ban, since the mods want that.
>>5401 > There are better place to advertise your garbage site <YOUR Cope /pol/yp
>>5401 >you can sharpen your arguing skills directly on /pol/ without cloak of raid Not really, most people won't go there on their own time because its a fucking mess. A raid helps because since there are more than 1 communist poster, you won't get swamped by shitposts that you can't reply to in time.
>>5399 >It's called raiding, a long time past-time by channers, and for /leftypol/ our main target tends to be reactionaries We aren't on 8chan anymore faggot. And even if we were, by the end of the 8chan era we already saw that the /pol/yps had gotten far more radical and extremist in their outlooks than they were when we used to poach large amounts of users off them and convert them to leftists. They aren't your fucking Ron Paul loving ironic fascists or whatever easy-to-dismantle meme ideologies they had in the past, they have a virtually religious dogma towards insane shit like Qanon and other far-right conspiracies and the idea that these people that are so pathologically online and schizophrenic are convertible or even useful after the fact is just fucking insane. 4/pol/ is worse than even 8/pol/, it's literally no different than if you tried to convert people from fucking r/The_Donald.
>>5399 >PPH >not quality >overzealous mods >please be gentle to the nazis >exposure to people >implying nazis are people you don't target the most retarded sections of internet faggots for "converting" you fucking mongoloid
>>5697 >>5700 1) good job answering a post from a week ago when its no longer relevant 2) We're still a chan idiot 3) /pol/ is more than just nazis. Sure a lot of them are stormfaggots, but some are just youthful fools who are still ignorant and we can turn them away from the darkside before they join it. >please be gentle to the nazis <implying that mods don't make mistakes and ban people for bad reasons Learn how to orange text nigger. >not quality LOL board quality would probably improve as they would unite against a common foe instead of constant infighting >it's literally no different than if you tried to convert people from fucking r/The_Donald. You clearly don't realize that r/The_Donald are a lot less fascistic than actual /pol/niggers m8.
>>5721 i'd rather convert /pol/ people than /r/the_donald types
>>5739 How irrational.
(31.32 KB 750x192 banned.png)
(19.28 KB 591x218 bannedxd.png)
Can someone defend this ban? It was my literally only post in the conversation about ethots and I got banned because I don't uncritically support people who sell nudes and panties online
>>5748 >sex workers are capitalists They not capitalists, and they aren't petite-bourgeois either. Your take is conservative and pretty retarded. You don't need to "uncritically" support anyone, but you're just wrong and spreading conservative hate for no good reason. Your ban has expired already.
>>5750 They specifically profit off of limiting access to a commodity i.e. intellectual property i.e. a form of property The conversation wasn't about prostitutes or sex workers it was specifically on people who live off of selling nudes which I contend is not sex work and is certainly not proletariat You proceed to 1. not address their rentiership 2. not even read my post because I said onlyfans thots are capitalists not sex workers in general just like the janny did 3. can barely read because the ban expires in 3 hours not already but sure just call my take conservative and retarded and shut me down Tell me, will the socialist utopia have copyright laws? Will there be people who profit off the artificial scarcity of commodities such as movies, pictures, and books? These are all objects which cost nothing to reproduce therefore their cost should be zero and why places such as the piratebay and libgen are a boon. Do you really think a group of people whose entire scheme is predicated upon copyright law will support those that want to make their occupation unprofitable?
>>5751 I'm the vol that banned you. >onlyfans thots are capitalists Selling/renting your body or pictures of you doesn't make you a capitalist. This is just a wrong take which is being used to justify hate. >can barely read because the ban expires in 3 hours not already Oh ffs, forgive me for not seeing the GMT-4. >will the socialist utopia have copyright laws? Literally irrelevant. ought/is. >Do you really think a group of people whose entire scheme is predicated upon copyright law will support those that want to make their occupation unprofitable? Yes.
>>5751 To answer your shitty takes on /IG/ thread. >That means JK Rowling is a QUEEN PROLE. btfo! Most people on onlyfans use it to pay for basic shit, like college, rent, and health related costs. Pretending that most people who sell their images on onlyfans are petit-bourg is frankly ridiculous.
>>5752 >Selling/renting your body or pictures of you doesn't make you a capitalist. This is just a wrong take which is being used to justify hate. >Selling/renting >doesn't make you a capitalist. You're a fucking joke you know that? There is absolutely nothing tying these people to proletariats: they don't have their surplus value extracted. they own their own means of production, they don't exchange labor for a wage. Meanwhile they accumulate wealth from exchanging, for money, commodities that only have value because of copyright law that benefit solely the bourgeoisie. Take a hypothetical, Belle Delphine hires a professional photographer for $40 dollars or whatever, gets pictures taken of herself then proceeds to take these pictures and sell them online making let's say $4000. This is a textbook case of labor exploitation but suuuuuure onlyfans posters are 100% prole >Do you really think a group of people whose entire scheme is predicated upon copyright law will support those that want to make their occupation unprofitable? >Yes. Well then praise comrade Rowling, I mean after all she is doing the same thing. She could have released the harry potter series online for free and release it into the public domain, but she kept it under IP law lock and key and became a millionaire off of it. Truly she has the same material interest as the of the proletariat fuck you, resign janny
>>5753 >Most people on onlyfans use it to pay for basic shit, like college, rent, and health related costs. I literally do not care, I would have an issue with capitalists even if they donated all of their wealth away leaving only the bare essentials for themselves The fact that you think the issue with capitalists is one of scale is fucking laughable to your understanding of marxism also that isn't me in the eceleb general, afterall i am banned and would never engage in ban evasion :)
>>5753 >Most people on onlyfans use it to pay for basic shit, like college, rent, and health related costs. LOL did you not hear about that one chick who was able to buy a farily large house just from her onlyfans money? Sit down.
>>5752 >justify hate. Thats literally the argument radlibs use.
>>5754 You're wrong, anon. There are some writers who are bourg, some who are petit, some who are dirt poor hobbyists. You're basically saying, ALL writers are bourg because they at some point exploit the labor of someone? That's ridiculous. >>5755 >The fact that you think the issue with capitalists is one of scale is fucking laughable to your understanding of marxism No, u. Seriously. Do you seriously think that a person who sells hot dogs on street corners is petit too, just because he buys at a cheaper price and sells at a higher price? >>5756 >that one chick ok. opinion discarded. >>5757 Quote it in its entirety. >a wrong take which is being used to justify hate. And fuck off.
>>5754 Uber drivers also own their own MoP.
I bet this janny is a thot with an onlyfans based on how hard theyre defending the concept
>>5758 >You're basically saying, ALL writers are bourg because they at some point exploit the labor of someone? No you cretin read again, writers profit off of artificial scarcity imposed by intellectual property law which is incompatible with socialism. They would naturally be against socialism because they build wealth by a mechanism unique to the capitalist system. >No, u. Seriously. Do you seriously think that a person who sells hot dogs on street corners is petit too, just because he buys at a cheaper price and sells at a higher price? Did you know many hot dog vendors in nyc average over 100k a year in income? That the most expensive permit to sell hot dogs in central park costs nearly 300k a year and they still turn a profit? Yes they are bourgeoisie and like I said the fact that you think it is an issue of scale just speaks to your retardation. >that one chick >ok. opinion discarded. simp janny fuck you, submit your resignation
>>5762 Just googled it >) Last year’s occupant paid $415,000 a year for the Met stands plus at least $25,000 for supplies and labor, and didn’t go under—so we can assume he brought in significantly more than $440,000. Hot dog vendors are proles tho guys
>>5762 >which is incompatible with socialism. ought/is >They would naturally be against socialism because they build wealth by a mechanism unique to the capitalist system. speculation >Did you know many hot dog vendors in nyc average over 100k a year in income? >nyc hot dog vendors are comparable to all vendors around the world. therefore hot dog vendors are, and I quote >Yes they are bourgeoisie sighs. >fuck you, submit your resignation I resign arguing with you. >>5763 lmfao. you are a joke.
>>5764 >which is incompatible with socialism. >ought/is it is not ought it is strictly is >therefore hot dog vendors are, and I quote You're a fucking ultra liberal that would be okay with capitalism if we returned to pre-industrial guilds I mean after all a master craftsman only makes enough to live right? Surely they would never want build wealth. Surely a hot dog vendor who can invest hundreds of thousands of dollars for a vendor's permit and proceed to straight up build wealth in the M-C-M' cycle is a full blooded prole You're a fucking joke of a leftist you know that?
(137.13 KB 539x558 S.png)
>>5764 >lmfao. you are a joke. t. no argument(s)
>>5764 Let this sink in because it has really fucking thrown me for a loop You are defending copyright law You are defending intellectual property You are defending what amounts to ownership of private property for no good reason There is debate here, communism is communal ownership of property and this includes the domain of intellectual property You proceed to call it speculation or is/ought or whatever just because women good and you must uncritically support woman's copyright You can't even string an argument against it but just sit at your computer with a monkey brain bashing the keyboard and yet they gave you mod powers. What a fucking joke
>>5766 >this is incompatible with socialism <we live in capitalism >muh nyc hot dog vendors literally represent the average street vendor in the world *yawn* >>5769 >things ought to be like communism >if you state that people work using the current capitalist structure, that means you defend copyright law >>5768 Omg, you're right, I'm defending the 💰💰💰global hot dog bourgeoisie💰💰💰. I'm honestly out. I have better things to do. This ban has expired anyways.
>>5771 Nigger, if people directly benefit from the capitalist structure and would directly malefit from the implementation of socialism means they would generally as a group be against the proletariat. This isn't fucking controversial at all >if you state that people work using the current capitalist structure, that means you defend copyright law Onlyfans posters literally are not working, they are not laboring, they are benefiting from capitalist policies designed to defend capitalist interest because their entire grift is from being a capitalist with regards to selling access to pictures You dumb cunt haven't addressed this neither when I first posted it in /eceleb/ nor throughout this entire thread Learn to form a coherent thought dumbfuck
>>5771 btw I'm still not unbanned and you disallow actual marxist discussion from taking place about the class nature of sex workers/sexual workers You're a detriment to the site
>>5777 >>if you state that people work using the current capitalist structure, that means you defend copyright law Onlyfans posters literally are not working, they are not laboring, they are benefiting from capitalist policies designed to defend capitalist interest because their entire grift is from being a capitalist with regards to selling access to pictures This applies to absolutely anybody making something in a digital format you can replicate though. It applies to people making any kind of media, doing any kind of writing including scientific papers. The end result is digital content that is or could be behind a paywall they are now "capitalist" because they are selling a commodity. But that's not what makes someone a capitalist. Someone who sells something they made independently is more or less outside the class system, but in most cases e-thots and content creators in general go through some capitalist company as an intermediary - a hosting service typically. This service generally takes a cut of sales, which is rent or surplus extraction depending on how you want to look at it. But since it's the company that owns the infrastructure allowing distribution of the product, they are controlling the MoP (specifically distribution) which makes them a capitalist and the person selling the products a worker.
>>5754 >Take a hypothetical, Belle Delphine hires a professional photographer for $40 dollars or whatever, gets pictures taken of herself then proceeds to take these pictures and sell them online making let's say $4000. This is a textbook case of labor exploitation but suuuuuure onlyfans posters are 100% prole People don't pay for those photos because the photography is good. They pay for them because they're pictures of Belle Delphine. Yes, without the photographer she can't sell photos, but on the other hand without her as the model the photographer probably couldn't take photos of something that sell for anything like $4000. In this case you are describing something that requires multiple inputs of labor, just like a house involves labor of builders and painters and roofers. And while it may seem to you like posing is not real work, it requires you to stand for long periods making repetitive motions according to a desired result.
>>5783 >while it may seem to you like posing is not real work, it requires you to stand for long periods making repetitive motions according to a desired result. Know how I know you're a female?
Also are we not going to talk about how onlyfans ethots not only exploit capitalism to their advantage, but they often exploit pedophilic and dd/lg themes such as belle delphine dressing like a child and all her set looking like its in a childs room. Totes prole.
>>5790 Your absence is a blessing.
jannies are way too sensitive about trannies. and the e-thot simp is literally simping, pathetic beyond that the moderation here is honestly not that bad. they're even starting to ban the anti-China glowies, which has been a very pleasant surprise
(141.53 KB 479x269 leddit.png)
>>5771 >Omg, you're right, Hint- making snarky, passive aggressive comments doesn't make you right. pic related >I'm defending the 💰💰💰global hot dog bourgeoisie💰💰💰. That's not what was being stated by him, but ok, whatever helps you save face.
>>5784 I'm not female lol. But I'm guessing the only labor you've done was at a keyboard. Fun fact, the time a bodybuilder is most likely to be injured is while posing.
>>>/leftypol/728135 Soyjak was too much for this mod and he cracked at the seams
(809.66 KB 1280x720 XSKQbR7.png)
>>5753 Imagine living in a world where human contact and concepts along the lines of love and affection are basically boiled down to a financial transaction and calling yourself a socialist
>>5753 JK Rowling was in fact a prole when she started writing Harry Potter. Right up until she started collecting royalties for the IP she was a prole, and when she sold the movie rights for a huge cut she transitioned from petty bourgeois to full blown bourgeois. Even still she is just barely a billionaire, along with Paul McCartney and a handful of other very successful proles-to-start-with. This kind of social mobility is possible but exceedingly rare. But JK Rowling is bourgeois because of her ability to leverage her labor into class mobility, not because of the nature of that labor. Most writers are proles.

Delete
Report

no cookies?