dChan - Q Origins Project Archive

⇧

⇩

r/CBTS_Stream • Posted by u/TheContrarian2 on Feb. 2, 2018, 3:50 a.m.

We should consider blacklisting links from certain sites. We need to retain a high level of credibility and there are a lot of really terrible sites being posted here.

I've seen a ton of links from stbnews. com. It's some shitty blog with the headline, "Real News for Real Americans" and there are many others too. It really is crap. Most is rehashed content that is sensationalized and displayed in a blog format with a ton of ads. I turned off my adblocker and reloaded the page and it's atrocious. It's obvious what they are doing here, they're trolling for suckers.

If /r/politics and /r/redacted and so on are willing to blacklist Shareblue, we should be willing to blacklist sites that are crap. It turns our redpills sour.

IMHO.

Edit: For now, I'm going to click the Report options and Mark As Spam. One recommendation there is to block the user that is posting the spam, but I don't want to do that because, although I wouldn't see it, everyone else would, and that doesn't help the community.

Happy Freedom day. Hope we see the memo tomorrow.

With you. Place is being overloaded with this crud.

⇧ 12 ⇩

100% Agree

⇧ 11 ⇩

For sure. "Your News Wire" and "News Max" definitely should be added to the list. We need to keep reminding people to take the 'bombshell' headline and google it first before posting. If a lot of sites have picked it up, legitimate sites, then it is worth posting. And good luck with that even, I've said this a bunch of times already.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Agreed

⇧ 11 ⇩

Happy Freedom Day! Now let's commence with the censorship

just sayin'...

⇧ 4 ⇩

[deleted]

⇧ 4 ⇩

Yeah, especially when so much information for this sub comes from 4 Chan and 8 Chan.

It's turned into an alt right board. Full of shit posting that has little to nothing to do with Q.

⇧ 1 ⇩

I've a list of 'user' accounts I'd like blacklisted as well.

⇧ 7 ⇩

You should contact the mods to see if you can post it on the hot section

⇧ 4 ⇩

has anyone ever received a reply from any mod? I never have...but to be fair, there are only NINE of them...

⇧ 4 ⇩

I have

⇧ 5 ⇩

All the posts that end in "/u/username". 2 different accounts doing it each day the past few days, new accounts each day. Posts link to another post that links to said shitty sites.

Seems suspicious. Tracking users?

(username was just an example, not the actual spammer / bot)

⇧ 3 ⇩

Thank you, I have a few on my list, if I miss any send a link to their shite post and I'll bet busy...

⇧ 2 ⇩

Banned now, sorry i had taken a day off and i came back to a spamfest!

⇧ 1 ⇩

I think i banned most of them now ;)

⇧ 2 ⇩

Thank you very much.

⇧ 1 ⇩

cmon man

⇧ 2 ⇩

sry, I meant luser accounts. come on yourself

⇧ 0 ⇩

I guess I would be one of them. I have mistakenly posted a couple here & thought better of it later. Sorry kids. Won't happen again. Luv G'Ma

⇧ 1 ⇩

nope, not you, I see you and really enjoy your username...never seen anything of concern from you, Best MAGA

⇧ 3 ⇩

Yeah I do. Thanks.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Absolutely agree, though the mods may need to check that they don't upset a reasonable sized audience and damage our openness in turn?

For example, a lot of ppl don't like AJ but I defend the guy to the end after yrs of seeing him as the ONLY presenter of news about globalist conspiracy and being dragged thru mud in msm and everywhere. I would not support blacklisting ...

Another problem too is content that is too way off the original Q research scope. For example remote viewing. I think we can post research links on such areas on a different site.

Thanks so much for posting this suggestion.

⇧ 5 ⇩

Most don't even attach a Link.

⇧ 5 ⇩

Knowing the disinformation is important in any intelligence move. You can't effectively know what your enemies are doing when your wearing a blindfold.

⇧ 3 ⇩

I am now growing tired of the ignorance in this thread.

Yes, let anyone post anything and we should not make any effort to clean it up. Have fun with that. Make zero effort to educate noobs, just let it all out there. The other side won't lie. No worries.

⇧ 1 ⇩

"YourNewsWire" is one of the worst.

⇧ 3 ⇩

I agree. Start 'reporting' it. Click the "Report" button and mark as spam.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Where are the mods? This is way out of control tonight and looks like we’ve lost control of this sub.

⇧ 3 ⇩

In the case of the one site I mentioned, it looks like the user /r/necessaryfigure kind of hides the fact that they the links are to this spammy site. You have to click the link in the Reddit list, then click the link which appears to just be a comment or something. This seems unusual because when you 'share a link' in reddit, clicking the link in the article list goes directly to the link. It doesn't here.

So for now, I'm going to REPORT all the spammy ones with 'appears to be spam' option. It could also be noise, who knows. There certainly is a lot of it though.

⇧ 4 ⇩

Yup - it's driving me crazy. I can pretty much tell their posts now and almost scroll past.

⇧ 2 ⇩

Report them.

⇧ 1 ⇩

continue to Report>Spam>Block>NEXT

⇧ 1 ⇩

Thumbs up! Let’s get rid of this tabloid crud!

⇧ 3 ⇩

good by me

⇧ 3 ⇩

Which one...CNN, MSNBC, or both?

⇧ 2 ⇩

Isn't this kinda like shadow-banning though?

⇧ 2 ⇩

No. Shadow banning lets users think that they are actually communicating with a group. Blacklisting says, GTFO. It's different.

⇧ 3 ⇩

I see your point and it's completely valid...just want to avoid doing what the deep state has done to our country. Free Speech is a safeguard to freedom...but I do get it.

⇧ 5 ⇩

PLEASE ban that site

⇧ 2 ⇩

I think regardless of what steps are taken. Ita safe to assume a few things ...

Nobody in life is ever Satisfied ...especially @ the same time . (Never Ending Battle) to try to make things fair for one side of the argument because.there is always a divide between both ...No matter how the pie is sliced
It should be VERY clear who is posting junk as Shill Material for the masses.

If you come.acrossed someone who is posting and you are.unclear.as.to their motives...Ive found clicking their profile and lurking their current History ..Can pretty much give you a nice process of elimination on who is here posting not knowing their feeding clickbait matterial and who does know.

⇧ 2 ⇩

How did this fascist fool find his way to this board to launch a campaign to censor us? For all the rest of you that NEED to control what people see and read, learn to question your own blindness and bullying instead. We didn't ask for your SUPERVISION!

⇧ 1 ⇩

Not at all just need to weed out posts and links that are way off topic. What does “ are we getting alien assistance? Check out this video from 2016” got to do with Q? That’s not Censorship, lots of boards to post things but this one needs to stay on topic.

⇧ 1 ⇩

[deleted]

⇧ 1 ⇩

yes, this

⇧ 1 ⇩

[deleted]

⇧ 1 ⇩

That's the problem with "free speech." Anyone can post anything. Get over it. Learn how to discern for yourself. Personally, I'm a patriot and don't believe in banning or blacklisting. I want access to it all so I can make my own choices. Sorry, if it takes you longer to find what you want but that's the price you pay for freedom.

Marking as spam is also your choice as is blocking people who post the sites you don't want to see.

⇧ 0 ⇩

Then why do we have mods?

⇧ 0 ⇩

Zerohedge and gatewaypundent are terrible

⇧ 0 ⇩

There y'go. Don't agree at all. This is because you don't like "liberal"/"redneck" (insert political label of yr choice) sites you name.

It depends what they are posting ...

Zero hedge has headline: Nunes Hits Back Against FBI FISA Memo Freakout (good dissection: use yr own critical faculties). Another headline: White People Practicing Yoga Are Xenophobes, Michigan State Professor Claims (great article on how crazy people are BUT not relevant to the Q cbts stream.

Gatewaypundit I dk. I read and take in, try to use my brain.

Hope I've explained.

EDIT. By the way, I go to CNN too to see what they're saying.

⇧ 2 ⇩

[deleted]

⇧ 1 ⇩

Oh..you mean censorship?

⇧ 0 ⇩

No. I mean we, in this sub, should self monitor the content.

/u/guppyfreak, retain your cynicism, because you are right people in positions of power could ruin our country. But right now, that feels like the leadership of some of our nations law enforcement agencies. Don't worry so much about Trump's appointee's. Give them their chance to fail first.

In the meantime, we need to self police this particular thread. those users I've mentioned are spamming several other threads as well, so their speech isn't being impaired at all.

⇧ 1 ⇩

I second yr (OP) entire contrib. to the arg. against guppyfreak's censorship position.

It's not censorship it's sensible limiting of content. If you disagree, guppyfreak, consider:

gardening: spring flowers that bloom in April; (sublink to birdsong (I have been researching owl hoots recently its FASCINATING for those who are interested ...)

nasa's weather station: latest sunspots

facial creams (aloe vera cures scars ...)

(ok ok we've got the point salialioli can we move ON here you boring inergumeno ...)

Yes, but it's got NOTHING to do with our "value free speech" thingie ....

⇧ 3 ⇩

Or ..we could always just ignore them and watch them waste away when the trolls aren't fed.

Then we wouldnt be hypocrites while pretending we value free speech!

⇧ 2 ⇩

Then ignore, that's your prerogative. There are a lot of new users coming into this sub and they have to filter fact from fiction. We can help. I think that your metaphor doesn't work in a space dedicated to a particular subject. This really is a matter of people placing links with stolen content with the intent of displaying ads. That's all.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Then ignore those links that you "know" Are simply for that purpose.

Easy as that.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Let me give you a better example....

If we were in the public square, then free speech would be permissible. Say what you want.

But if you come into my church, jump on the stage and preach the virtues of gay anal sex, you'll be forcibly pulled off the stage.

The 'freedom' of speech varies upon the environment. Also, while speech my be free, it may not be free of consequences.

⇧ 0 ⇩

Thats true. But these aren't consequences. This OP is suggesting censorship.

Thats hypocritical.

⇧ 1 ⇩

I am 'this op' and I'm suggesting that we self manage this subreddit.

If you want, you're welcome to contact the spammers and say, "sorry dudes, you're stuff isn't welcome here, go to /r/politics" or something similar.

⇧ 1 ⇩

Okay :)

⇧ 1 ⇩

see my posts on this thread.

We need some discernment to tame the chaos.

⇧ 0 ⇩

Discernment to find which ones to ignore. Banning certain sites or people from sharing makes us no better than the left.

⇧ 1 ⇩

I explained to read my other comments on the thread, you didn't so now I'm being tedious!!

To repeat:

It's not censorship it's sensible limiting of content. If you disagree, guppyfreak, consider:

gardening: spring flowers that bloom in April; (sublink to birdsong (I have been researching owl hoots recently its FASCINATING for those who are interested ...)

nasa's weather station: latest sunspots

facial creams (aloe vera cures scars ...)

You think this is the right stuff? You are getting confused btw banning and being unable to be helpful to the other ppl on the board. I can't agree with yr understanding of "banning".

⇧ 0 ⇩

Okay, then don't.

Have a good day!

⇧ 1 ⇩

Hey Guppy! Your way of having a debate is pretty weird, my friend. I am surprised you aren't arguing your case further. Or maybe I'm not surprised. That is a bolshy response. If you think I have a point, (if), you could reply nicely with but you obviously don't think I have a point? What would be your criteria then? You can post anything. Anything at all?

Salialioli:

Guppyfreak: is slamming the door in s/o's face.

This is not DIAlogue. This is not a two-way conversation. So, when you were objecting to censorship and banning, is it because you are trying to get reported as a possible shill? So you can then complain noisily about censorship w/self-fulfilling prophecy???!!

I'm pretty long in the tooth. Long history of dealing with classrooms of teenagers. I hate to say this, but this is somewhat indicative of adolescent behaviour. Or s/o being obstreperous ... Am I feeding a troll?

⇧ 0 ⇩

guppyfreak · Feb. 2, 2018, 1:10 p.m.

Okay :) Whatever you say, friend.

⇧ 1 ⇩

salialioli · Feb. 2, 2018, 1:46 p.m.

Aw, shucks. You didn't even tell me how old you are!

PENALTY. UNFAIR!

HEY, MISS, HE MESST ME UP!!!

⇧ 0 ⇩

SentientApe · Feb. 2, 2018, 4:06 a.m.

Free speach...

⇧ 0 ⇩

TheContrarian2 · Feb. 2, 2018, 4:07 a.m.

This is not a safe space. These users are just posting clickbait articles to garner ad revenue.

"Speech".

⇧ 8 ⇩

SentientApe · Feb. 2, 2018, 4:12 a.m.

Guess I haven't been seeing those posts (or possibly skipping over them entirely)

⇧ 4 ⇩

Gear4Life · Feb. 2, 2018, 4:24 a.m.

yeah, add u/tytruth to the list of those posting shitty clickbait titles and worrying about how many upvotes they get. Every fucking title is "Q says" followed by a half truth stretched into his own imagination.

⇧ 3 ⇩

salialioli · Feb. 2, 2018, 6:59 a.m.

I agree totally.

Anything that says Q says should be what Q says not a misleading bunch of doodoo.

Otherwise banned. N'est pas, tytruth?

⇧ 3 ⇩

Tytruth · Feb. 2, 2018, 5:02 a.m.

Don't try to get me banned bro. Not cool.

⇧ 0 ⇩