-9

u/sudo, this isnt their first time

Submitted by zombie_berkman in TrollDissection

so this isnt the first time they have caused a ruckus here.

  • 4 months ago they made a big deal (and falsely) about the warrant canary: https://raddle.me/f/meta/5659/false-alarm-the-warrant-canary-is-fine

  • 2 months ago they made a power grab at f/science and got overwhelmingly opposed for various stuff like supporting the dprk, lieing about supporting monsanto, it being pointed out they just did a power grap about f/freeasinfreedom, for being a "dick near his libertarian fellows", and apparently supporting elon musk (not sure about this one)

  • which brings me to the next point of sudo being a mod in f/reeasinfreedom where it was never announced and they repeatedly called free software "open source" until i partitioned the change. for being a mod of a f that is dedicated to free software, not knowing the difference is pretty unbelievable.

  • then 24 days ago they partition for anonymous posting which overwhelmingly gets opposed: https://raddle.me/f/meta/16180/vote-should-anonymous-posting-be-a-feature-of-raddle

  • 2 weeks ago they went full liberal and vocally anti-anarchist in this hot take: https://raddle.me/f/lobby/16920/violent-direct-action-without-proper-education-and-agitation with some of the following goodies: "Had the German masses been properly educated about communism, then this action could have served as a rallying point to inspire more people to take up arms against the German state. But, since the masses were not educated about communism, Hitler exploited this situation by claiming it was a communist plot to take over Germany, which turned public opinion against the communists."

"It always seems to be anarchists who advocate for immediate direct action like this. ... "Anyone who opposes violent direct action for any reason must be a liberal or a fascist." These last two are beneath comment." "But I'm not talking to the masses right now, I'm talking to anarchists and communists, who understand what those words mean."

"The only true imperialists are those in power."

"Well, I guess I agree with Trotsky when he's debunking anarchism."

im sure i missed a bunch but that was just a quick rundown of their troll behavior

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

12

Enkara wrote (edited )

If I had to guess I'd say sudo is either young person, newby lefty, or both... and/or neurodiverse in some way. I don't think they're a troll, since troll means someone who revels on pissing off others and doing it for funsies. I think they just like.... have unusual and sometimes wrong ideas and no filter. The bringing up anarcho/tank beef from a month ago is pretty suss but I'm not convinced they're just trying to troll at this point...

I support being pedantic about warrant canaries though.

2 months ago they made a power grab at f/science and got overwhelmingly opposed for various stuff like supporting the dprk, lieing about supporting monsanto, it being pointed out they just did a power grap about f/freeasinfreedom, for being a "dick near his libertarian fellows", and apparently supporting elon musk (not sure about this one)

wait do they like... actually support the dprk? Wew..... I'd be interested in more evidence of this paragraph in general, power grabbiness is really unattractive to me these days and we should employ a system of collectivized side-eyes for those wrapped up in it imo.

To be clear, I'm not arguing against anyone getting banned, just that I don't agree they are necessarily a troll.

11

Catsforfun wrote (edited )

With regards to people who are new to leftism, it can be a long process of deconstructing beliefs, falsehoods, behaviors impressed upon us by the violent world we live in. It definitely took me a while to completely understand some things, and I absolutely appreciate users who had patience with me and didn't just outright discard or reject me because I didn't understand something or had a problematic understanding of something, or phrased something in a way that may not have been as sensitive as I'd wanted to come across. It's a learning process and if we don't allow for and support people in their learning process then that is crappy praxis.

edit- although with regards to this particular situation, idk, I'm just talking about in general

6

selver wrote

Yeah I was such a dipshit for a while, way moreso than now, and lots of people who got radicalized on the internet as a teenager are that way. I'm pretty sympathetic to young fanatics and their horrible takes.

4

SpiritOfTito wrote (edited )

What do you mean by support the dprk?

Because I fully support the dprks right to exist. If people are unhappy I hope they overthrow the Kims.

It should be up to the citizens of dprk to do that Not the imperialist whims of others.

But in nearly 80 years the Great Satan (US) has invaded over 70 nations with untold death and misery. Untold death squads in Latin america. The dropping of more bombs on cambodia, laos and vietnamese than the entire pacific theatre of ww2. The destruction of Libya, iraq, afghanistan and now Yemen.

Heres a list of the nations dprk has invaded in 80 years:

Rok

And if you want to talk about dprk as a batshit, enclosed state I'm all for it. As long you mention first that the Great Satan murdered 20 percent of their population in the Korean war and didn't leave "one brick standing on top of another" in their relentless bombing campaign.

4

Enkara wrote

See.... this is a problem I have with tanks... like I can't just say "DPRK is terrible" without one of you being like "But america is worse! Imperialism!!!".

Like... I fucking know the US is bad I'm a goddamn anarchist, I'm not taking US's side, and for the record, I DO NOT support DPRK's right to exist, or the US's right to exist, both are evil murderous states in their own way.

0

SpiritOfTito wrote

I'm not a tankie.

I just assert its up to the people of the dprk to depose their government not you or some other bootlicking yankee

4

Enkara wrote

How exactly am I licking boots? For not liking DPRK?

Yeah obv the US bombing the fuck out of NK would make things worse.

But if comrades in NK were asking for your help would you not? No sense of international solidarity? Why do borders matter?

1

SpiritOfTito wrote (edited )

Let me clarify. I don't like the DPRK either but it is point blank not my place to say anything other about the place than to say "no war with DPRK".

The DPRK became a batshit enclosed society off the back of the US wiping out 20 percent of their population.

Imagine (if you're american) what that would do to your society if 1 in 5 people you know was murdered by, say, Iranian bombs in the 1950s. Do you think the psychological trauma would still be deeply embedded in your country?

My assumption would be: it would for any country .

But if comrades in NK were asking for your help would you not? No sense of international solidarity? Why do borders matter?

It matters because the americans think they have the right to invade whereever they like under the pretext of "humanitarian intervention" and those that would normally be inclined to protest against a war with another nation are cowed into a corner of being labelled a "Saddam hussein/Assad/DPRK sympathiser/supporter!"

No society is better off where the US has invaded since 1945.

It is point blank not your place to say anything else other than "No war with dprk". Anything else, quite frankly, is just shoring up the status quo for the resident Dotard in office to go to war with the DPRK under the pretext of "weapons of mass destruction" so they can encircle China (and Russia who also shares a border) for geopolitical looting.

No sense of international solidarity?

I protest to ensure my country doesn't get on the invade and destroy train the US is drumming up. I've no intention of engaging in politics of a country I know nothing about and is a closed society (unsurprisingly) because of what the Jackboots in the US did to it in the 1950s.

Every leftist shoudl be an anti-imperialist before they're a communist/anarchist etc.

However bad capitalism is imperialism is much, much worse.

4

Enkara wrote

I'm not talking about a fucking US invasion, jesus zombie christ... As I said, OBVIOUSLY THAT WOULD BE BAD.

I just asked you, if the people of NK asked for help, would you support helping them? I am not talking about nation-states here, I am talking about fucking individual radical humans. Look at Rojava, do you call that an imperialist invasion by international volunteers who have gone there to fight alongside YPG and YPJ against ISIS?

It is so my fucking place to call an authoritarian shithole with deathcamps an authoritarian shithole with deathcamps, that doesn't mean I support a US-fucking-invasion.

Contrary to everything your ideological socialization has told you "the masses" are not just a bunch of fucking idiots who can't handle an ounce of nuance.

-2

SpiritOfTito wrote (edited )

you mean Rojava that did a deal with the US for a military base?

Spitshine those boots with your tongue cos you missed a bit

1

martasultan wrote

you mean like the soviet union that did a deal with the US for military supplies

-4

zombie_berkman wrote

They are now telling people to not shoplift because there is a risk associated with it in the f they just became the sole mod of. There are either a complete dumbass or a troll

10

jadedctrl wrote (edited )

4 months ago they made a big deal (and falsely) about the warrant canary

So their crime was being too concerned about the sanctity and security of raddle. How evil, how troll-like, obviously. /s

got overwhelmingly opposed for various stuff like supporting the dprk

They never said "I support the DPRK." They clarified in the thread:

I don't support Kim Jong-Un - cults of personality are bad. But I do support the people of the DPRK in their struggle against US imperialism.

Take from that what you will-- but "supporting the DPRK" and that are not 1/1.

they went full liberal and vocally anti-anarchist in this hot take

/u/sudo criticized the methods they used. It wasn't "full liberal," it was a genuine reflection on the methods anarchists used and why they think it was ineffective, and how they believe improvements could be made.

they repeatedly called free software "open source"

Yea, I remember that, actually. Wasn't ideal, but is a common mistake and really isn't a big deal. They started using Free when it was pointed out.

then yesterday they went full liberal and saying protesting pipelines is useless

JFC mate, at the rate you toss "liberal" around it'll mean literally nothing in ten minutes. They were criticizing the protests in the interest of rather directing energies toward attacking the root cause of the problem-- the use of fossil fuels and the economic system that enables it.
I don't agree with them either, but that's certainly not "full liberal," it's just a leftist opinion you disagree with.

im sure i missed a bunch but that was just a quick rundown of their troll behavior

If anyone here's acting like a troll, it's you. I've seen your username several times over the past 24 hours just attacking /u/sudo and stirring shit around. Not cool, comrade. Their only crime is having different politics from you. They've done nothing wrong as a member of this community, and has actually done excellently as a moderator and comrade.

Seriously, you should chill out and get off their back. I'm starting to think you might be a troll.

-7

zombie_berkman wrote

Yea, I remember that, actually. Wasn't ideal, but is a common mistake and really isn't a big deal. They started using Free when it was pointed out.

brb getting mod of trans then deadnameing and misgendering someone because its a "common mistake and really isnt a big deal"

fuck off chud, why do you let sudo do their own dirty work instead of licking their boots like a p_k sycophant

8

________deleted wrote

Can we stop throwing around the name pk to describe everyone we don't like? Pk is a veey specific type of liberal lowlife.

6

DissidentRage wrote (edited )

Godwin's Berkman's Law: As leftist dispute grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Hitler Prince_Kropotkin approaches 1.

3

DissidentRage wrote

2 weeks ago they went full liberal and vocally anti-anarchist in this hot take

I'd argue that not being able to critically analyze your own stance makes you sound kinda reactionary. They laid out a detailed post on why they hold that view and your responses range from an adage that would be good on a motivational poster to dismissing it out-of-hand as liberalism. A number of people in that thread did a better job of actually engaging the issues raised and actually discussing it. This keeps us honest and able to address each others' concerns. The only people that benefit from us being hostile to each other are libs and fash.

"Well, I guess I agree with Trotsky when he's debunking anarchism."

Okay, this is a needlessly sectarian sentiment and I think you have a point here.

then yesterday they went full liberal and saying protesting pipelines is useless

This is less liberalism and more addressing the present concern of inelastic demand in the existing system and how that affects normal people in the population who are not as politically inclined as we are.

and now they are bringing up old shit that was settled a month ago in a heavily upvoted and now brigaded thread here

It could be that the reason they're "bringing up old shit" is because you waited a month after the discussion had mostly disappeared from the collective consciousness of the community to make the unilateral decision without consulting fellow mods to ban someone on a premise on which the community did not agree with you (except for a couple people dogpiling).

-2

zombie_berkman wrote

i banned them after they brought it up. if they wouldnt have made the post they wouldnt have been banned. the ban came in AFTER their post not before.

the time line went jason called anarchist fascists trash, tankies brigaded r/sra and turned the place to shit, i said authoritarians arent welcome to be vocal in f/armedleft, sudo was being a piece of shit and i warned them, 1 month goes by sudo makes a post crying about a post that was +14 and heavily upvoted, a brigade happens, i ban them for being a shit stirrer, and we are here now.

so when you say i "waited a month after the discussion had mostly disappeared from the collective consciousness of the community to make the unilateral decision without consulting fellow mods to ban someone on a premise on which the community did not agree with you (except for a couple people dogpiling)." that never happened and is factually false

2

DissidentRage wrote

All the threads I'm seeing came after both the entry in the moderation log and the transparency thread you created to announce your banning of sudo. It also doesn't look like sudo was being a piece of shit, unless you count disapproving of banning by association as being a piece of shit.

-3

zombie_berkman wrote (edited )

is this a fucking joke? i banned them 20 hours ago and their thread is a day old. i banned them 4 hours after their post.

edit: zombie_berkman moderator banned sudo (expires: Never). Reason: "you arent going to start shit here" — December 19, 2017 at 1:51 AM

A bit late, but should the mods of /f/ArmedLeft be allowed to ban Marxist-Leninists and Maoists from their forum just because of their ideology?

Submitted by sudo at December 18, 2017 at 10:33 PM in meta (edited at December 19, 2017 at 2:17 AM)