Just the very starkest most ratiocinationary combination of a contrarian red herring and a false dilemma

yeah dude the reason people think MDMA isn’t worse than meth is that it isn’t their heart rate they’re worried about with habit-forming meth consumption

It’s all a system. None of that shit is organic. Even on /r/SSC TP0 and Kirkegaard had to pretend they didn’t actually know each other personally

These people are racism Trotskyists

For a moment I thought I’d replied in the wrong context, but it looks like I just straight up replied to the wrong thing. My bad either way

Ooooh somehow I replied to your reply to the comment rather than to the comment (originally replying to me)

I was mostly referring to comments like yours

It’s more that I think the whole discussion is completely head-ass

Nobody who knows anything about the sub should think it’s remotely worth asking beyond “I guess a mod did that”, it’s literally always been this way

No, I’ve done a lot of research here and it may be time

I just think, and perhaps this is just me, that it is weird, conspiratorial, speech to summarise your research into this question as, paraphrasing, ‘I found out one of the old mods has gone alt right’ and nothing more

It’s also defensive speech to say “people are allowed to comment on the vibe”. I know they’re allowed to comment on the vibe! I think they’re weird for detecting a bad/weird vibe! I think it’s indicative of a conspiratorial framing! There is so little information to go on in these speculations, and literally none of it out of keeping with ordinary goings on at SneerClub, for anyone remotely invested in anything that has ever gone on there

Similarly, I found your speech to frame the question itself conspiratorially, as if the fact that one of the old mods has hints of having gone alt right - despite having nothing to do with any recent posts on the subreddit - is worth mentioning at all, certainly not as the only thing of note that your research turned up

Answer on a postcard

Throwing in that comment about Son_of_Sophroniscus was pretty out there! My roll would be pretty damn slow had you just left that out. But instead we’ve got that, people talking about a “weird/bad vibe”, reading tea leaves all over the shop…

But even in just your own case, it seems like the opposite of not jumping to conclusions to throw in references to old mods going alt right that bear absolutely zero relationship to any of the handful of posts on the “resurrected” sub

“Why, for fuck’s sake?”, as an illucutionary act, seems to do a lot more than simply “asking the obvious question”

But it is, indeed, in typical reddit fashion to omit that sort of thing from one’s own complaint about the response one got to one’s provocation, notwithstanding the traditional SneerClub response to user’s complaints, which is of course “if you want to leave, but can’t, we can help with that”

People are still subscribed to the subreddit. When a post gets made, it goes on their reddit feed. Lots of mobile users in particular will just have seen it pop up while doomscrolling.

All I know is one fundamental thing: between 49 to 100 per cent of you are all fucking nuts.

/u/completely-ineffable, who founded the sub, and closed the sub a year ago, literally just made a post! That’s all that happened! I’m distantly in touch with that person! Everything is fine! In fact I’d almost be tempted to theorise it was all a dumb ruse to see if you lot turned out to be crazy people!

And it seems to have worked wonders!

Who even put the term “resurrected” in there? It’s one post, followed by a smattering of others including posts bickering about the supposed resurrection! What monstrous goings on are people permitting themselves to imagine?

Smart, funny people create good times

Good times attract unfunny morons

Unfunny morons create bad times

Bad times attract smart, funny people

Very glad to see the sub being run exactly as it was always supposed to be.

Giziti was made a mod to take pressure off the modteam, along with David Gerard (who also founded this place). The inference you’re drawing that they’re hostile seems wrong: it’s targeted not at this place but at people using the existence of this place to spam fediverse garble on the subreddit, demanding new rules to link to the fediverse(!)

I would have thought anyone who regularly posted on the sub in the last 7 years or so would be well aware that there were effectively two active moderators, only one of whom - the founder and head mod /u/completely-ineffable - is still on reddit, and who made the first new post (being “The EA Case for Trump”)

Two further moderators were added shortly before the AI reddit fuckaround which spawned this place, with one of them being David Gerard (who formally spawned this place)

A conclusion I am genuinely surprised to see nobody drawing is obvious: a mod just decided to post something, and turned on comments on for the sake of comments. What’s the deal with trying to figure that out as if it’s some kind of high level management decision?

lmao, are you doing a bit? What the fuck could you possibly know, and why didn’t you check the easily checkable history of the sub’s modlist? The fact that you felt compelled to make this up should, frankly, embarrass you away from offering your comments on anything to do with either the sub or this instance at all

But that’s just the thing! Nietzche’s fundamental innovation is to view all of these things: morality, politics, economics, indeed any kind of social or philosophical question through an incredibly narrowly psychological lens. It’s his obsessive persistence in this, and his excessive sensitivity to the deep irrationality in human nature (I hesitate to go with many people in saying “brilliance”, because what’s “brilliance”?), which makes him such a powerful critic of Western culture. For Nietzsche, the entire history of the world is nothing more than the history of individual sick people working out their issues, and generally doing badly.

But Siskind doesn’t have any of that, because he can only think in terms of a shallow combination of overcoming bias and his own unexamined prejudices. Siskind’s problem is that he doesn’t even view the psychological psychologically.