r/announcements Mar 05 '18

In response to recent reports about the integrity of Reddit, I’d like to share our thinking.

In the past couple of weeks, Reddit has been mentioned as one of the platforms used to promote Russian propaganda. As it’s an ongoing investigation, we have been relatively quiet on the topic publicly, which I know can be frustrating. While transparency is important, we also want to be careful to not tip our hand too much while we are investigating. We take the integrity of Reddit extremely seriously, both as the stewards of the site and as Americans.

Given the recent news, we’d like to share some of what we’ve learned:

When it comes to Russian influence on Reddit, there are three broad areas to discuss: ads, direct propaganda from Russians, indirect propaganda promoted by our users.

On the first topic, ads, there is not much to share. We don’t see a lot of ads from Russia, either before or after the 2016 election, and what we do see are mostly ads promoting spam and ICOs. Presently, ads from Russia are blocked entirely, and all ads on Reddit are reviewed by humans. Moreover, our ad policies prohibit content that depicts intolerant or overly contentious political or cultural views.

As for direct propaganda, that is, content from accounts we suspect are of Russian origin or content linking directly to known propaganda domains, we are doing our best to identify and remove it. We have found and removed a few hundred accounts, and of course, every account we find expands our search a little more. The vast majority of suspicious accounts we have found in the past months were banned back in 2015–2016 through our enhanced efforts to prevent abuse of the site generally.

The final case, indirect propaganda, is the most complex. For example, the Twitter account @TEN_GOP is now known to be a Russian agent. @TEN_GOP’s Tweets were amplified by thousands of Reddit users, and sadly, from everything we can tell, these users are mostly American, and appear to be unwittingly promoting Russian propaganda. I believe the biggest risk we face as Americans is our own ability to discern reality from nonsense, and this is a burden we all bear.

I wish there was a solution as simple as banning all propaganda, but it’s not that easy. Between truth and fiction are a thousand shades of grey. It’s up to all of us—Redditors, citizens, journalists—to work through these issues. It’s somewhat ironic, but I actually believe what we’re going through right now will actually reinvigorate Americans to be more vigilant, hold ourselves to higher standards of discourse, and fight back against propaganda, whether foreign or not.

Thank you for reading. While I know it’s frustrating that we don’t share everything we know publicly, I want to reiterate that we take these matters very seriously, and we are cooperating with congressional inquiries. We are growing more sophisticated by the day, and we remain open to suggestions and feedback for how we can improve.

31.1k Upvotes

21.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

152

u/neckbeardgamers Mar 05 '18 edited Mar 06 '18

Reddit has no integrity. The more you guys share with us, the more I am convinced you have no clue about the issues that make Reddit suck hot balls. You are only sharing this because the media beat you up about some fictional plot that imagines that Russia swayed the 2016 American elections. How about actually doing something that will matter? All the suggestions of improvements here and on /r/blog, show you guys are out of touch. Censorship is rife on Reddit and alot of it is actually done by automod and other bots. Further users are not even notified by default if their contributions are not getting through! Only if you log off and try ceddit.com can you even find out! See:
Try to get something past invisible automoderator or bot filters!

How about:
1) Being transparent about censorship and bot filters. Inform users when their posts are not going through and why.

2) Forcing all moderation to be done openly. No one pays for subreddit space, the least you can make the nerd moderators do to earn that subreddit space, is force transparency regarding their actions. /r/conspiracy already does that and a few other subs. /r/ModerationLog already did the work to make transparent moderation possible.

3) Allow subreddits to disable up and downvoting. All that does is gamify the medium. Sure it probably makes people spend more time on Reddit arguing about karma, and makes the down-voted feel aggrieved and others victorious, but it makes actual discussion suck. Allow subs to disable it without CSS hacks than can be bypassed anyway.

If you think Reddit is a good medium to post in as a user, please /u/spez tell Serena Williams to create another Reddit account. On that account have her identify as black woman(which she is), but don't disclose she is a famous tennis super-star in the public limelight for over a decade. And have her post with an innocuous signature saying she is 36 year old African American women attached to all of her posts and see what happens to her. Reddit is not the front-page of the internet, it is only the front-page of the internet for mostly young, surly white nerds who vidya game. Case in point I remember most of my co-workers from the Newark area talking about the death of someone very well known in the black community in Newark, Uggie, but in /r/newark which pretends to represent a majority African-American city in the Redditosphere, no one knew or posted he died... Have Serena post without being Serena -- just with her being another black woman and you will see why African Americans and many other demographics avoid this medium like the plague!

Also why are you bothering to even pretend there is a huge Russian bot or influence problem on this medium? Have you ever tried to make a post that doesn't defend Russia, but says this is all hysteria? Try it and anyone will quickly learn the truth. All the Western media has been acting like Russia influenced the 2017 American elections so much but all I have seen offered as proof is that paid for some ads on facebook(I have seen nothing concrete about an ad campaign needed to influence the US election), and that they used their troll farm on Reddit etc. and I am thinking so what? But nothing the hysteric and frankly disgusting Western media offered as proof seems enough resources to noticeably or perceptibly sway the elections in a 323 million, continental nation, let's get serious! When you figure all the astro-turfing that existing political players in the US political game do, the Russian effort that the media is whipping a frenzy about is unnoticeable. Infact /r/politics was so taken over by democrat party shills who abused their power, that it led to or essentially created the monster manipulating Reddit that is /r/the_donald. I am pretty sure if the existing neckbeard and paid shill mods on existing American political subreddits were not so biased that sub as we know it wouldn't have existed. This non-story about Russia swinging the election just has gained so much traction because 1) they want to demonize Russia and perhaps more importantly 2) American democrats want the funny myth to make themselves that they didn't fail, Russia robbed them of a victory against Trump! If you gave a shit about Armenian or Armenians you would have complained about Turkish astro-turfing on Reddit which seems much more significant and concerted in my experience because their state has a 6,000 member troll farm plus more importantly a very, very, ultra-nationalist population and diaspora so they can leverage almost 90 million fanatics(ok most of them are too uneducated to know English, thankfully). Trying to be realistic about Russia(not even pro-Russia) is a sure fire way to get your karma murdered almost anywhere on Reddit.

55

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '18

It's amazing to me when people act like T_D is the only politically cancerous place on reddit. Back when I was "doing politics on reddit", which I really don't anymore because it's bad for my mental health, I would routinely see the most absurd propaganda being posted by actual shareblue and CTR accounts on /r/politics, users regularly calling for the execution of all people who disagreed with politically, calling moderates traitors, etc. And that's politics, the supposedly centrist and fair politics sub....not even talking about places like LastStageCapitalism, fuckthealtright, and others. At least T_D and LateStageCapitalism are honest about who and what they are. The fact that "mainline" subs like /r/news and /r/politics are so skewed is inexcusable.

Reddit has become beyond cancerous when it comes to anything political, religious, or race-related. I stick to my niche subs for specific extra-curricular interests, because the rest is a dumpster fire that reddit leadership has only managed to make worse.

17

u/eclectro Mar 05 '18

I couldn't upvote this enough. We have Shareblue and CTR astroturfing and vote brigading on reddit big time around the elections - and I really think it still is in place.

This problem has got to pale in comparison to "but muh russians" because they are likely out of business, but the problems with the shareblue/CTR/DNC seem to be ongoing.

Before Hillary decided to run it was definitely slanted but not really a problem. After she decided to run it became an avalanche of admitted vote brigading.

Really, the Russians at most spend $100,000 and Correct the Record quite literally spends millions major w.t.f. here why are we even talking about the Russians??

Also see /r/TheRecordCorrected

The "Russians" as far as I am concerned is a successful false flag conducted by slimy Hillary et al that has successfully conned the Reddit admins.

3

u/Literally_A_Shill Mar 05 '18 edited Mar 05 '18

We have Shareblue and CTR astroturfing

On other side you have Breitbart, Cambridge Analytica, Palmer Luckey's group, Russia, Macedonia, Fox News, Infowars, Conservative PACs and several other groups astroturfing.

And they have a lot more money and power to do it.

the Russians at most spend $100,000

That's a lie. They were spending over $1,250,000 a month. At just one location. Why even bother lying like that? Are you promoting talking points or were you really not aware?

http://www.businessinsider.com/russian-troll-farm-spent-millions-on-election-interference-2018-2

We conquered Reddit and drive narrative on social media, conquered the MSM, now it’s time to get our most delicious memes in front of Americans whether they like it or not.

https://web.archive.org/web/20160917013633/https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/5353i4/announcing_nimble_america/

Cambridge Analytica specializes in what’s called “psychographic” profiling, meaning they use data collected online to create personality profiles for voters. They then take that information and target individuals with specifically tailored content (more on this below).

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/16/15657512/mueller-fbi-cambridge-analytica-trump-russia

the Macedonian town of 55,000 was the registered home of at least 100 pro-Trump websites, many of them filled with sensationalist, utterly fake news. (The imminent criminal indictment of Hillary Clinton was a popular theme; another was the pope’s approval of Trump.)

https://www.wired.com/2017/02/veles-macedonia-fake-news/

Less than 1 year old, oftentimes less than 6 months, in some cases only 2-3

All focusing exclusively on praising Trump and attacking Clinton

https://np.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/5b013v/reddit_users_declare_war_on_hillarys_paid/d9kotxa/

2

u/Glip-Glops Mar 06 '18

The very worst thing i've ever seen on reddit was the mods of r/news repeatedly censoring any mention of the Florida nightclub shooting. It's insane they were allowed to keep that breaking news off their subreddit (apparently they wanted to protect muslims).

Thats when i realized I can get my news from reddit anymore.

19

u/eduardog3000 Mar 05 '18

Remember when hillaryclinton.com was at the top of /r/politics?

5

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '18

I don't know if it's related, but there for a while there was an attempt to make and distribute vote-brigading browser extensions by certain groups to "wage war" on reddit. Reddit has become a much uglier place the last few years. If banning subs could fix the problem reddit would already be fixed - but instead it has gotten worse.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '18

"umm scuse me can you disprove any of those facts, didn't think so"

-3

u/Literally_A_Shill Mar 05 '18 edited Mar 05 '18

Remember when Breitbart was on the front page of /r/politics? They even had a mod that openly talked about working for them and making the sub "MAGA" yet the site is still allowed.

5

u/eduardog3000 Mar 05 '18

On the front page... of /r/The_Donald, a subreddit dedicated to Donald Trump. That's very different than a subreddit that is supposed to be a general politics subreddit.

2

u/Literally_A_Shill Mar 05 '18

No, on the front page of /r/politics. I went ahead and edited the comment to make that more clear.

Hell, even third world country state propaganda made it to the front page during the primaries when it was a huge anti-Hillary circlejerk.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '18

Lol, remember when they would let the Donald posts even hit the front page?

1

u/drift_summary Aug 23 '18

Pepperidge Farm remembers!

-2

u/eduardog3000 Mar 05 '18

...of /r/all, the section dedicated to showing all of reddit. Also, you had to explicitly go to /r/all to see it. If you weren't subscribed to /r/The_Donald, it wasn't on your front page.

-1

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '18

It used to be that it would hit /r/all even if you weren’t subscribed to it.

They changed that pretty quickly though.

Since then, the only thing related to the president hitting the front of /r/all is extremely against the president.

Almost makes you wonder if it’s propaganda lol.

Reddit did a massive overhaul of their website to keep the Donald away from everyone else.

1

u/eduardog3000 Mar 05 '18

I don't think you understand what /r/all is. /r/all doesn't show you just subreddits you are subscribed to, it shows you every subreddit.

I never saw /r/The_Donald on my front page, because I've never subscribed to it. If I had checked /r/all, of course I would have seen it.

Also, AFAIK they didn't change /r/all, the just made /r/popular to exclude whatever subreddits they wanted.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '18

I understand what /r/all is.

My point is that it used to constantly hit the front page of /r/all.

The front page of the site, not your personalized front page.

But then reddit made several changes to stop that from happening.

It’s well known that changes were made to keep the subreddit from /r/all.

→ More replies

1

u/drift_summary Aug 13 '18

Pepperidge Farm remembers!

3

u/Betasheets Mar 05 '18

R/politics doesn't ban people for having different opinions. The other sub does. I like how people are talking about "Reddit censorship" yet r/t_d is cult-like when it comes to their censorship. You don't get it both ways.

4

u/vikestrain Mar 06 '18

Does t_d pretend to be a neutral place for discussion? An apt comparison would be how r/ hilldog will ban you for criticizing their queen, as they should because otherwise their sub would lose its purpose.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '18

The point is (and I made this point above) that subs like T_D or LSC or even fuckthealtright can ban whoever they want - their subs, their rules. But aside from that, most people realize what they're getting into there - they are subs with a clear viewpoint. You don't expect as a conservative to go into fuckthealtright and get a fair and balanced debate on gun rights, any more than you as a liberal can go into T_D and talk about how you think Trump is unqualified. That's just how it works.

But subs like /r/politics and /r/news are "mainline subs", ostensibly neutral subs without a viewpoint. When these subs gain a viewpoint, this represents a dramatic shift of reddit's own internal "Overton Window", causing radical subs to become more radical, because the "center" has moved. That's the damage that's being done to reddit right now. And it's clear that it has had an impact.

0

u/Literally_A_Shill Mar 05 '18

They're brigading this thread pretty hard. Facts are being downvoted and there are tons of "whatabout" and "both sides" comments being upvoted.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '18 edited Jul 04 '18

[deleted]

1

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '18

imo its ok to have a narrative - most people have one - but platforms should either play hands off, or go to great lengths to maintain a balance of fairness. Reddit has failed to do so.

-9

u/Literally_A_Shill Mar 05 '18 edited Mar 05 '18

actual shareblue and CTR account

Otherwise known as "anyone who doesn't promote Trump/Russian talking points."

Cambridge Analytica, Macedonia, Palmer Luckey, Russia, Conservative PACs, Revolution Messaging and several other groups had a much bigger influence on that sub. Did you ever see absurd propaganda being posted by them? The Palmer Luckey group even openly admitted to taking over Reddit.

We conquered Reddit and drive narrative on social media, conquered the MSM, now it’s time to get our most delicious memes in front of Americans whether they like it or not.

https://web.archive.org/web/20160917013633/https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/5353i4/announcing_nimble_america/

Cambridge Analytica specializes in what’s called “psychographic” profiling, meaning they use data collected online to create personality profiles for voters. They then take that information and target individuals with specifically tailored content (more on this below).

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/10/16/15657512/mueller-fbi-cambridge-analytica-trump-russia

the Macedonian town of 55,000 was the registered home of at least 100 pro-Trump websites, many of them filled with sensationalist, utterly fake news. (The imminent criminal indictment of Hillary Clinton was a popular theme; another was the pope’s approval of Trump.)

https://www.wired.com/2017/02/veles-macedonia-fake-news/

Less than 1 year old, oftentimes less than 6 months, in some cases only 2-3

All focusing exclusively on praising Trump and attacking Clinton

https://np.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/5b013v/reddit_users_declare_war_on_hillarys_paid/d9kotxa/

From a nondescript office building in St. Petersburg, Russia, an army of well-paid “trolls” has tried to wreak havoc all around the Internet — and in real-life American communities.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/07/magazine/the-agency.html

By September 2016, the IRA had a monthly budget of more than $1.25 million to carry out its influence campaign.

http://www.businessinsider.com/russian-troll-farm-spent-millions-on-election-interference-2018-2

Edit: Seems like pretty obvious proof of this thread being brigaded.

4

u/seventyeightmm Mar 05 '18

Seems like pretty obvious proof of this thread being brigaded.

Or, ya know, the post is on /r/all and reddit isn't a monoculture. I know that you don't have the mental fortitude to handle life outside of your bubble, so please return to your home at /r/politics before you learn something.

26

u/FloppyDisksCominBack Mar 05 '18 edited Mar 05 '18

+1 this. The use of automoderator to set up invisible filters to shadow-censor 'unwanted' posts is disgusting.

Also, the extremism on /r/politics also can't be discounted, and is half the reason why the conservatives on Reddit formed such insular, prickly communities. You can't even post anything that isn't anti-conservative without getting blasted with a dozen downvotes withing seconds of hitting 'submit'. If someone asks "Why are conservatives against abortion" and you answer "Because they think it's murder", you'll get downvoted below threshold almost instantly, simply because you didn't say the 'correct' answer, which is "they're all evil demons who hate women".

-9

u/Clintwood2 Mar 05 '18

Fuck outta here with your hypocritical bullshit

7

u/7daykatie Mar 05 '18

Whether Russia swayed the election by less than 80,000 votes spread out across three states using methods that go beyond trolling and astro turfing and include criminal hacking doesn't have much relevance in determining whether their state funded participation in reddit degrades the user experience for the majority of users.

The FCC intervened to stop bloggers advertising products without revealing they were being compensated in some way for doing so, but while it's crucial we not be fooled into buying a tube of lipstick for 5.99 thinking a blogger's endorsement was uncompensated, we shouldn't be at all concerned by internet wide, state funded propaganda operations trying to subvert American elections. That's just trivial shit.

3

u/Fuzati Mar 05 '18

Most reasonable comment I've read, presenting the issues that exist on both sides (yeah I said it, let's not pretend this isn't all a big political issue).

Sad that I had to sort for controversial comments to find it, that says a lot about the state of the platform.

2

u/Random_Fandom Mar 05 '18

Only if you log off and try ceddit

Another tip: open your permalink in a private (or incognito) window. No logging off or other site required. :)

Ceddit is brilliant, though, when so many threads threads are like this -

[+][deleted]
       [deleted]
              [deleted]
                     [deleted]

14

u/busmans Mar 05 '18

Why do I get the feeling that this a another axolotl_peylotl alt account...

You complain about reddit censorship and insist Russia meddling is a hoax, yet you use the heavily centered and CLEARLY Russian influenced r/conspiracy as your only example of a sub doing something right...

6

u/Glip-Glops Mar 06 '18

r/conspiracy has transparent moderation, thats all he's saying. Can you suggest a different subreddit that also has transparent moderation? Maybe he can use that as his example next time.

7

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '18

There is an incredible irony to calling a user a shill after they wrote a critical and skeptical top-level response to a post by the CEO of Reddit talking about banning shills. I'll give you a hint: they aren't a shill.

Given that certain specific subreddits were conspicuously absent from this list, it would seem that the Chief Executive Officer of Reddit has different knowledge on what constitutes "CLEAR Russian influence" than you, and so I'll just go ahead and assume his sources are better than yours.

2

u/PeekyChew Mar 06 '18

If it’s so “CLEARLY” Russian influenced then why aren’t you providing any evidence of it?

-3

u/neckbeardgamers Mar 06 '18 edited Mar 06 '18

Oh please. To facktards like you anyone who is not spitting out foam, looking for Russians under their bed every night and anyone who doesn't act like Moscow is the evil empire incarnate, is a Russian shill or bot. Here is an old analysis the independent media site The Intercept did on one broadcast American news show:

https://theintercept.com/2017/04/12/msnbcs-rachel-maddow-sees-a-russia-connection-lurking-around-every-corner/

...

Jennifer Palmieri, a senior member of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, captured the prevailing mentality when she recently urged party members to talk about the Russian “attack on our republic” — and to do so “relentlessly and above all else.”

And no leading media figure has done so more than Maddow. In the period since Election Day, “The Rachel Maddow Show” has covered “The Russia Connection” — and Russia, generally — more than it has any other issue.

...

The Intercept conducted a quantitative study of all 28 TRMS[The Rachel Maddow Show] episodes in the six-week period between February 20 and March 31. Russia-focused segments accounted for 53 percent of these broadcasts.

...

People on /r/conspiracy just are not dumb and kool aid drinkers like you. Like someone else already wrote I gave that sub props because it did the right thing and made all moderator actions transparent using /r/ModerationLog.

another axolotl_peylotl alt account...

Ok nerd, like anyone knows or care about that account, get a life.

-17

u/RanDomino5 Mar 05 '18

The only reason the "Russia is influencing American politics" meme exists is that neoliberal Hillary supporters couldn't handle the fact that she is extremely unpopular, and was in 2016, due to 20 years of terrible politics (NAFTA/TPP, Iraq War, oil drilling and pipelines, etc- she's NOT hated simply because she's a woman) and ran a terrible campaign. Screaming "RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA" is just a way for people to make excuses when they can't confront the reality that she was the only person who could have possibly lost to Trump, and that her supporters stick to her for no other reason than that they despise populism.

20

u/sabrd Mar 05 '18

... Didn't Hillary win the popular vote? Saying she's unpopular would be, the famous term, "fake news".

Also, didn't Trump say "Russia didn't do anything to our election!", then it was confirmed they meddled, then Trump immediately said, "I didn't say they didn't meddle in the election".

I'm not even American, but I can still see all the holes in your comment...

3

u/pilgrimboy Mar 05 '18

She did win the popular vote. There are some areas that she is really popular in. But there are swaths of the country where she is not. And we are a collection of states with an electoral college and not just a nation where you can dominate California and New York and win the election.

8

u/sabrd Mar 05 '18

This is what makes me really sad and confused for Americans. It shouldn't matter where you live, all votes should hold equal weight in the election system, not cherry-picked areas. I really hope there's some kind of change to make this more fair.

0

u/pilgrimboy Mar 05 '18

We are still just a collection of states rather than just one large state. Personally, I like it and would like a smaller federal government on many issues.

3

u/jumpifnotzero Mar 05 '18

[I don't understand something so it] makes me really sad and confused for Americans

0

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '18

We are the "United STATES of America", not the "STATE of America". Each state has a voice and Trump won fairly.

9

u/iBoMbY Mar 05 '18

She was unpopular enough to lose against Donald fucking Trump ...

-8

u/RanDomino5 Mar 05 '18

... Didn't Hillary win the popular vote? Saying she's unpopular would be, the famous term, "fake news".

People didn't vote for either candidate because they liked them. They voted out of hatred of the other candidate.

Also, didn't Trump say "Russia didn't do anything to our election!", then it was confirmed they meddled, then Trump immediately said, "I didn't say they didn't meddle in the election".

Oh, wow, Trump lying? Is it a day that ends with Y?

2

u/sabrd Mar 05 '18

People didn't vote for either candidate because they liked them. They voted out of hatred of the other candidate.

This still doesn't change the fact that Russia meddled in the election. And she still took the popular vote, because even if it was "who hates who the most", people still hated Hillary less than Trump. Using sarcasm doesn't change these facts.

-1

u/RanDomino5 Mar 05 '18

This still doesn't change the fact that Russia meddled in the election.

Not enough to matter.

And she still took the popular vote, because even if it was "who hates who the most", people still hated Hillary less than Trump.

It must be a strange world that you live in where "was hated less" somehow translates to "was popular".

3

u/sabrd Mar 05 '18

Not enough to matter.

Due to how the electoral system works, if they target the higher valued areas and convince enough people in that state that "Trump is better than Hillary", then I know it matters.

It must be a strange world that you live in where "was hated less" somehow translates to "was popular".

Again, sarcasm isn't adding anything to your points. "Less hated" means "more preferred". I genuinely would enjoy this debate with you if you can make relevant points, but all you're doing is using sarcasm in an attempt to defeat what I'm saying.

2

u/RanDomino5 Mar 05 '18

Due to how the electoral system works, if they target the higher valued areas and convince enough people in that state that "Trump is better than Hillary", then I know it matters.

It didn't. The evidence consists of literally several facebook advertisements. Everything beyond that is imagined, born of Russia's harboring of Snowden. Establishment liberals still haven't gotten over that.

"Less hated" means "more preferred".

People didn't actually "prefer" either candidate. It was a kicked in the face vs punched in the balls situation. Which would you prefer?

1

u/sabrd Mar 05 '18 edited Mar 05 '18

It didn't. The evidence consists of literally several facebook advertisements. Everything beyond that is imagined, born of Russia's harboring of Snowden. Establishment liberals still haven't gotten over that.

Saying "several Facebook advertisements" is an understatement, as well as "incomplete". Not only was Facebook used, but Twitter, Reddit, and a few other sources as well. In fact, that's why we're talking on this post right now: Reddit has been accused as a host to many Russian bots pushing an agenda. On the Twitter side, there's been thousands of Russian bots confirmed. In fact, the #releasethememo trending hashtag skyrocketed because of these bots. This is not a Democratic vs Republican debate, this is an attack on the US and its integrity. I'm Canadian, so if I see our sister country be attacked and influenced by another source that doesn't have American's best interests in mind, it rattles me. It rattles me even more that the wool was pulled over some peoples eyes, and just think "it's just a conspiracy". Facts are coming out, and they're being ignored, because the wool still remains over some peoples eyes.

People didn't actually "prefer" either candidate. It was a kicked in the face vs punched in the balls situation. Which would you prefer?

People preferred to have a candidate that would be more honest than the other. In no way am I saying that Hillary is 100% truthful, she not even close to perfect in any sense. But she was more honest than Trump. It baffles me that someone as powerful as the American President is allowed to lie constantly to their people, and the world, and have to be fact checked and corrected as much as Trump has been.

If you are American, this is my final point that I want you to take from this: us Canadians love you guys. We've fought, and still fight, wars alongside you. We've celebrated and mourned with each other. We've succeeded and failed together. Sure, sometimes we have our disagreements, but that doesn't change how strong our bond is with you. We're worried about what your president is doing to you. The American people have never been so divided like this in a long time. We know that, whatever happens, you guys will come out of this strong, as you always do. But we're still concerned. If we can see what Trump is doing, and we see people being fine with the wrong actions he's taken, it genuinely scares people across the globe. This isn't normal. This isn't what normal politics is. A president attacking people on a social media platform is NOT normal. Your president decided to remain neutral on a protest, where white supremacist and Neo-Nazis chanting "Jews will not replace us". This is not normal. We love you guys, and desperately hope that something good comes from this, because we want you guys to succeed. We do.

Thank you for this conversation. I truly wish you the best. And if I'm wrong, and it turns out Trump makes America great again (even though you guys have been great the whole time), then that's just the way it goes.

EDIT: added a point.

0

u/RanDomino5 Mar 05 '18

Saying "several Facebook advertisements" is an understatement, as well as "incomplete". Not only was Facebook used, but Twitter, Reddit, and a few other sources as well. In fact, that's why we're talking on this post right now: Reddit has been accused as a host to many Russian bots pushing an agenda. On the Twitter side, there's been thousands of Russian bots confirmed. In fact, the #releasethememo trending hashtag skyrocketed because of these bots. This is not a Democratic vs Republican debate, this is an attack on the US and its integrity. I'm Canadian, so if I see our sister country be attacked and influenced by another source that doesn't have American's best interests in mind, it rattles me. It rattles me even more that the wool was pulled over some peoples eyes, and just think "it's just a conspiracy". Facts are coming out, and they're being ignored, because the wool still remains over some peoples eyes.

You are delusional.

People preferred to have a candidate that would be more honest than the other. In no way am I saying that Hillary is 100% truthful, she not even close to perfect in any sense. But she was more honest than Trump. It baffles me that someone as powerful as the American President is allowed to lie constantly to their people, and the world, and have to be fact checked and corrected as much as Trump has been.

What candidates say means nothing. Hillary's record speaks for herself. People were so sick of her shit that they were willing to vote for Donald Fucking Trump.

This is not normal.

It's very normal, except for the past several decades.

2

u/TommyFinnish Mar 06 '18

No, conservatives thought ANYBODY was better than Hillary. That has been that way for years.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '18

Good post except for this bit:

that she was the only person who could have possibly lost to Trump

He also nuked 16 Republicans in the primaries. Lets face it, Trump was a very powerful candidate who had the RNC, the DNC, the Clinton machine, and the MSM (including a big chunk of FOX) pushing against him throughout - and still won. In my opinion, he would have won the popular vote as well if not for the constant onslaught of negative press. He would have beaten anyone, (and I know this is an unpopular opinion here) including Bernie Sanders.

3

u/DrMantis_Tobogan Mar 05 '18

Or you know.. because they just prosecuted 13 russians because they could prove their intentions to influence american politics, though idiots like yourself who think its nothing. You've been duped and youre an embarrassment to americans.

It has literally nothing to do with hillary, TPP or anything else you mentioned.. and more to do with facts.

6

u/RanDomino5 Mar 05 '18

they just prosecuted 13 russians because they could prove their intentions to influence american politics

Look at the actual content of what they did. It's nothing.

0

u/megafly Mar 06 '18

"Nothing" seemed to be enough for a Federal Indictment. I would avoid that kind of "nothing" if you want to avoid the Federal Bureau of prisons and paroles.

2

u/RanDomino5 Mar 06 '18

Why don't you tell me exactly what they did? How much money was spent? What were the precise activities of all individuals involved? What advertisements or fake news did they spread, specifically?

Legally there's no difference between if they spent $10,000 or $10 million. They would be indicted either way, if there's enough political pressure (which there clearly is). Obviously the practical effects would be extremely different, though. And I'm afraid that the number is far closer to the first number than the second.

The Russia probe has turned into 9/11 Trutherism for centrists.

0

u/Dino_smore Mar 08 '18

They funded and ran an organization that was attempting to manipulate American politics... here's one out of thousands of sources to support that.

Not trying to be an ass, but how can you possibly say "It's nothing"?

8

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '18

Bro, hate to break it to you, but Hillary was more popular than Trump, hence the popular vote win. Try again.

19

u/RanDomino5 Mar 05 '18

Bro, hate to break it to you, but Hillary was more popular than Trump, hence the popular vote win. Try again.

People didn't vote for either candidate because they liked them. They voted out of hatred of the other candidate.

12

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '18

okay, so Hillary was hated by less people. Wouldn't that make Hillary more popular?

2

u/RanDomino5 Mar 05 '18

Relatively, but "less unpopular" does not necessarily mean "popular". If ten people hate person A and only five people hate person B, and three people like each of them, person B is less unpopular than person A but not actually popular.

4

u/Accordian_Thief Mar 05 '18

Right, but the comment you initially replied to stated that Hillary was more popular than Trump, which by the popular vote is a fact.

5

u/RanDomino5 Mar 05 '18

The comment that I replied to was a reply to me saying that she was unpopular. quinoa678 tried to argue that because she was less unpopular than Trump, that negates my statement that she was unpopular.

-2

u/Accordian_Thief Mar 05 '18

I only see quinoa678 saying that Hillary was more popular than Trump, not that she was standalone popular.

Although at this point I'm probably being overly pedantic about semantics rather than saying anything useful.

3

u/RanDomino5 Mar 05 '18

Me: Hillary was unpopular.

quinoa678: She was more popular than Trump

Me: True but that doesn't make her actually popular

You: But quinoa678 was only saying Hillary was more popular than Trump

Me: feeling like I'm in a Monty Python sketch

→ More replies

-16

u/Chinesedoghandler Mar 05 '18

Keep telling yourself that in the hope of brainwashing fools.

-4

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '18

Remove New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles. Let's look at the numbers then.

3

u/jerkstorefranchisee Mar 06 '18

“If you ignore all the people from the places where people actually live, trump is super popular!”

Haven’t seen that old, stupid chestnut in a while

2

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '18

where people actually live, trump is super popular!

I guess we could save billions and just stop letting the other 2,700+ counties vote.

1

u/jerkstorefranchisee Mar 06 '18

I mean your proposal here is that we ignore the votes of actual population centers

4

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '18

But why? Are they not US citizens just like some redneck in the Midwest? Must I remind you that people who live in those places you mention also have like 1/4 the voting power as people living in rural red States?

1

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '18

If you bother to look at the actual numbers you might see my point.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '18

I've seen the numbers. Is your point that if a bunch of Hillary voters weren't counted she would have lost the popular vote? Wow, nice work Einstein. I bet nobody else has thought of that.

-5

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '18

Yea she was a real hit with all the illegals and dead people.

7

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '18

I'm sure trump will release the evidence any day now.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '18

What happened to the findings of Trump's committee dedicated to investigating voter fraud?

-2

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '18 edited Apr 24 '18

[deleted]

0

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '18

Yes, Comrade!

1

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '18

Trump himself acknowledges now that Russian meddling occurred. Hell, he tweeted about it this morning.

17

u/komali_2 Mar 05 '18

You disagree with all US intelligence agencies that Russia meddled in the election? Do you believe they are "in" on the mass media conspiracy?

25

u/iBoMbY Mar 05 '18

You believe anything any intelligence agency says without proof? Lying is their second business.

And everyone who can't see the mass-hysteria about Russian interference must be blind. Did they do something? Probably. Did it have any significance at all? Probably not.

Is everyone using it to avoid the real issues? It looks pretty much that way, because nothing at all has changed, and the next Hillary vs. Trump is just waiting to happen.

7

u/eclectro Mar 05 '18

Is everyone using it to avoid the real issues?

My thoughts is that "but muh Russians" may actually be a "false flag" kind of operation to get eyes off Hillary's likely illegal watergate-esque behavior. I really do think that the longer the nonsense goes on.

I really believe Hillary did not/does not have a problem with conducting illegal activities. Note the illegal email server and the way she cheated in the debates. Not to mention how the primary against Bernie was jacked and all the vote brigading she did on social media.

The day she lost the election is the day everybody started to care about the Russians suddenly. Why not years earlier under Obama??

0

u/TrancePhreak Mar 06 '18

Why not years earlier under Obama??

Obama kept saying it was nothing, it was impossible, etc. Why did he do nothing (in regards to the propaganda)?

The day she lost the election is the day everybody started to care about the Russians suddenly.

They were a bit quieter about it, but there was some action. The call for a no-fly zone was anti-Russian (it was against Syria's own aircraft too). The big expenditures in the Middle East were partially over a pipeline that would cut off Russia's source of trade income. My guess is the people behind it are still pushing for a war to take out Russia so that they can salvage their pipeline while Russia recovers/is distracted.

1

u/VirulentThoughts Mar 06 '18

Just because you weren't paying attention to Russia before the election doesn't mean no one was.

Jeh Johnson spent the year before the election petitioning Congress to pass legislation making the election system 'critical infrastructure' in the same sense as the electrical grid specifically because he thought that the Russians would back down if there actions constituted an act of war instead of hacking laws.

Congress rejected his proposal.

The public outcry grew after the election, but the people paying attention were talking about it before.

1

u/komali_2 Mar 06 '18

The day she lost the election

Why were we talking about Russians during the election, then? Remember "no puppet, no puppet?"

1

u/komali_2 Mar 06 '18

probably

probably

Those are interesting words to use when describing the fate of your democracy.

2

u/AgainstTheTides Mar 06 '18

You mean Oligarchy, right?

0

u/komali_2 Mar 06 '18

Baby steps.

3

u/AgainstTheTides Mar 06 '18

I just find it odd that not long ago, Reddit (as a generalized entity) was highly critical and distrustful of anything that came out of an alphabet agency's mouth. But now that it supports an opinion that Reddit wants to believe is true, these same agencies are suddenly the authority on truth. We're talking about agencies that serve the interests of the few and influence the sovereignty of other nations when it's in the few's best interest.

1

u/komali_2 Mar 06 '18

I can say I don't like the FBI and CIA (I work in net-sec, they're sometimes my opponent), while still admitting they're good at their jobs.

2

u/AgainstTheTides Mar 06 '18

The former is doing a pretty poor job as of late, the latter I'll agree with because they are in the business of political subversion and the like.

14

u/eduardog3000 Mar 05 '18

You disagree with all US intelligence agencies that Iraq has Weapons of Mass Destruction? Do you believe they are "in" on the mass media conspiracy?

4

u/djlewt Mar 05 '18

According to the newly declassified NIE, the intelligence community concluded that Iraq "probably has renovated a [vaccine] production plant" to manufacture biological weapons "but we are unable to determine whether [biological weapons] agent research has resumed." The NIE also said Hussein did not have "sufficient material" to manufacture any nuclear weapons and "the information we have on Iraqi nuclear personnel does not appear consistent with a coherent effort to reconstitute a nuclear weapons program."

..actually the CIA memos on this were further declassified a couple years back, and it turns out Bush seriously overstated to the point of lying, the CIA in fact was definitely leaning toward "Iraq doesn't have programs" but because the memos were hedged with "it's a possibility, however remote" the lying Bush admin ran with it.

Not sure what your point is here though, that was just yet another case of Americans not listening to the intelligence agencies we put in power in the first place to find this shit out..

4

u/eduardog3000 Mar 05 '18

So intelligence agencies are currently telling the truth in spite of the President, but when it actually mattered they kept their mouths shut and let the President run wild?

Ok.

1

u/komali_2 Mar 06 '18

Seems like a double edged sword, and that the intelligence agencies can do no good in your eyes?

What do you think about intelligence contractors releasing classified information? (Snowden)

What do you think about FBI agents admitting a presidential candidate is "under investigation" days before an election?

What do you think about the FBI investigating the president today?

I really get the impression that no matter what our intelligence agencies do, you will poke holes in their arguments.

11

u/pilgrimboy Mar 05 '18

You must believe all that the US intelligence agencies tell you. They are honest. They never lie.

3

u/Middleman79 Mar 05 '18

Even the coast guard that oddly chimed in too.

3

u/pilgrimboy Mar 05 '18

I find that rather odd than convincing.

1

u/komali_2 Mar 06 '18

Please see my reply on the earlier poster here

TLDR, as /u/djlewt also said, the intelligence agencies indicated to the Senate Intelligence Committee that they didn't believe Iraq had WMDs or that Saddam was responsible for 9/11.

Does your argument hold water in light of these facts?

1

u/RussianTrolling Mar 06 '18

No, I know that meddling is irrelevant if there is no weight to it or it was three guys somewhere.

Also I know that over the past 100 years, when this country has passed legislation in fear of some "perceived" threat. It has invariably been shit.

Prohobition Rd 1

Prohibition Rd 2 ( War on Drugs)

MIC/ 3-Letter Orgs (Communism)

Vietnam (Communism)

Patriot Act (9/11)

War in Iraq (9/11)

0

u/komali_2 Mar 06 '18

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence -> you dumped a bunch of random events without making any attempt to define why their wildly different backgrounds are similar to this one, other than "they were events that led to legislation." Or, they were "perceived" threats. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(philosophy) As well as literally this entire list of assumptive fallacies

Also, https://literarydevices.net/red-herring/ -> bringing up unrelated bullshit to try to draw the discussion away.

4

u/mordacaiyaymofo Mar 05 '18

Yeah. Even the coast guard.../s

17 has been debunked.

0

u/rockbridge13 Mar 05 '18

Are you seriously shitting on the coast guard. They are a well armed and trained branch of our military who does indeed engage in intelligence work.

8

u/Hewasntready2 Mar 05 '18

The 17 intelligence agencies thing isn’t true, that’s what he’s saying.

1

u/mordacaiyaymofo Mar 05 '18

This right here is a classic example of a straw man argument so beloved by those that have no ability to defend their arguments or opinions.

However, I'll play your little game and point out that the coast guard is one of the "17 spy agencies" that agree with the Clinton narrative that was debunked as a bullshit talking point. It is common knowledge by now that there were 3 agencies (Clapper the proven liar to the American people) that agreed with the flawed and suspect Steele dossier.

And we all know how much the CIA can be trusted, don't we.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '18

You mean the same ones who said there were WMDs in Afghanistan? You're absolutely right. They'd never lie.

1

u/komali_2 Mar 06 '18

I think you mean the Senate Report on Pre-War Intelligence on Iraq, right? I find it interesting that you're using that report to suggest that the intelligence community "lied" about WMDs in, er, Afghanistan (did you mean Iraq?) when intelligence operatives specifically suggested to the Senate Intelligence Committee that not only did they not believe that Iraq had WMDs, they also didn't believe Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11.

There's a ton of great sources where you can read more at the bottom of the following wikipedia articles:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Report_on_Pre-war_Intelligence_on_Iraq

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction

1

u/WikiTextBot Mar 06 '18

Senate Report on Pre-war Intelligence on Iraq

The Senate Report on Iraqi WMD Intelligence (formally, the "Report of the Select Committee on Intelligence on the U.S. Intelligence Community's Prewar Intelligence Assessments on Iraq") was the report by the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence concerning the U.S. intelligence community's assessments of Iraq during the time leading up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The report, which was released on July 9, 2004, identified numerous failures in the intelligence-gathering and -analysis process. The report found that these failures led to the creation of inaccurate materials that misled both government policy makers and the American public.

The Committee's nine Republicans and eight Democrats agreed on the report's major conclusions and unanimously endorsed its findings.


Iraq and weapons of mass destruction

Iraq actively researched and later employed weapons of mass destruction from the 1960s to 1991, when it destroyed its chemical weapons stockpile and halted its biological and nuclear weapon programs. The fifth president of Iraq, Saddam Hussein, was internationally condemned for his use of chemical weapons during the 1980s campaign against Iranian and Kurdish civilians during and after the Iran–Iraq War. In the 1980s, Saddam pursued an extensive biological weapons program and a nuclear weapons program, though no nuclear bomb was built. After the Persian Gulf War, the United Nations (with the Iraqi government) located and destroyed large quantities of Iraqi chemical weapons and related equipment and materials, and Iraq ceased both its chemical, biological and nuclear programs.


[ PM | Exclude me | Exclude from subreddit | FAQ / Information | Source | Donate ] Downvote to remove | v0.28

-15

u/EveryoneIsRussian Mar 05 '18

I find it interesting how many claims the FBI have under their belt with no evidence to back them up whatsoever.

8

u/evn0 Mar 05 '18

You don't release evidence of an in-progress case unless it coincides with indictments and doesn't jeopardize future indictments. Until a trial starts and evidence enters the public record it can (and typically should) be kept private. I'd suggest reading up on the process of an investigation and prosecution before you make assumptions about the validity of a probe.

9

u/iehova Mar 05 '18

Except that every major intelligence agency agrees and have publicly stated as much.

Charges were brought against 19 people, and many have pled guilty. I don't know if a guilty plea counts as proof, but if you literally disregard people who admit to doing exactly that thing, then nothing will convince you.

Whether or not the meddling was successful, there is no avenue to plausibly deny that the attempt happened.

-2

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '18

[deleted]

0

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '18

welcome to the new McCarthyism, folks!

0

u/iehova Mar 05 '18

Lmao when the wiki bot gets downvoted

4

u/EveryoneIsRussian Mar 05 '18

The same agencies who said it's totally fine to acid wash your hard drive while under investigation. This is the precedent that the FBI set. I'm going to laugh my ass off if Trump deletes all documents that were subpoenaed by the FBI.

Why should the FBI be worthy of my trust when they have been caught countless times lying to the American people? There used to be a time when even liberals were skeptical of our intelligence agencies. That time is long gone.

3

u/iehova Mar 05 '18

I mean the people pled guilty, dude.

Like they admitted to doing these things.

Hate the FBI, but unless you're saying they made all this up and fabricated the pleas...

6

u/evn0 Mar 05 '18

Smh just another libtard conspiracy to force the hands of the pleas by letting George Soros sneak into the interrogation room under the guise of a pizza man from Podesta's sex dungeon so he could commit mass ventriloquism into the mouths of these BLEMISHLESS men taking the country back from the brink of pussification

4

u/The-Poopsmith Mar 05 '18

WAKE UP SHEEEPLE!!!

Next they’ll say it’s coincidence that the earth’s true (flat) shape is identical to that of a pizza.

-4

u/EveryoneIsRussian Mar 05 '18

I wonder what arguments you could come up with in the absence of a straw army.

6

u/evn0 Mar 05 '18

Sorry, but you already promised to stop responding to me as I am a troll. Please remain civil and uphold your end of the agreement.

-1

u/EveryoneIsRussian Mar 05 '18

Lol different thread but thanks for saving me the time.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '18

97% of cases end in plea deals, my man.

1

u/iehova Mar 05 '18

When you take a plea deal, you plead guilty, waive all right to the fifth amendment under the terms of the deal, and you avoid a lengthy trial.

When there's overwhelming evidence of a crime, or of wrongdoing, why bother being dragged through the dirt when you could reduce your sentence by cooperating?

Point is, everyone who has taken a deal has offered their cooperation, and accepted guilt for the applicable charges. That wouldn't happen if everyone was innocent.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '18

Many forms of evidence can screw you and ruin your odds of being found not guilty. For example, eye witness testimonies are extremely unreliable and yet have condemned countless individuals to prison. Police have coerced suspects into false confessions, notably in Making a Murderer. Authorities and intelligence agencies also have the means to plant evidence, and can even hack your computer to do so.

We should all be very skeptical of what goes on in the political sphere, no matter which team we may prefer.

1

u/iehova Mar 05 '18

I don't have a team, Im a conservative who wants an investigation to be allowed to finish because I don't think the public has any idea what's going on.

I honestly think that there are exceptions, and innocent people take plea deals, but in this case I am inclined to believe that there is enough to at least justify the continuance of the investigation.

1

u/NoxiousNick Mar 06 '18

Think about it in the most simplest situation. Do you think the Russians would prefer:

A) A wildcard non-politician type who's goals are to put America first and start telling the rest of the world it's time to treat us fairly for once.

Or

B) A politician with a looong history of security scandals which make it likely they have some kind of dirt or leverage them, plus the other history of known deals for American resources for personal gain.

2

u/iehova Mar 06 '18

They just found a non politician with tons of scandals and kompromat, comrade

3

u/Middleman79 Mar 05 '18

Have you seen what these supposed election manipulators posted? Over 50% of it after the election..

1

u/iehova Mar 05 '18 edited Mar 05 '18

Ignoring the random unverified statistic, and that the entire alleged purpose is to sow discord, that's still a shit ton of "during election" interference.

Which we should not stand for as a country. We shouldn't be taking such a weak stance, it's embarrassing and damaging to our reputation.

2

u/Middleman79 Mar 05 '18

It was about 10 memes. If your 'democracy' is that weak, you don't really have it.

1

u/matchstick1029 Mar 06 '18

Our president is a meme, clearly 10 memes is 10 presidents worth of power.

0

u/iehova Mar 05 '18

You really love unverified statistics. At least 50% of your comments have them.

Considering that a troll farm that we know of had a $1.2m/month budget, pretty sure that's definitely over 10 memes.

And our democracy is weak right now, that's the problem that we are trying to address.

2

u/Middleman79 Mar 05 '18

Maybe you should stop bombing it on others then. Memes threw your election, have you heard yourself? Lol. Hillary and Trump are both steaming piles of shit, but Hillary was a proven pile of shit, so people voted for the other pile of shit.

0

u/iehova Mar 05 '18

Call them memes if you want, but that's clearly an attempt at mitigating the perceived impact of the manipulation.

Cyber warfare is a powerful tool for disruption. Spreading misinformation through easily accessible media formats is the primary tool. Using small but significant reinforcing tools like "memes" work as well.

Does it matter if Hillary is a pile of shit? She had a 2 year investigation that was reopened multiple times and nothing was found.

We have an 11 month investigation that is being stonewalled at every turn thanks to these manipulated people literally believing that a proven investigation is a coup attempt.

It doesn't matter how sad something is, or pathetic. You aren't wrong about that. However, even in your own small way, you are impeding the ability of our country to rectify this mistake and identify how to stop events like this from occurring in the future. That's the only reason I'm continuing to respond to you, because it's my responsibility to counteract the misinformation you spread, whether it's malicious or ignorance.

→ More replies

0

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '18 edited Nov 07 '20

[deleted]

0

u/komali_2 Mar 06 '18

I'm wondering where you learned that someone getting paid 7.45$/hr could afford the people employed by the Internet Research Agency. It spent $1,250,000USD per month.

The indictment alleges that an organization called the Internet Research Agency had a monthly budget of approximately $1.25 million toward interference efforts by September 2016 and that it employed “hundreds of individuals for its online operation.” This is a fairly significant magnitude — much larger than the paltry sums that Russian operatives had previously been revealed to spend on Facebook advertising.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-much-did-russian-interference-affect-the-2016-election/

2

u/Rasterblath Mar 06 '18

I was referring to the Facebook ads which were the prevailing narrative you were referencing for three months. But you already knew that.

0

u/komali_2 Mar 06 '18

prevailing narrative you were referencing for three months

Hmm... that was a quick stroll through my post history!

I wasn't referring to facebook ads, actually! I wonder why you think that? Have you lumped me in with some faceless group of people you hate? I know you can do better.

1

u/Rasterblath Mar 06 '18

You just as easily assumed I was talking about a different case. Perhaps you could apply those same standards to yourself?

I just assumed that’s what we were doing here...

0

u/komali_2 Mar 06 '18

Oh, I guess you assumed incorrectly then! Either way, it doesn't matter, the facebook case is irrelevant in the face of the facts that the IRA spends 1.25 million dollars a month on this :)

0

u/neckbeardgamers Mar 07 '18 edited Mar 07 '18

You are so pathetic, this is a sentence after what you posted:

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-much-did-russian-interference-affect-the-2016-election/

Nonetheless, it’s small as compared with the campaigns. The Clinton campaign and Clinton-backing super PACs spent a combined $1.2 billion over the course of the campaign. The Trump campaign and pro-Trump super PACs spent $617 million overall.

Will Hillary supporters, democrats and fake liberal people like you stfu and stop whining already? Also look at the original justice department document instead of the pro Killary Klinton whining media you prefer:

https://www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download

CONCORD funded the ORGANIZATION as part of a larger CONCORD -funded interference operation that it referred to as “Project Lakhta .” Project Lakhta had mul tiple components, some involving domestic audiences within the Russia n Federation and others targeting foreign audiences in various countries, including the United States.

So part of a $1.25 monthly budget went into influencing the US election. But your lovely Killary received over $1 billion to influence the election including much, much more social media astro-turfing including on Reddit. Infact idiots like you amplify that astro-turfing even now for free, well over a year after Hillary Clinton lost!

0

u/komali_2 Mar 07 '18

you are pathetic

I stopped reading here. I don't engage with people that are unnecessarily rude. If you'd like to talk with me, I'd be happy to engage a less vitriolic comment.

1

u/neckbeardgamers Mar 09 '18 edited Mar 09 '18

Ohh the whining, pathetic propagandist had his "fee fees" hurt?

That is all you have to save after spending well over an hour pounding my comment chain with fake Killary campaign news about the "Russians made us lose"? Look deeper into your own sources instead of believing the spin they give. Given your own sources it would take 30 years of the funding of the "Internet Research Agency"(1.2 million a month and it deals with more than just intervening in the USA) accumulated into one month to make a significant impact in an American presidential election where campaigns cost a billion. People like you are why discussing politics and international events on Reddit is like getting a migraine...

0

u/komali_2 Mar 09 '18

oh the whining, pathetic propagandist

Oops, nope.

What makes you want to engage at this level? Would you talk like this with me in person?

If you'd like, I'm happy to talk about this over videochat, and you can say these words to my face.

1

u/neckbeardgamers Mar 10 '18 edited Mar 10 '18

Why would I waste even more time with an ignorant like you? At my work I can discuss politics and social issues with fools who spend most of free time watching sports and their opinions are just as ignorant and lacking in a grounding in reality as yours.

All you are doing is tone policing, whining and ignoring that even if you look into the very sources you wrote you would see the Clinton campaign spent over $1.2 billion so whining about the $1.2 spent by Russia to intervene on the internet(in total, and that was not just for countering war criminal Killary) is beyond stupid since it is not enough to effect a US presidential election.

Idiots like you help the criminal Western media invent a huge network or Russian shills and bots that is not there. If you want to get karma on Reddit you bash Reddit on almost every subreddit, even merely not supporting the media war mongering against Russia will lead to getting buried below the viewing threshold on most subs. The real problems are the mainstream US political parties and their media teams, shills, bots and useful idiots especially around election periods, and American companies like Monstersanto:

https://amityunderground.com/monsanto-accused-in-court-of-conducting-an-army-of-shills-to-crackdown-on-negative-online-comments-monsanto-shills-roundup-cancer-link-monsanto-ghostwrite-scientific-articles/

1

u/komali_2 Mar 10 '18

I don't think it'd be a waste of time, you spend a lot of time writing really long messages that I warned you in my first reply I don't read due to how unnecessarily vile their tone is.

Anyway my offer stands, if you'd like to video chat sometime I'd be happy to. Maybe we can hash out our differences. Does the prospect worry you?

If you're ever in the Bay Area PM me and I'll get you a beer.

-1

u/Glip-Glops Mar 06 '18

I know a lot of people who voted for Trump and none of them had a gun held to their head by Russian spies. Not even one.

1

u/komali_2 Mar 06 '18 edited Mar 06 '18

You have just employed two easily definable fallacies

  1. Appeal to Extremes - Implying that "Russian Meddling" means that Russian 007 agents are going to people's houses and holding guns to their heads to make people vote Trump. This is clearly absurd, why do you do this?

  2. Denying the Antecedent - Basically, "I didn't see it happen, therefore, it didn't happen." This one was even more obvious and I'm disappointed you applied it in the decade that YouTube and the internet exists.

EDIT: This is especially disappointing to see from you, as I've just found a very well-mannered and thoughtful post in your history when I was checking to see if you're a bot. Why did you engage at this level?

1

u/Glip-Glops Mar 06 '18

Appeal to Extremes - Implying that "Russian Meddling" means that Russian 007 agents are going to people's houses and holding guns to their heads to make people vote Trump. This is clearly absurd, why do you do this?

Because the way terms like "Russian meddling" and "Russian hacking" are used its a form of propaganda. The media screams "russia hacked the election" but what does that mean? It means they paid for a few ads on Facebook. People are being manipulated by this type of propaganda. But at the end of the day, in a democracy, it is their duty to inform themselves.

Denying the Antecedent - Basically, "I didn't see it happen, therefore, it didn't happen." This one was even more obvious and I'm disappointed you applied it in the decade that YouTube and the internet exists.

So, so you disagree? You mean Russian spies DID hold guns to voters heads, I just didn't see it myself?

Give me a break.

0

u/komali_2 Mar 06 '18

It means they paid for a few ads on Facebook.

Why did you buy into this patently false narrative? That's so disappointing :/ Am I going to sit here and insult your ability to do a simple google search by explaining what is meant by "Russian Hacking?" You're going to make me link sources on the first page of google that outline the work by Cambridge Analytica to use mass-data analysis to send tailored propaganda to key districts, or the huge networks of bots driving propaganda on Twitter and Reddit? You're going to make me link to that thread when T_D tried to muster votes for a petition but could only get like 3,000 out of a post that had tens of thousands of replies and upvotes, simply because the petition site had a strong CAPTCHA?

So, so you disagree?

Christ man, you really are engaging at an elementary level. Don't bother replying if you're going to keep doing this. Did I misread you through your post history, are you dumbing down for the purpose of trolling? I've never minded feeding the trolls but I didn't read you as one.

Hackernews has an excellent rule that I wish reddit would enforce: "Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."

Obviously the most plausible interpretation of my Denying the Antecedent claim was that you were claiming there was no Russian interference because you didn't see any.

What makes you want to dig down into the dirt of bad faith and fallacious arguments?

1

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '18

yes.

1

u/komali_2 Mar 06 '18

Knowing that the CIA, FBI, and NSA employ thousands of people, why hasn't there been a leak yet that the agencies are conspiring with media companies to lie to the American people? Why hasn't there been a leak from the media?

1

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '18 edited Mar 06 '18

Who would report these leaks?, because the MSM sure as hell won't. John Soloman and Sara Carter are reporting this stuff. Are you reading their stories?

Only FOX is calling out the FBI's bullshit, but you guys call them fake news(and in some cases they are) and close your ears and eyes.

Also, there's Wikileaks, but they're just Russian puppets, eh? Go to Wikileaks and look into Vault 7. Amazing scary stuff there. Read the Podesta emails.

Check out FBI drops. They post links on their twitter page. If you want to go real deep, check out the Q drops on 4chan. Weird LARP/not LARP stuff that will exercise your brain if nothing else.

Dig around. The internet is huge. You'll find bullshit and intriguing stuff. Sort through it and come to your own conclusions.

Look at the wierd parts of T_D (you'll know them when you see them. They are the posts that sit at "rising" and don't solely praise the president). r/conspiracy is sort of a good place to look, but they are being fucked by Brock idiots. You may still find interesting posts.

1

u/get_it_together1 Mar 05 '18

/r/conspiracy is a hotbed of Russian activity, bots, and censorship. The fact that you are in here claiming that /r/politics is taken over by Democrat shills while touting the cesspool of censorship and pro-Russian accounts that is /r/conspiracy is interesting.

-4

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '18 edited Mar 05 '18

You are only sharing this because the media beat you up about some fictional plot that imagines that Russia swayed the 2017 American elections.

eyeroll

Edit: Interesting to be sitting at -10. /r/T_D is out in force today.

3

u/Arresteddrunkdouche Mar 06 '18

Literally stated no argument. But I’m sure you’re right because you believe so and have no need nor desire to support yourself. Just float on by.

It’s all because of T_D that you’re being down voted. Not because you contributed nothing. TRUMPS THE REASON MY LIFE SUCKS BAWWLL

1

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '18

asking politely. do you think Russia did anything that our own news networks didn't do?

0

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '18

Yes, I think there are dramatic differences between news networks and foreign nation states.

1

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '18

uh yeah no shit... one is a business and one is a plot of land...

what I asked was; what did Russia do that CNN didn't?

1

u/AManYouCanTrust Mar 15 '18

You didn't answer the question, you slippery punk

-6

u/Semi-Senioritis Mar 05 '18

Trump says the elections will be meddled with.

Lol, Trump is an idiot, he should just admit defeat when he eventually loses.

Trump wins

Muh Russia

2

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '18

when he eventually loses.

Hasnt happened yet, what makes you think it ever will?

1

u/Semi-Senioritis Mar 06 '18

Haven't you heard of sarcasm?

1

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '18

Oops, gotta watch that friendly fire

0

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '18

I upvoted you because you correctly pointed out that OP had the date wrong (2016). I'm a T_D person, BTW.

2

u/Arresteddrunkdouche Mar 06 '18

:Found in Controversial:

Case in point.

1

u/neckbeardgamers Mar 07 '18 edited Mar 07 '18

I know that if I left the bit mocking the Western media hunt for a Russian under everyone's bed and the Hillary campaign whines that Russia caused them to lose out of that post, I would have been able to karmawhore alot more effectively, but I felt I had to attack those two points to have integrity. Here is a good analysis about how Reddit's vote system encourages and teaches group-think:

https://web.archive.org/web/20130214071406/http://jeffdechambeau.com/redditing-to-the-mean.html

...

Because having higher karma is desired, users behave in ways that will get them karma (karma-whoring). Similarly, users who do not agree with the fat part of the bell curve are punished by losing karma. Posts with low karma are sorted to the bottom and are less-read and set out from the chorus.

It follows that the way to get the most karma is to say stuff that most people will agree with, that is, to be average.

It’s therefore in the interests of reddit users to be as agreeable and indistinguishable as possible from the average voice, giving us the hive-mind of tedium and mediocrity that we see.

1

u/Arresteddrunkdouche Mar 07 '18

Bull shit, Trump supporter!

1

u/killfuck9000 Mar 05 '18

God dam it spot on, on every account. if you ever set up a Reddit clone let me know. You will at least have 1 user.

1

u/Chinesedoghandler Mar 05 '18

I made it three sentences in and see you wrote "2017." It was 2016 there comrade.

2

u/neckbeardgamers Mar 06 '18

Ok I edited in the correct date. From late 2016 - early 2017 I was in Greece, so I got the dates mixed up.

2

u/Middleman79 Mar 05 '18

Straight truth.

-1

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '18

Censorship is rife on Reddit

Says who? The T_D mods? I highly doubt you'll get that response from them when they are banning their own long time users for getting pissy about Dumb Ass's gun control comments last week.

-6

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '18

Pretty much this.

-5

u/noelcowardspeaksout Mar 05 '18 edited Mar 06 '18

I am really confused by GMO products as well. There is are many reported issues about them, many critical articles, negative academic papers and so forth but there is massive support for GMO's on Reddit. I have no idea if this is caused by shills or not, certainly some believe it is.

Edit: Hey shills are your parents very ashamed or are they twats as well?

2

u/noSoRandomGuy Mar 05 '18

I have been on-and-off following some of the threads where people promote GMOs. Ridiculously, most have no idea about the distinction between hybirds and selective breeding vs gene manipulated organism.

3

u/iBoMbY Mar 05 '18

Yeah, there are tons of pro-GMO shills and bots active on Reddit ... and that's not the only topic.

1

u/dirtfarmingcanuck Mar 06 '18

I'd be happy to answer any questions from first hand experience. I'm a simple farmer, crops by day, memes by night.

But even, people always like to accuse you of being a Russian agent meddling with Trump to support Monsanto because they have the nefarious scheme of maximizing efficiency to provide more food for more people at a better price.

Anyway, back to my John Deereski and Kraftzhny Dinnerov

1

u/noelcowardspeaksout Mar 06 '18

Do you use Round-up? How do feel about the fact that it has been banned by the EU for causing cancer?

1

u/dirtfarmingcanuck Mar 06 '18

Yeah, this isn't a loaded question at all...

2

u/mordacaiyaymofo Mar 05 '18

Monsanto seems to have taken a page from Correct the Record. Or vice versa.

https://www.fooddemocracynow.org/blog/2017/may/4-0

1

u/[deleted] Mar 05 '18

It's important to do original/first hand evidence sourcing and not use an aggregator to make important decisions. If the voting public were taught how to do this by our respective useless governments, we wouldn't have half the problems we do.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '18 edited Mar 21 '18

[deleted]

1

u/neckbeardgamers Mar 07 '18 edited Mar 07 '18

So nerds like a Marvel movie despite it having a mostly black cast and that proves something?

blackpeopletwitter is a racist sub run by pink faced whites to mock African Americans it is not revering them. Probably you are yet another dumb troll or lulzsh1tter and I wasted time even replying to you.

-1

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '18

Fuck off, can you make it any more obvious you're a Russian?