Source
r/metanarchism•
-Enkara-

[Proposal] Ban /u/Min_thamee

So a warning thread has already been started for Min_thamee already, if you're interested in them getting a warning you can check it out here.

I'd been intending to make a really detailed and comprehensive ban thread but hadn't gotten around to it, lots of folks are calling for a ban in the warning thread, so I don't see why we can't have a ban thread in addition to the warning thread, because IMO min_thamee has already had enough warning and I'm sick of their gamergate and MRA defending bullshit. I'd like to get rid of min_thamee asap at this point so I made this thread.

This proposal is to ban u/min_thamee and u/min_dami (both the same user).

Here's what they posted in the gamergate thread that got brigaded to hell

Then they doubled down on their bullsht

Now they're defending MRA bullshit

I'm so sick of this, the fucker hardly ever knows what they're talking about but opens their fucking mouth and spews reactionary drivel regardless, whether it's intentional concern trolling (I'm thinking that's likely), or just chronic repeated cluelessness is irrelevant, it would never be tolerated if not for their long history here.

Posted Mar 13, 2015, 1:22 AM UTC · edited

17236
Vindalfr•

Support.

Edit: Hijacking this comment to remind people to also contribute less interesting proposals as well.

Like an accountability thread for banning an obvious troll someone... or either of the two threads that attempt to address the sorry state of the sidebar.

11
boilerpunx•

It shouldn't be tolerated specifically because of their long history. They've had ample opportunity to learn, and they've stubbornly refused at every turn.

Support

10
[deleted]•

Support. Can we also not do these stupid “accountability processes" like what ATPL suggested they would do with min_dami? Coddling likely trolls and reactionaries is ridiculous.

9
needstrangersadvice•

It looks like that was a one off, due to how shit the results have been.

8
needstrangersadvice•

Support.

9
The_Mermaid•

Support.

8
analogueb•

Support, for what it's worth. It ain't gonna stop him making a new account and carrying on like before but whatevs

7
lilit_•

Tho if he doesn't change we'll know who he is and can ban him again. Like with thecirclejerk dude. It's not that hard to notice the same patterns.

3
[deleted]•

[deleted]

7
GTnicholas•

Oppose. Looks like he's playing devils advocate because he's still very much opposed to how the sub is run. I don't see how thats grounds for a ban. Like I admit he's a nuisance, but the ban-hammer isn't for nuisances, its for people spamming, trolling and contributing to the marginalization of peoples we want to make feel safe.

7
flaxrabbit🐰•

How is being a "nuisance" by reposting the removed comments of people that were "spamming, trolling and contributing to the marginalization of peoples we want to make feel safe" not "spamming, trolling" and etc?

9
GTnicholas•

Oh that is a cause of concern. Perhaps I missed that burried in some evidence of them just saying "we shouldn't ban mra's". But a warning was issued for that no? If they repost deleted post after being warned you have my support.

3
Vindalfr•

This thread came about because they were gonna get warned, but that got a bit out of hand.

Please feel free to support a warning or banning at your discretion.

7
GTnicholas•

I support a warning for reposting deleted content. Seriously not okay.

4
Sachyriel•

Oh, support, cause this looks kinda close.

7
Cosmic_Insurrection•

Highly support.

6
Newbunkle•

Support.

6
stirner_was_a_cat•

Support.

6
rusty811•

I'm going to oppose on the principle that I don't think anything he did was egregious enough to deserve a ban. If someone can show me I'm wrong maybe I'll support. I don't think we should ban quite this easily, bans should be reserved for people who truly outright oppressive, and I think we're walking a bit of a fine line here.

6
lilit_•

Around 4-5 months ago he posted an article complaining about "white genocide" and was banned. He was unbanned because some people naively think he is participating in good faith and is willing to learn. Recently there was some pretty strong evidence that he still knows fuck-all about racism (or at least his persona does).

There was a post about a black group in Wisconsin demanding the police pull out of their communities after a young, unarmed black guy was shot, and the post was brigades by white supremacists. There was a ban thread for one dude in particular who said some shit like "they need police for their own protection, and who will protect us from them with no one to keep them in line? History has shown us a few ideas!"

And so min_thamee said in the ban thread that the dude seemed to be here in good faith, maybe we could learn something from him, he might have a point, but oh, I guess it was kinda sorta not ok for him to call people faggots, so maybe we can ban him. With zero mention of the blatant racism.

4
theLastSolipsist•

Support

6
HamburgerDude•

Support

6
BiggieAndTheMets•

reaganvegPlease vote here: expand allcollapse all [–]from reaganveg sent 1 hour ago http://www.reddit.com/r/metanarchism/comments/2yv286/proposal_ban_umin_thamee/ permalinkreportblock usermark unreadreply

5
-Enkara-OPPOOR IMPULSE CONTROL•

Reaganveg asked you to vote here? lol

7
boilerpunx•

He messaged people to vote on his ban too

6
The_Mermaid•

That's probably why his ban proposals never pass. He begs inactive users to vote for him.

5
boilerpunx•

I brought it up in his ban thread, somebody created a whole sock to point it out, but for some reason everyone acted like it was no big deal. People who don't post here except to vote oppose on Reagan's ban threads should not be counted, I don't see how that's a controversial opinion. It's not like it's people who post once in a while, it's people who post every day, or even run their own subs, but there last posts in any of the @subs are months old, and even then some of those are just votes opposing Reagan's last ban thread. Now he's doing the same thing with min dami. It wouldn't even be hard to determine if someone is just coming to manipulate the vote, just take a glance at the names you recognize who haven't posted regularly since volcano got banned.

7
lilit_•

What a weirdo

6
HeloRising•

I received the same message.

4
anarchokawaii•

http://i.imgur.com/daU0im0.png?1

3
reaganveg•

If you don't want to vote, will you explain why not? Much appreciated.

-12
justcallcollect•

I hope you're messaging every reddt user, or at least everyone subscribed to r/@ and asking them to vote, or for an explanation as to why they aren't.

7
needstrangersadvice•

I doubt their motivation is either so principled or consistent.

6
reaganveg•

Messaging every reddit user??? Obviously not.

-7
justcallcollect•

Why not

8
BiggieAndTheMets•

I don't participate in this sub anymore because I don't think what happens here has anything to do with anarchism in praxis (and is in fact counterproductive). I've never even seen this handle, u/min_thamee, so why should I try to keep them from being banned?

Plus on a personal level, you've been a real dick to me and I find it galling that you would enlist me to help you game the system here. I'm assuming because we were frustrated by the same users in the past you thought I would jump up and have your back.

5
reaganveg•

Thanks for your reply.

I don't participate in this sub anymore

Do you mean r/anarchism or r/metanarchism?

I've never even seen this handle, u/min_thamee, so why should I try to keep them from being banned?

I would only ask you to judge the proposal for yourself on its own merits.

(The way I remember it, you would have seen the same person as u/min_dami though.)

Plus on a personal level, you've been a real dick to me

Sorry you feel that way. I didn't know you did.

-1
Indignantary•

support

5
Capn_Blackbeard•

Support

5
malcolmflaxworth•

Support. Their primary purpose appears to be devil's advocating just for the sake of it.

4
wavetime•

Support.

4