~ archived since 2018 ~

This Group of Straight Men Is Swearing Off Women

YoMommaBlack

September 25, 2015

0 upvotes

/r/MGTOW

http://www.vice.com/read/inside-the-global-collective-of-straight-male-separatists

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	This Group of Straight Men Is Swearing Off Women
Author	YoMommaBlack
Upvotes	0
Comments	16
Date	September 25, 2015 7:32 PM UTC (10 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MGTOW
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MGTOW/comments/3mdhxd/this_group_of_straight_men_is_swearing_off_women/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MGTOW/this-group-of-straight-men-is-swearing-off-women.641517 https://theredarchive.com/post/641517

Comments

[–]Rafoie2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SCROTAL-SACK1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]thrownaway_MGTOW1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]thrownaway_MGTOW0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]thrownaway_MGTOW0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

And in /r/MGTOW[1] where the number of new posts is really small, there's no excuse to not check the posts since the article was created if the article was made a few days ago.

Exactly. I mean in this case there were at least TWO other obvious prior posts of this same article (with only a slightly altered URL link).

Of course, if its months old, I don't blame someone for not finding it (reddit search sucks, plus crappy titles don't help).

Yeah I really don't complain about that. You can't expect someone to search through multiple pages of prior posts.

The BIGGER problem is that a lot of these are by brand new (< 1 day old) accounts -- that to me (especially in common with the repost) signals Shill, Troll, etc. -- I'm beginning to think we need to suggest to /u/ss_camaro that he implement some automod bot that disallows posting of new threads unless the account is at least like a week old. That doesn't completely resolve the "shill" issue, but with the trolls it at least eliminates the "impulsive" kind requires them to have the discipline to come back a week later.

[–]ss_camaro1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]thrownaway_MGTOW0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]ss_camaro1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]thrownaway_MGTOW0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well, as /u/227889 and I were discussing, we dont really have a problem with "reposts" per se -- so long as there is some decent amount of time (months, weeks, or at least a few days) in between them.

It's things like the recent "Vice.com" article -- which I think was posted like 3 or 4 times within a single day (and then of course the additional blog-spam "wrapper" regurgitations of the same thing, like the Reason.com article, which was largely just quoting the Vice.com crap.)

And I wasn't certain if you wanted to be bothered with them as "reports" -- I mean generally speaking I'd rather see the karma up/down vote thing take care of it -- but in this case it seems more like it was some outside shills that were PUSHING the content here...

So if I see that kind of thing in the future (though I'm betting the automod thing will reduce the likelihood) I will now "report" it.

Cheers!

P.S. Also, thanks for reducing the size of the logo thing. Much more manageable at this size (especially on my "short/wide" screen netbook where vertical screen space is at a premium).

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]thrownaway_MGTOW0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[deleted]

[–]thrownaway_MGTOW0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And it wouldn't prevent lurkers from lurking, nor even from creating brand-spanking NEW accounts to finally participate and "comment" on topics.

It wouldn't even prevent them from becoming active thread-starters -- it would merely cause a (relatively short) delay in the ability to do so with some BRAND NEW account.

IOW, they would simply be given a choice: post a new thread WITH A PRE-EXISTING ACCOUNT -- or, if they wanted to create a new "alternate" account... and then WAIT a week (MY GOD!!!) before posting a new thread.

The benefit to the forum-community is that it would PREVENT the wholly anonymous/impulsive "trolls" from plastering the place with ridiculous amounts of crap threads (i.e. Seagull fashion -- flying in, crapping all over everything, squacking like crazy and then flying away) -- which once you've been here a while, you'll realize happens in fits and spurts on a fairly regular cycle.

(BTW relative to that, I'm convinced that when that happens, it's often a SINGLE {clearly de-ranged reactionary} person {and very often a woman} who generates multiple new accounts to create the illusion of several people -- even including several re-postings of the same article/link in order to sort of FORCE or CRAM certain specific content into the forum.)

[–]TFCNU0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link