RageFuel the redditfags are getting posters BANNED from this forum

[Princel]

i told you this would happen. if you call out a commie liberal reddit faggot, they wait until you make a post that breaks the rules and they report you. even if your obviously jokin in your post they report you and mods temp ban you. then you get pissed at mods and talk shit about mods and mods hate you now. then you post more angry content bc your life is shit then reddit faggots report you and you get perma banned bc mods hate you.

thats how these commies do it. its in rules for radicals the communist tactics book

Rules for Radicals pdf

RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.”

If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity’s very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)

in this case reddit faggot commie infiltrators know that a post that "incites violence" will get you temp banned and later perma banned. they know were angry af. they use it against us and use the rules to get us banned. reddit faggots will win either way bc they get the mods to clamp down on our free speech and break apart this community or they ban charismatic posters and leave the most docile pussy nigger posters on this forum.

notice how the best posters are gone? ppl say mods and that can be true but right now is what im talkin about. after this migration of reddit faggots, the real niggaz bein banned are targetted by reddit commie faggots. dont be fooled. a lot of internet communities are organized especially commie ones. they are specialists infiltration and disruption. if you been here as long as me or even longer, there is a difference in quality on this forum from the beginning with the black pills to shitpostin faggots.

this assault wont stop unless all commie liberal faggots are wiped from this forum. notice conservatives want to live in peace with freedom but these faggots keep invadin and tryin to change our spaces? you can call me crazy but this always happens even in history.

if you read this thread, save it and come back to it. do not forget my words. this forum was marked for destruction and now the reddit commie faggots are here to do it. also remember israel uses its soldiers to invade forums to promote itself as well as hire out to private companies like jewish internet defense force.

we have a lot of enemies bc we speak truth. even if we get banned here, dont stop spreadin it. whatever forum or chan you happen to move to, speak the blackpill truth.

 

[Napoleon de Jizzbal]

Would not happen with based mods

 

[Princel]

Would not happen with based mods

i cant help you. those who know will understand my post. those that cant will live in ignorance. this is my final warnin to this community. the seed sprouted. time will lead to all our destruction.

 

[speedtypingincel]

Honestly, I think the problem is the overly strict rules.

 

[Princel]

Honestly, I think the problem is the overly strict rules.

duh. admins and mods know normies are watchin this forum and they want to avoid controversy with recent shootins and shit. thats why they startin to stamp out. reddit commie faggots notice this and are usin it. thats how cold wars are fought. study history especially commie history and you notice they use tactics like this. infiltration, subversion, disruption, dilution. did you not read gentleman guide to forum spies?

Gentleman Guide to Forum Spies

the conservatives are learnin and usin their own moves against them. they dont like it. thats why they need to shut us down from every major platform bc the truth is dangerous to there ideas

 

[Hate_my_life]

overly strict rules.

Which are?

 

[Deleted member 21883]

I wonder if we could get IT on some kind of copyright thing. It might be a way to make the idiots pay.

 

[IamJacksBrokenHeart]

Honestly, I think the problem is the overly strict rules.

i strongly support the rules tbh , you may not like them but they are what keeps the normies , LARPers and IT users out of this forum .
Keep the rules as they are tbh , cause if they make them less strict once , this will only lead to them reducing them even more in the future and eventually letting even females join .

 

[Princel]

Which are?

rules are like laws and can be interpreted in any way. just like a judge who kills a prenup and forces the man to pay alimony and 1/2 his shit to his cheatiin whore wife. i had a recent run in with a mod who is breathin down my neck and forcin me to leave. i followed the rules to the letter even quoting serge himself but he still threw out my case and told me to fuck off.

if the rules say no illegal shit discussed then its on mods to decide if you talkin bout ok or not. talkin bout streamin or torrents is illegal but mods decide if its ok or not to talk about. talkin bout your violent thoughts are illegal in certain states in JewSA which are under "red flag laws." if someone ever finds out who you are you can be arrested, have your guns taken away and sent to a mental hospital if needed and forced to take crazy pills.

its all on interpretation which is different from every person and people mess up a lot.

 

[speedtypingincel]

Which are?

The vagueness of the rules shouldn't exist, it makes the community feel repressed.

On top of that there are many others that are unnecessary and people get warning points (for basically no reason).

Some examples:

1) @jerrycan dan 's post about having nightmares of being banned from this forum. Do you think that in a healthy community a regular, contributing member such as him would be posting such a thread? .... No.

2) @AntiPain 's thread recently about how he was banned for a gay joke, he said "x, x or Napoleon de Geso". Do you think people should get warnings for gay jokes? ... In any case, I'm not saying that we should allow faggots to come here and tell us to become gay.

3) The legendary slang "BBC" which gives 30% per warning, do you think such a restriction should exist? We have seen @Cuyen
post a thread about it, @MarriedAndLookin4Fun getting 60% for it, others getting warned, it's pointless and makes the regulars here feel scared of posting.

4) Low effort "spam", obviously there should be a limit, not spam the same things over and over again, but should we really have this rule?

5) "Baiting", probably the most vague rule of all, if you don't know what the word means and google it, urban dictionary will give you several definitions, one of them being that it means to intentionally try to trigger someone, and the other one which means to bait people into responding to you, respond to them, bait them again, and repeat the process to increase your post count.

Is this rule necessary? ... No.

 

[Teutonic Knight]

They banned eskimocel because (((they))) don't like the slavpill.

 

[Princel]

i strongly support the rules tbh , you may not like them but they are what keeps the normies , LARPers and IT users out of this forum .
Keep the rules as they are tbh , cause if they make them less strict once , this will only lead to them reducing them even more in the future and eventually letting even females join .

im talkin about those reddit commie infiltrators usin our rules that were meant to protect in order to fuck us. its like judo. they know what the motives of the admins andmods are. they know there are loopholes in the rules. they know posters hate bein banned for bullshit. they combine that together and use it against us.

holy fuck what is agitation which is a main tool of communists?







if theres only one video you have to watch, watch this one above this sentece


WE ARE A FUCKIN MOVEMENT NOW BOYOS

WE ARE THE SUCCESSORS TO THE RED PILL, WE OUTLASTED ALL THOSE PUA, MGTOW CUCKS BC WE SPREAD NATURES DARK TRUTH!

we are targetted for destruction. the mainstream media puts us on blast bc they want normies aware and they want them to hate us. its not enough were ugly and miserable but we cant even speak the truth without harrassment.

@BlkPillPres will be a writer one day
@BrendioEEE will be a speaker one day

these are the talents for this new movement that are comin up. there are many in the forum who have the potential but need to refine your gifts more. some can write, some can speak, some can make memes or videos, others can organize. take action is my only advice and use your gifts and knowledge as best you can. some have no talents but can spread black pill stickers and posters like /pol/ did it's ok to be white posters.

my time is limited here. if they ban me or delete this thread it was an honor postin with you cunts.

 

[Angry_runt]

Just don't break forum rules, bro.

 

[Napoleon de Jizzbal]

You sperading capitalist propaganda here or what? Capitalism sucks

 

[MarriedAndLookin4Fun]

@MarriedAndLookin4Fun getting 60% for it

Did not ever begin for me, not even in a thousand years

 

[Robtical]

You sperading capitalist propaganda here or what? Capitalism sucks

Communism is cucked because no one will want to work hard if they know they'll only get paid as much as a chad bagging groceries.

 

[Napoleon de Jizzbal]

Communism is cucked because no one will want to work hard if they know they'll only get paid as much as a chad bagging groceries.

Based communism with chads in gulag will work

 

[speedtypingincel]

im talkin about those reddit commie infiltrators usin our rules that were meant to protect in order to fuck us. its like judo. they know what the motives of the admins andmods are. they know there are loopholes in the rules. they know posters hate bein banned for bullshit. they combine that together and use it against us.

Loopholes exist because of vague rules.

 

[Hate_my_life]

1) @jerrycan dan 's post about having nightmares of being banned from this forum. Do you think that in a healthy community a regular, contributing member such as him would be posting such a thread? .... No.

In all honesty if someone's having nightmares about an Incel forums, it says a lot about the person rather than the forum (srs).

I'm not going to come across as a saint and that I don't need these forums (see online time), but if time away from here is actually having a knock-on effect in your day to day life: something's wrong.

2) @AntiPain 's thread recently about how he was banned for a gay joke, he said "x, x or Napoleon de Geso". Do you think people should get warnings for gay jokes? ... In any case, I'm not saying that we should allow faggots to come here and tell us to become gay.

No.

Just don't allow gays to start coming in here and shoving their views down our throat (no homo). They can do that all over reddit.

3) The legendary slang "BBC" which gives 30% per warning, do you think such a restriction should exist? We have seen @Cuyen
post a thread about it, @MarriedAndLookin4Fun getting 60% for it, others getting warned, it's pointless and makes the regulars here feel scared of posting.

JFL @MarriedAndLookin4Fun screenshot of the 60%?

In all honesty it's an obtuse statement made by the same spammers who won't ever post any scientific proof, to back up their fantasy "BBC theory" which in 99% of the times is largely influenced by porn - I sound like an IT cuck, but the r/JBB subreddit that used to exist was all pornography of a black guy with a large penis having sex with a white foid; with comments saying stuff like:
"White girls need to be bred by these black studs"

The r/JBW spammers are no better, but are they wrong in saying that Caucasian males/females have an edge over any other races? No - there's studies confirming that. That's not to say being white alone barres you from Inceldom, neither does being black or any other ethnicity. You need to be attractive, but for Caucasian men, there's a greater deviation.

In terms of the restriction, I don't think anyone should be getting warnings above 5% (JBB + JBW) unless they repeatedly post cherry-picked as a basis for their arguments. If the basis of their argument can be backed up by a source and they build on top of that with individualistic events. That's fine.

4) Low effort "spam", obviously there should be a limit, not spam the same things over and over again, but should we really have this rule?

Yes.

If there wasn't a rule, this forum would be just posts of people quoting the guy who had the effort to type something.
Once again, I'm not saying that you must have text in every post you make as I've even seen the moderators themselves just quote a good comment - especially if that comment expresses all the points you wanted to make.
Sorry to throw @needsolution under the bus, but in the large amount of posts he's amassed in the short-time frame he's been here. I'd wager that over 50% are just quotes (I'll re-iterate again, I'm also prone to that): Imagine every user did that.

5) "Baiting", probably the most vague rule of all, if you don't know what the word means and google it, urban dictionary will give you several definitions, one of them being that it means to intentionally try to trigger someone, and the other one which means to bait people into responding to you, respond to them, bait them again, and repeat the process to increase your post count.

I've actually never understood this rule: you're right tbh.

There are loopholes, but I imagine there's loopholes within any set of rules.

rules are like laws and can be interpreted in any way. just like a judge who kills a prenup and forces the man to pay alimony and 1/2 his shit to his cheatiin whore wife. i had a recent run in with a mod who is breathin down my neck and forcin me to leave. i followed the rules to the letter even quoting serge himself but he still threw out my case and told me to fuck off.

if the rules say no illegal shit discussed then its on mods to decide if you talkin bout ok or not. talkin bout streamin or torrents is illegal but mods decide if its ok or not to talk about. talkin bout your violent thoughts are illegal in certain states in JewSA which are under "red flag laws." if someone ever finds out who you are you can be arrested, have your guns taken away and sent to a mental hospital if needed and forced to take crazy pills.

its all on interpretation which is different from every person and people mess up a lot.

Agreed with your entire post.

I could happily type right now:
I want to have intercourse with a 16 year old willing female (that gives me consent).

IncelTears will have a heart-attack and if I was in the land of freedom (USA): I'd probably be getting a visit if i continuously re-iterated the above post. As the laws differ by nation, indeed there shall friction as to what's illegal or not, but I imagine majority of the user-base here is American so I just go off those laws as to what's illegal.

In all honesty, I think those laws are just to stop the extreme shit. e.g. Planning a shooting (In GTA V) or Trying to sell guns (In Minecraft) or Looking for 6 year old children (to buy candy).

But your point does stand.

 

[needsolution]

In all honesty if someone's having nightmares about an Incel forums, it says a lot about the person rather than the forum (srs).

I'm not going to come across as a saint and that I don't need these forums (see online time), but if time away from here is actually having a knock-on effect in your day to day life: something's wrong.



No.

Just don't allow gays to start coming in here and shoving their views down our throat (no homo). They can do that all over reddit.



JFL @MarriedAndLookin4Fun screenshot of the 60%?

In all honesty it's an obtuse statement made by the same spammers who won't ever post any scientific proof, to back up their fantasy "BBC theory" which in 99% of the times is largely influenced by porn - I sound like an IT cuck, but the r/JBB subreddit that used to exist was all pornography of a black guy with a large penis having sex with a white foid; with comments saying stuff like:
"White girls need to be bred by these black studs"

The r/JBW spammers are no better, but are they wrong in saying that Caucasian males/females have an edge over any other races? No - there's studies confirming that. That's not to say being white alone barres you from Inceldom, neither does being black or any other ethnicity. You need to be attractive, but for Caucasian men, there's a greater deviation.

In terms of the restriction, I don't think anyone should be getting warnings above 5% (JBB + JBW) unless they repeatedly post cherry-picked as a basis for their arguments. If the basis of their argument can be backed up by a source and they build on top of that with individualistic events. That's fine.



Yes.

If there wasn't a rule, this forum would be just posts of people quoting the guy who had the effort to type something.
Once again, I'm not saying that you must have text in every post you make as I've even seen the moderators themselves just quote a good comment - especially if that comment expresses all the points you wanted to make.
Sorry to throw @needsolution under the bus, but in the large amount of posts he's amassed in the short-time frame he's been here. I'd wager that over 50% are just quotes (I'll re-iterate again, I'm also prone to that): Imagine every user did that.


I've actually never understood this rule: you're right tbh.

There are loopholes, but I imagine there's loopholes within any set of rules.



Agreed with your entire post.

I could happily type right now:
I want to have intercourse with a 16 year old willing female (that gives me consent).

IncelTears will have a heart-attack and if I was in the land of freedom (USA): I'd probably be getting a visit if i continuously re-iterated the above post. As the laws differ by nation, indeed there shall friction as to what's illegal or not, but I imagine majority of the user-base here is American so I just go off those laws as to what's illegal.

In all honesty, I think those laws are just to stop the extreme shit. e.g. Planning a shooting (In GTA V) or Trying to sell guns (In Minecraft) or Looking for 6 year old children (to buy candy).

But your point does stand.

 

[Hate_my_life]

View attachment 166609

You're still a forum-icon.

 

[speedtypingincel]

JFL @MarriedAndLookin4Fun screenshot of the 60%?

Seems like I remember wrong, he is at 60% warning percent, he didn't receive 60% for it. Although if you go over on ban discussion megathread I'm sure there's a screenshot of a certain dude who gave 30% for "BBC spam".

In all honesty it's an obtuse statement made by the same spammers who won't ever post any scientific proof, to back up their fantasy "BBC theory" which in 99% of the times is largely influenced by porn - I sound like an IT cuck, but the r/JBB subreddit that used to exist was all pornography of a black guy with a large penis having sex with a white foid; with comments saying stuff like:
"White girls need to be bred by these black studs"

The r/JBW spammers are no better, but are they wrong in saying that Caucasian males/females have an edge over any other races? No - there's studies confirming that. That's not to say being white alone barres you from Inceldom, neither does being black or any other ethnicity. You need to be attractive, but for Caucasian men, there's a greater deviation.

In terms of the restriction, I don't think anyone should be getting warnings above 5% (JBB + JBW) unless they repeatedly post cherry-picked as a basis for their arguments. If the basis of their argument can be backed up by a source and they build on top of that with individualistic events. That's fine.

There have been studies on the topic, which can be found with just a simple google search, if you also consider the racemixing the last centuries there's too many variables for BBC theory to be proven.

If there wasn't a rule, this forum would be just posts of people quoting the guy who had the effort to type something.
Once again, I'm not saying that you must have text in every post you make as I've even seen the moderators themselves just quote a good comment - especially if that comment expresses all the points you wanted to make.
Sorry to throw @needsolution under the bus, but in the large amount of posts he's amassed in the short-time frame he's been here. I'd wager that over 50% are just quotes (I'll re-iterate again, I'm also prone to that): Imagine every user did that.

Oh no, when I say low-effort I don't mean that we should quote others (I actually always thought this is a bit stupid because it increases post count without contributing anything (although admittedly I've done it myself sometimes)). That shouldn't exist (hence why I said with a limit).

 

[Deleted member 16624]

The vagueness of the rules shouldn't exist, it makes the community feel repressed.

On top of that there are many others that are unnecessary and people get warning points (for basically no reason).

Some examples:

1) @jerrycan dan 's post about having nightmares of being banned from this forum. Do you think that in a healthy community a regular, contributing member such as him would be posting such a thread? .... No.

2) @AntiPain 's thread recently about how he was banned for a gay joke, he said "x, x or Napoleon de Geso". Do you think people should get warnings for gay jokes? ... In any case, I'm not saying that we should allow faggots to come here and tell us to become gay.

3) The legendary slang "BBC" which gives 30% per warning, do you think such a restriction should exist? We have seen @Cuyen
post a thread about it, @MarriedAndLookin4Fun getting 60% for it, others getting warned, it's pointless and makes the regulars here feel scared of posting.

4) Low effort "spam", obviously there should be a limit, not spam the same things over and over again, but should we really have this rule?

5) "Baiting", probably the most vague rule of all, if you don't know what the word means and google it, urban dictionary will give you several definitions, one of them being that it means to intentionally try to trigger someone, and the other one which means to bait people into responding to you, respond to them, bait them again, and repeat the process to increase your post count.

Is this rule necessary? ... No.

The BBC thing always gets me

 

[Hate_my_life]

Seems like I remember wrong, he is at 60% warning percent, he didn't receive 60% for it. Although if you go over on ban discussion megathread I'm sure there's a screenshot of a certain dude who gave 30% for "BBC spam".

I'm not fully aware of how posts work, but if I'm not mistaken:

Warning for first time offenders (Got mine )
then the magnitude of the percentage depends on the severity of the violation.

e.g.
Posting a picture of your P in V should warrant a 100000000% warning (perma-ban).

or
e.g.
Inciting violence would get you 20%

@WithoutMe @mental_out @i_a_m_i this correct?

Of course the definition is of severity is "vague".
Although I imagine if you repeatedly do the same offence, the warning magnitude increases accordingly.

There have been studies on the topic,

Link to those?

 

[grondilu]

Stop paying attention to those people.

 

[exe]

bbc spammers deserved it

 

[grondilu]

if theres only one video you have to watch, watch this one above this sentence.

This is indeed the kind of things we should be thinking about : strategizing to find legal ways to destabilize society. We don't stand a chance if we try to use force or terrorism. We have neither the numbers nor the financial resources that Islam has, for instance.

But think of memes like "it's ok to be white" or projects like cryptocurrencies, they are smart initiatives that challenge the status quo. There has to be legal ways to Blackpill normies, to uncuck society and kick women out of their pedestal.

We should use our LDAR time to think about that.

 

[jerrycan dan]

Would not happen with based mods

Napoleon de Geso for mod

 

[Emba]

Reports me

Bans me


All i ever wanted was 40 acres and a mule...

 

[Vermilioncore]

4) Low effort "spam", obviously there should be a limit, not spam the same things over and over again, but should we really have this rule?

Yeah I think this is the worst rule. I think low effort should be permitted as long as it's not spamming the same thing over and over

 

[Napoleon de Jizzbal]

Napoleon de Geso for mod

Would not work at fullest. Mods are forced to impose unbased rules

 

[speedtypingincel]

Seems like we had a redditfag today invade. Bumping for others to see.

 

[Dionysus]

didn't read

 

[startcel]

FUCK YOU JANNIES
YOU ARE POWERHUNGRY FUCKS AND YOU DONT DO YOUR JOB RIGHT
(jk) ((ich mache nur spaß)

 

[Hail The Bloatlord]

I will get you all banned, mysognistic inces!

 

[Saudade]

They banned eskimocel because (((they))) don't like the slavpill.

 

[Indari]

truth

3) The legendary slang "BBC" which gives 30% per warning, do you think such a restriction should exist? We have seen @Cuyen
post a thread about it, @MarriedAndLookin4Fun getting 60% for it, others getting warned, it's pointless and makes the regulars here feel scared of posting.

wtf? rules are ghey

 

[startcel]

mods are ghey

agreed

 

[LastGerman]

Sorry to throw @needsolution under the bus

Brutal driver licence pill here.

 

[Uglyethnicrat]

Oh for srs?

 

[startcel]

Brutal driver licence pill here.

Kek

 

[AlexanderTheGreat11]

didn't read

Me neither tbh

 

[startcel]

Oh for srs?

U are reddit infiltrator

Me neither tbh

U are reddit infiltrator

 

[Uglyethnicrat]

No im not i hate reddit

 

[startcel]

No im not i hate reddit

Yes yes

 

[Deleted member 16624]

Would not happen with based mods

 

[Uglyethnicrat]

Yes yes

Ok then

 

[speedtypingincel]

U are reddit infiltrator

U are reddit infiltrator

Dude don't go around calling people infiltrators, it's autistic and you have no proof. Reddit infiltrators will eventually show themselves (or maybe not...), just be careful and don't break the rules and you'll be fine. Trust nobody...

 

[startcel]

Dude don't go around calling people infiltrators, it's autistic and you have no proof. Reddit infiltrators will eventually show themselves (or maybe not...), just be careful and don't break the rules and you'll be fine. Trust nobody...

Im jking kek