This soy ''research'' was done in august about our beloved Incels.is forum ''for some cuck's master degree JFL'' we be giving them free degrees y'all :unreal:
Seriously we need to stop giving these cucks graduation projects
I actually found it accidentally on cucktear , wasn't looking for it specifically :kek: although its always interesting to read an out of group perspective,
well not in this case...
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTear/comments/xba3ym/essay_analyzing_incels/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3
the thread ITself received zero attention of the subreddit
okay lets check out ''the finding'':
The complete network of users, as shown in Figure 1, depicts a community divided into an inner and an outer group. A large proportion of users in the network interacted with less than 3 other users over the course of the corpus. Importantly, this meant that not only is the community divided, the groups serve disparate functions. Users in the outer group are not interacting among themselves, separate from the inner community. Instead, those within the outer group concentrate around a handful of users who act as focal points along the edge of the inner community. At the same time, the inner group is largely made up of users who do primarily interact among themselves, with only the occasional interaction with members of the outer group. This separation is further emphasized by the Betweenness Centrality of user nodes. 59.15% of users in the Incel network had a Normal Betweenness Centrality of < 0.0001. Thus, a majority of users exist within the outer group, largely disconnected from the inner Incel community. Figure 4 illustrates the disparity within the inner and outer
community.
(a) < 0.001 Normal betweenness centrality (b) ≥ 0.001 Normal betweenness centrality
Figure 4: Centrality Comparison
63.55% of users have a degree of ≤ 2, indicating that they interacted with only two separate users, either by commenting on their thread or having their threads commented on. 46.33% only interacted with a single user. Furthermore, for many of these users, their edges were with the limited handful of users who act as focal points within the network. Notably, there were several sections of the outer group divisible through the specific focal-point users they interacted with. Most notably of these focal-points, were the top three users by in- bound degree and weighted in-bound degree: User 1, User 893, and User 46. In fact, these three users combined made up a significant proportion of the total weight available within the entire network. For each of these users, the question arises as to what it is exactly that places them so centrally within the greater Incel community.
User 1 was a forum moderator, thus they have several moderator-focused threads and comments. Their interactions included responding to feedback posts, discussing users’ ban appeals, or generally responding as a spokesperson of the moderator team. Much of their in- bound interactions are the results of creating large “megathreads” for these purposes. Their appearance as a focal-point of the network makes sense as a result of their role within the community and is not necessarily the result of appealing to Incel narratives and establishing themselves within the community.
That said, it is still relevant that they have formal power over the forum. As a moderator, User 1 is able to ban/unban users, hide/remove/lock6 threads, and more. They also make reference to multiple older (now banned) Incel commu- nity sites in their discussions, likely placing them as a long-term member of the community.
One of the clear ways that admin users like User 1 enact their formal authority over a community is through the development and enforcement of rules. A community’s rules can give clear insight into the values of that community and moderators inherently work to maintain a community built around those rules. Considering this and User 1’s position, it is likely that User 1 is in invested in the Incel worldview and his enforcement of the site rules works to further reinforce that worldview.
This is evident with the following excerpt from a post outlining the forum’s rules and terminology:
Incel (Allowed): Person who wishes to be in a romantic relationship, but is unable to despite numerous attempts and a significant amount of time trying.
Blackpilled (Conditional): Person who believes in / wants to learn about the Blackpill.
Female (Not Allowed): Banned on sight, no exceptions
Immediately, this establishes a community built on the exclusion and vilification of women. Furthermore, this also seeks to enforce the importance of determining “real” Incels and that the blackpill is also central to that determination. Further on in the rules, when outlining things which are not allowed: Immediately, these rules establish a community constructed on the exclusion and vilification of women. Furthermore, it establishes the importance of “real” Incels and centers the blackpill in that determination. Further on in the rules post, he outlines things which are not allowed on the forum including:
Cherry picking (e.g. unattractive men with girlfriends).
This preemptively seeks to dismiss any criticism and block attempts to go against the Incel worldview views all men disadvantaged in the “Sexual Market” (O’Malley et al., 2020).
In contrast to the formal position of power of User 1, User 46 did not appear to be a moderator and in fact was was Banned at some point before the archive was captured. Still, User 46 created popular threads that garnered large amounts of replies and remained active for much of the corpus. Their most popular thread was one titled “I will approach7 1000 girls and find a GF”:
there is no way in hell that not 1 girl in 1000 will like me I have approached 22 978 to go fellas
This thread consisted of 2,612 comments, of which 2,112 were comments created by users other than User 46. In total, 549 different users created comments in this thread over its lifespan. Based on the final comments in the thread, it was eventually closed by forum moderators, yet not before users could reminisce with comments like “I miss the glory days of this thread.” Clearly, User 46 was able to make an impact within the community and generate significant discussion. Furthermore, User 46 firmly sits within the Incel identity throughout his comment history, frequently disparaging women, boasting about catfishing8women, and frequently using homophobic and racist slurs.
At the time the archive was taken, User 46 had been banned from the forum. There was no official explanation from moderators for this ban that could be found within the corpus, though based on the discussion threads which mentioned User 46 following his ban, he was likely banned due to having success in his dating life and “finding a GF” and having sex. This presents an interesting case, as previous to his ban, User 46’s comments clearly supported the Incel normative order of the Sexual Market and the power women hold over dating (O’Malley et al., 2020). But if it is true that he was banned for being able to develop
a romantic or sexual relationship with a woman, then his personal accounts and story would serve to delegitimize the Incel worldview. This is further supported as comments discussing him after his ban from the forum often disparaged him and declared that they had always suspected he was not a real Incel.
Similar to User 46, User 893 created a popular thread which maintained activity for the entire length of the corpus. In fact, User 893 created only a single thread within the forum corpus. This specific thread was the largest thread in the Offtopic sub-forum and as such was not intended for Incel ideological discussion. Instead, this thread was intended to be a place for users to post music recommendations. It consisted of a total of 2,753 replies of which only 31 comments came from User 893. In total, 485 unique users commented on the thread over its lifespan. Also unlike User 46, this thread remained active throughout the corpus and never seemed to slow or be locked by moderators.
Even though outside of his own thread User 893 was less active than User 46, he was still very much entrenched in the Incel ideology. While his comment history is not considerably large outside of his thread, his comments placed emphasis on the Incel normative orders and traits, such as his contribution to a thread titled “Chad fails suicide via shotgun to the head. Ends up disfigured. Gets first face transplant.”:
incel does the same thing no one gives a fuck and everyone makes fun of him until he dies for real a few months later: stacy shots[sic] herself in the head for attention: millions of views on jewtube people being sorry for her can still get chad.
Thus, even though User 893’s own thread may not have been Incel-focused, he, like User 46, demonstrates that they are fully invested in the Incel worldview and the Incel normative orders (O’Malley et al., 2020). Unlike User 46, though, he was not eventually banned and remained active throughout the date range of the corpus.
As many users in the outer Incels never interact beyond the few focal-point users, those focal-point users act as an intermediary between the inner and outer Incels. Outer Incels can be split based on the specific focal-point user they interact with, but within the inner community, there is no similar disconnections. There are not any outstanding subdivisions or splits within the inner Incel community, even when considering the network spans the four separate sub-forums of the Incel forum. Still, users congregate into a singular cluster of interconnections.
Another aspect of this inner and outer community is its connection to how long users have been members of the Incel community. Figure 6 plots users’ join dates against their normal betweenness centrality with users split according to user category9. Most noteworthy is that users among those who have a normal betweenness centrality of ≥ 0.001, none of them joined the Incel forum after November 2018 10. Additionally, even among members who fell into this power user category, those with the highest centrality primarily joined the community earlier. This demonstrates the ways in which users do not immediately join the inner community but must move after some time.
This centrality was also disconnected from the number of comments a user makes, as demonstrated by Figure 6. While higher centrality members did tend to have a higher number of comments on average, there where many users who joined later who did not have high centrality. This measure placed importance on the specific of who comments on a users
thread or whose threads that user comments on instead of on merely having a large number of comments.
The emphasis on specific users’ threads further lends credence to the argument that Incels join the community on the outside, likely with less intense, less extreme ideas and slowly form connections with those already in the inner community and become further and further embedded within the inner community. Additionally, as explained previously, this further strengthens both the formal and informal authority that focal-point users have to influence the users who join the community later.
Figure 5: Relative Plots of Normalized Betweenness Centrality, Split By User Category
Figure 6: Relative Plots of Comments Included in Corpus, Split By User Category
Okay lot of blabber here, what is the take points?: TL;DR if you will.
mentioned thread: https://incels.is/threads/i-will-approach-1000-girls-and-find-a-gf.46003/
mentioned thread: https://incels.is/threads/music-megathread.24563/
possible identifiers:
Figure 1: Complete Incel User Network
Seriously we need to stop giving these cucks graduation projects
I actually found it accidentally on cucktear , wasn't looking for it specifically :kek: although its always interesting to read an out of group perspective,
well not in this case...
View: https://www.reddit.com/r/IncelTear/comments/xba3ym/essay_analyzing_incels/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3
the thread ITself received zero attention of the subreddit
okay lets check out ''the finding'':
4 Findings
User Centrality
The complete network of users, as shown in Figure 1, depicts a community divided into an inner and an outer group. A large proportion of users in the network interacted with less than 3 other users over the course of the corpus. Importantly, this meant that not only is the community divided, the groups serve disparate functions. Users in the outer group are not interacting among themselves, separate from the inner community. Instead, those within the outer group concentrate around a handful of users who act as focal points along the edge of the inner community. At the same time, the inner group is largely made up of users who do primarily interact among themselves, with only the occasional interaction with members of the outer group. This separation is further emphasized by the Betweenness Centrality of user nodes. 59.15% of users in the Incel network had a Normal Betweenness Centrality of < 0.0001. Thus, a majority of users exist within the outer group, largely disconnected from the inner Incel community. Figure 4 illustrates the disparity within the inner and outer
community.
(a) < 0.001 Normal betweenness centrality (b) ≥ 0.001 Normal betweenness centrality
Figure 4: Centrality Comparison
63.55% of users have a degree of ≤ 2, indicating that they interacted with only two separate users, either by commenting on their thread or having their threads commented on. 46.33% only interacted with a single user. Furthermore, for many of these users, their edges were with the limited handful of users who act as focal points within the network. Notably, there were several sections of the outer group divisible through the specific focal-point users they interacted with. Most notably of these focal-points, were the top three users by in- bound degree and weighted in-bound degree: User 1, User 893, and User 46. In fact, these three users combined made up a significant proportion of the total weight available within the entire network. For each of these users, the question arises as to what it is exactly that places them so centrally within the greater Incel community.
User 1 was a forum moderator, thus they have several moderator-focused threads and comments. Their interactions included responding to feedback posts, discussing users’ ban appeals, or generally responding as a spokesperson of the moderator team. Much of their in- bound interactions are the results of creating large “megathreads” for these purposes. Their appearance as a focal-point of the network makes sense as a result of their role within the community and is not necessarily the result of appealing to Incel narratives and establishing themselves within the community.
That said, it is still relevant that they have formal power over the forum. As a moderator, User 1 is able to ban/unban users, hide/remove/lock6 threads, and more. They also make reference to multiple older (now banned) Incel commu- nity sites in their discussions, likely placing them as a long-term member of the community.
One of the clear ways that admin users like User 1 enact their formal authority over a community is through the development and enforcement of rules. A community’s rules can give clear insight into the values of that community and moderators inherently work to maintain a community built around those rules. Considering this and User 1’s position, it is likely that User 1 is in invested in the Incel worldview and his enforcement of the site rules works to further reinforce that worldview.
This is evident with the following excerpt from a post outlining the forum’s rules and terminology:
Incel (Allowed): Person who wishes to be in a romantic relationship, but is unable to despite numerous attempts and a significant amount of time trying.
Blackpilled (Conditional): Person who believes in / wants to learn about the Blackpill.
Female (Not Allowed): Banned on sight, no exceptions
Immediately, this establishes a community built on the exclusion and vilification of women. Furthermore, this also seeks to enforce the importance of determining “real” Incels and that the blackpill is also central to that determination. Further on in the rules, when outlining things which are not allowed: Immediately, these rules establish a community constructed on the exclusion and vilification of women. Furthermore, it establishes the importance of “real” Incels and centers the blackpill in that determination. Further on in the rules post, he outlines things which are not allowed on the forum including:
Cherry picking (e.g. unattractive men with girlfriends).
This preemptively seeks to dismiss any criticism and block attempts to go against the Incel worldview views all men disadvantaged in the “Sexual Market” (O’Malley et al., 2020).
In contrast to the formal position of power of User 1, User 46 did not appear to be a moderator and in fact was was Banned at some point before the archive was captured. Still, User 46 created popular threads that garnered large amounts of replies and remained active for much of the corpus. Their most popular thread was one titled “I will approach7 1000 girls and find a GF”:
there is no way in hell that not 1 girl in 1000 will like me I have approached 22 978 to go fellas
This thread consisted of 2,612 comments, of which 2,112 were comments created by users other than User 46. In total, 549 different users created comments in this thread over its lifespan. Based on the final comments in the thread, it was eventually closed by forum moderators, yet not before users could reminisce with comments like “I miss the glory days of this thread.” Clearly, User 46 was able to make an impact within the community and generate significant discussion. Furthermore, User 46 firmly sits within the Incel identity throughout his comment history, frequently disparaging women, boasting about catfishing8women, and frequently using homophobic and racist slurs.
At the time the archive was taken, User 46 had been banned from the forum. There was no official explanation from moderators for this ban that could be found within the corpus, though based on the discussion threads which mentioned User 46 following his ban, he was likely banned due to having success in his dating life and “finding a GF” and having sex. This presents an interesting case, as previous to his ban, User 46’s comments clearly supported the Incel normative order of the Sexual Market and the power women hold over dating (O’Malley et al., 2020). But if it is true that he was banned for being able to develop
a romantic or sexual relationship with a woman, then his personal accounts and story would serve to delegitimize the Incel worldview. This is further supported as comments discussing him after his ban from the forum often disparaged him and declared that they had always suspected he was not a real Incel.
Similar to User 46, User 893 created a popular thread which maintained activity for the entire length of the corpus. In fact, User 893 created only a single thread within the forum corpus. This specific thread was the largest thread in the Offtopic sub-forum and as such was not intended for Incel ideological discussion. Instead, this thread was intended to be a place for users to post music recommendations. It consisted of a total of 2,753 replies of which only 31 comments came from User 893. In total, 485 unique users commented on the thread over its lifespan. Also unlike User 46, this thread remained active throughout the corpus and never seemed to slow or be locked by moderators.
Even though outside of his own thread User 893 was less active than User 46, he was still very much entrenched in the Incel ideology. While his comment history is not considerably large outside of his thread, his comments placed emphasis on the Incel normative orders and traits, such as his contribution to a thread titled “Chad fails suicide via shotgun to the head. Ends up disfigured. Gets first face transplant.”:
incel does the same thing no one gives a fuck and everyone makes fun of him until he dies for real a few months later: stacy shots[sic] herself in the head for attention: millions of views on jewtube people being sorry for her can still get chad.
Thus, even though User 893’s own thread may not have been Incel-focused, he, like User 46, demonstrates that they are fully invested in the Incel worldview and the Incel normative orders (O’Malley et al., 2020). Unlike User 46, though, he was not eventually banned and remained active throughout the date range of the corpus.
As many users in the outer Incels never interact beyond the few focal-point users, those focal-point users act as an intermediary between the inner and outer Incels. Outer Incels can be split based on the specific focal-point user they interact with, but within the inner community, there is no similar disconnections. There are not any outstanding subdivisions or splits within the inner Incel community, even when considering the network spans the four separate sub-forums of the Incel forum. Still, users congregate into a singular cluster of interconnections.
Another aspect of this inner and outer community is its connection to how long users have been members of the Incel community. Figure 6 plots users’ join dates against their normal betweenness centrality with users split according to user category9. Most noteworthy is that users among those who have a normal betweenness centrality of ≥ 0.001, none of them joined the Incel forum after November 2018 10. Additionally, even among members who fell into this power user category, those with the highest centrality primarily joined the community earlier. This demonstrates the ways in which users do not immediately join the inner community but must move after some time.
This centrality was also disconnected from the number of comments a user makes, as demonstrated by Figure 6. While higher centrality members did tend to have a higher number of comments on average, there where many users who joined later who did not have high centrality. This measure placed importance on the specific of who comments on a users
Table 4: Focal-Point Users
User 1 | User 46 | User 893 | |
User title | “Admincel” | “Banned” | |
Joined month | Nov. 2017 | Jan. 2018 | Feb. 2018 |
Total messages | 1740 | 3612 | 3987 |
Normal betweenness centrality | 0.435 | 0.154 | 0.286 |
Degree | 1230 | 609 | 799 |
Weighted degree (in/out) | 30480 (29995/485) | 2347 (2318/29) | 9673 (9654/19) |
thread or whose threads that user comments on instead of on merely having a large number of comments.
The emphasis on specific users’ threads further lends credence to the argument that Incels join the community on the outside, likely with less intense, less extreme ideas and slowly form connections with those already in the inner community and become further and further embedded within the inner community. Additionally, as explained previously, this further strengthens both the formal and informal authority that focal-point users have to influence the users who join the community later.
Figure 5: Relative Plots of Normalized Betweenness Centrality, Split By User Category
Figure 6: Relative Plots of Comments Included in Corpus, Split By User Category
Okay lot of blabber here, what is the take points?: TL;DR if you will.
- basically our forum is hosting a divided and rather dysfunctional community; consisting of three individuals ''powerusers'' *CCDH report flashback* kek
- user1 : a former Admincel
- user46
- user893
- the ''outer group'': what we refer to as greycels
1. 1/3 user 46
@uninstall mentioned thread: https://incels.is/threads/i-will-approach-1000-girls-and-find-a-gf.46003/
2. 2/3 user 893
@Schizoidcel mentioned thread: https://incels.is/threads/music-megathread.24563/
3. 3/3 user1
unknown: help identifying who he might've been in this thread below:possible identifiers:
Figure 1: Complete Incel User Network
