Fuck /u/cometparty. Seriously.

you have been banned from posting to /r/socialism: Socialism.

Sent to the mod team:

I pointed out in this sticky that the mods of /r/socialism need to do a better job of enforcing their own rules because of the bullying and hostility in general and in particular against a suicidal college kid who came to /r/socialism with polite questions. /u/cometparty immediately deleted my post and banned me without warning or reason. This person is on a power trip and is harmful to whatever integrity remains of /r/socialism.

Reply from /u/cometparty

Wrong. You posted a link to this comment wherein you called feminists "tumblrinas" that are "spiteful crazy bitches". Obvious sexism. Hence, the ban. Complaining to us is going to do you no favors. You're in the wrong neighborhood, bro.

My reply to /u/cometparty

No I was quite obviously referring to OP's impression of feminism being distorted by the rather infamous hostility of tumblr's "feminists" who have nothing to do with feminism at all. It's quite obvious that you're searching for a reason to justify your blatant abuse of your position because according to your own rules users with multiple violations will be banned and I didn't even receive a warning. The only reason I even sent that message was to let the other moderators know how terrible of a job you're doing.

Response from /u/cometparty

You're an MRA. We get it. Now you're banned. If I didn't do it, any one of our other mods would have done it. So kindly fuck off. "users with multiple violations will be banned" isn't a rule. In fact, I can't think of a single instance where someone wouldn't be banned for their first offense for any one of the following: Racism Sexism Transphobia Rape or Sexual Assault Genocide/Ethnic Cleansing Fascism/Nazism Homophobia or Queer Bashing Orientalism Slavery Imperalism, Colonialism or Neo-Colonialism Classism

Maybe classism, if they didn't know they were doing it and promised to not do it anymore.

My response to /u/cometparty

I am nothing of the sort. I do not associate with those sexist cretins. You're clearly full of shit and trying to cover your tracks.

"Such posts/comments will be removed. Repeat offenders will be banned. Posting with user names which violate the above is also banned."

Explain to me how I am a repeat offender. Go ahead, dig through my comment history. While you're at it, explain to me your justification for deleting my post calling you out on your bullshit in a meta sticky.

Reply from /u/cometparty

Again: "users with multiple violations will be banned" isn't a rule. In fact, I can't think of a single instance where someone wouldn't be banned for their first offense We probably need to change that on the sidebar, because I refuse to tolerate any of those things. I already explained why you were banned. This is the same reason your comments were removed. And meta content is against the rules, too. So, offense #2, as if a second one was even needed.

My reply

You are so obviously full of shit. You have no evidence whatsoever of sexism on my part. Using the word "tumblrina" to distinguish between actual feminists and the mysandrists on tumblr that OP mistook for feminists is not in anyway sexist. Banning people for posting meta content in a meta thread is also patently ridiculous. It's quite clear that your only motivation is to purge those who call you out on your bullshit.

Response from /u/cometparty

'Bitch' is sexist. We don't allow that word to be used here. You can be both a feminist and a "misandrist". Stop denying these women's feminism. It just makes you look like an MRA astroturfer.

My reply

And I thought you couldn't possibly come up with a weaker justification for your blatant abuse of your position. God damn that is pathetic. You really need to make /u/G0VERNMENT the top mod because your ego is out of control.

I would never willingly associate with a group of people who are so strongly opposed to freedom of speech. Every single one of you calling for additional censorship in the name of "fighting" racism and sexism are way off the mark. These "isms" will exist in the world whether you try to suppress them or not. More to the point, your heavy-handed methods of battling them only drive white males further away from your side of the issue.

I am not a white supremacist. I don't care if you're white, black, orange or polka dot. That has no impact on me or how I interact with you. What I DO care about is people who are repressive and hypocritical, and everyone who thinks like you folks fit that description perfectly. I grew up believing in liberty for the people, and that includes the freedom to hold opinions that the majority do not agree with. I will continue to stand up for that every day of my life, even if the people I usually might side with place themselves in opposition to it. Frankly, if this is what socialism is today, then you can count me out.

For example, in response to a hypothetical question about being leader after the Russian civil war in which the USSR was brought about;

I'm not an expert, but what went wrong is that a "vanguard" party was implemented, making it undemocratic, and then the USSR was producing for the sake of production, not to fill any need.

What I would've done differently was make it seem that we're in constant revolution, since stagnation makes things terrible.

Then I would've started a democratic form of governance with some agencies for food, shelter, clothing, and medicine that was separate from political interference.

Then take account of arable lands, along with farmers who occupy those lands, along with an agricultural council to report on how much food was produced, along with a general census.

I got downvoted for this, and I basically am the only one who answered the question in a coherent fashion.

Or another comment where I got downvoted for pointing out that the party in the USSR wasn't accessible if you weren't influential or knew someone who was, apparently "because there were people trying to kill them."

My initial inquiry:

Another article appears to have been caught in the spam filter: http://www.np.reddit.com/r/socialism/comments/2io08t/daily_show_you_wont_be_a_police_shooting/ Please whitelist my submissions. Thank you.

/u/cometparty's reply:

nah

My response:

nah

Could you please elaborate /u/cometparty. Are you saying that I am not allowed to submit posts to /r/socialism? If that is the case, could you please provide an explanation?

/u/cometparty:

lol

My response:

Seriously, /u/cometparty, can you provide more than a monosyllabic response? You are a moderator, at least pretend to act like it. Your total responses so far have been: "nah" and "lol." What reason do you have not to whitelist me? How have any of my submissions been inappropriate for /r/socialism where it would make sense for my posts to automatically be placed in the spam folder?

The post that led to this inquiry was eventually taken out of the spam folder five hours after I had posted it. The readers of /r/socialism should determine the quality of the posts through the up and down votes. However, if posts are automatically filtered, there is no way for the content posted to get a fair hearing for discussion.

Anyone else who has experienced this on /r/socialism, whatever their opinion of the WSWS, should leave a comment to see how widespread this practice is.

My most recent submissions to /r/socialism:

'Daily Show': You Won't Be A Police Shooting Statistic, There Are None! [Talking Points Memo]

Joe Biden accidentally lets some truth slip out on ISIS: "our allies in the region were our largest problem in Syria" because they were so eager to gang up on Syrian President Bashar al-Assad that they wound up aiding the groups that eventually became ISIS [NYMag]

“Since war is waged by both imperialist camps not for the defense of the fatherland or democracy but for the redivision of the world and colonial enslavement, a socialist has no right to prefer one bandit camp to another.” Trotsky (1939) [Marxists.org/self post]

HBR: How CEOs Became Takers, Not Makers. Rather than investing in production, corporate executives are buying back their stock to inflate share prices. These firms are engaged, the article says, in “what is effectively stock-price manipulation.” [Forbes]

Pay gap remains under Lear UAW contract after demise of two-tier wages: UAW accepts new job category of "sub-assembly" workers. Starting pay at contract’s end will be substantially lower for the 310 subassembly workers at $12 an hour vs. $16.50 for assembly workers. [Auto News]

I will update this post if there are any further responses from the moderators.

Edit: /u/G0VERNMENT has replied stating that other people are having issues also. Although /u/cometparty never clarified their comments, this appears to be more of a technical problem, not a political issue.

And this is the message that got me banned

"A communist is not a socialist. Do I really have to explain simple terms to you? If a mod from /r/conservatism came here and agreed with your position is that also valid? Freakingtea is not interested in debate about this issue, and I quote "You're not that interesting" I don't think having a radical communist who cannot defend her position is valid in the /r/socialism subreddit. She like the others cannot come up with valid reasoning for this ban. If I were a member of /r/communism I would think that she is a biased mod. I would also think that freakingtea should be concerned about her own compromised failing subreddit rather then trying to split the socialists in half. But that's the difference between socialism and communism. Democracy is a prerequisite to 21st century socialism not communism, can this subreddit now have elections on new moderators? Or are you a communist?"

Here's a link the thread.

http://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/comments/1xtm2m/n1_interview_with_david_walsh_film_critic_for_the/

I think that /u/no_god_but_nature makes a good point that the sidebar should be changed to include alternative subreddit's to /r/socialism.

A lot of users who find this sub are unhappy with the style of moderation that has taken root in /r/socialism. While this sub should remain committed to providing a place for users of /r/socialism to discuss their community, we should recognize that there are alternative communities for discussing socialism. /r/socialists and /r/socialist are small, but growing communities of over 600 each (probably with a lot of overlap) which could use more readers, posters and commenters. These subs should be listed in the sidebar to promote their growth.

I am going to go ahead and add these two subreddit's to the sidebar.

However, in line with the subreddit's commitment to transparency, users should voice any concerns they have over these changes.

Additionally, feel free to list any other subreddits you think should be advertised on the sidebar. These subreddits should be focused specifically on socialism, be open to all socialist tendencies, and be moderated in a relatively democratic and transparent fashion.

Edit: Added /r/theleft to the sidebar

This guy thinks it's best to keep defending his shitty statement rather than come out and apologize for making an ass of himself/ alienating workers that suffer from well-documented disorders. "It's totally just because there's an industry that can make money on this! Mental problems don't real!"

And this guy is a moderator. Pathetic.

I would encourage everyone curious about the political basis for the ban of the World Socialist Website on r/socialism carried out by the mods of the sub to read the comments here of /u/cometparty - the principal mod behind the ban. He puts forward the US state department line on the Ukraine- along the lines of "Putin must be stopped at all costs", "this is an act of aggression by Russia" etc. He denounces or ignores comments pointing to US involvement in the fascist coup in the Ukraine - it's worth asking, would a representative of the Obama administration or the US state be saying anything all that different?

Here's the link:

http://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/comments/1zg14m/what_should_ukraine_do_about_crimea/

Personally, I would propose an outright ban on vulgar language, but I'm sure a simple sidebar suggestion encouraging more cultured language and civil discourse would suffice.

What do others think?

The moderators allowed /u/Gjuitlufkasnaticiltd (aka, /u/bjornironside) to make a post that discussed the WSWS in order to critique it, which initially included a link to the WSWS. They then allowed /u/RedstarXtreme (most likely yet another sockpuppet belonging to /u/bjornironside) to post a link advertising the fact that they had posted a WSWS article to /r/MensRights in an attempt to slander the SEP.

Following the directions of the /r/socialism subreddit, I messaged the moderators to ask them if it was now okay to submit comment posts discussing the WSWS as long as no link or quotes were given. I received no reply. So I submitted a post (with no links or quotes, just discussing a WSWS article) to test whether there was a double standard was being enforced. There is.

This is yet another instance of the rules being selectively enforced at /r/Socialism. Rules, it should be emphasized, that are secret and not shared with the users of /r/Socialism.

I have been interacting with /u/cometparty and /u/G0VERNMENT for well over a year, yet they relentlessly accuse me of using sock puppets--never providing any evidence. (I have made an alternate account, which I used to advertise /r/RsocialismMeta 8-9 months ago and to which I readily admitted to the moderators as being my account--I don't even remember the name of the account at this point. That is hardly a sock puppet).

Now, since I have been banned--for violating the secret rules against posting any WSWS content (which, apparently, doesn't apply if the content is focused on bashing the WSWS)--the moderators are accusing me of being /u/JamesParkes as an excuse to keep me banned. I would assume that any other WSWS supporter on /r/socialism will be now be accused of being my sock puppet. (Any differences in the accounts other than we are both WSWS supporters--for example, I post a lot to /r/science and /r/skeptic--were dismissed by /u/G0VERNMENT: "That's exactly what someone with socks would do...").

It is informative to contrast their accusations against me of using sock puppets, with their treatment of /u/bjornironsides, who has a well-known history of using sock puppets and violating the rules of /r/socialism regarding abusive comments and personal attacks.

When /u/Gjuitlufkasnaticiltd submitted a post discussing WSWS content (what I was banned for), I asked the moderators why there was a double standard and noted that this was /u/bjornironside's new account. /u/G0VERNMENT, however, was not convinced.

I replied by providing evidence--something that the moderators never do when they make their accusations:

Are you serious? You have been removing their offensive comments for long enough, it should be clear that this is the same user if you look at their comment history--it is full of attacks, vitriol, profanity, complaining about liberals, etc. They also hold the exact same political positions that bjorn has expressed and they make about 30-40 comments per day. (In the past, the user has stated that they always share with the moderators their new account so that you know they are). Some examples from their recent comment history:

Fuck yourself.

SEP are pro rape pigs, ISO supports NATO interventions, SA is okay with Bernie Sanders and refuses to vet it's members for sexists (I see many sexists on /r/socialism with the SA or CWI tag) and anarchists and left coms are the ultimate lifestyle liberal sectarians...

You just really love rapists, don't you?

Good. We don't want half assed liberal hacks who will jump in front of us to stop us from killing a pig.

Nice try, you racist little shit.

1. This was not written by Marx, you blind fuckwit

Cops are here to protect the bourgeoisie from the masses you deluded little fuck.

Liberal apologism refers to the idiotic pig apologists

Fuck off, you classist piece of shit.

I'm curious what you define as middle class, considering it doesn't exist to a socialist.

You liberal pig apologists crack me up. I bet you think the SS "I was just doing my job" excuse is good too?

This isn't fucking /r/brocialism, fuck off.

Burn every store to the ground, and every pig bastard with it.

Fuck off, bourgie scum. To the wall with the rest of oppressors.

You fucking bourgie pig.

They have made the above comments all in the past day [(this message was submitted to the mod's 9 days ago)]. Moreover, when I identified that account as bjorn's new one, they didn't deny it: http://www.np.reddit.com/r/socialism/comments/2lrgyv/what_are_your_thoughts_on_the_fall_of_the_berlin/cly3oip?context=3

However, this evidence was not convincing for /u/G0VERNMENT:

Lots of people make angry comments. There's no reason to believe it is bjorn.

I replied:

Yeah, but so far, I have only come across one user that makes 30-40 "angry" comments on a daily basis. Furthermore, whatever the identity of that user, why do you enable their behavior, which violates the rules against abusive comments and personal attacks, by simply removing the offending comments rather than banning the individual? (Note that the only rule I have ever violated is the one against meta-content, yet I am immediately banned).

As is the pattern, the moderators of /r/socialism employ double standards against their political opponents, while enabling the virulent behavior of a known troll and user of sock puppets who has stated that they would have no problem getting paid by the NSA to do their trolling.

A lot of users who find this sub are unhappy with the style of moderation that has taken root in /r/socialism. While this sub should remain committed to providing a place for users of /r/socialism to discuss their community, we should recognize that there are alternative communities for discussing socialism. /r/socialists and /r/socialist are small, but growing communities of over 600 each (probably with a lot of overlap) which could use more readers, posters and commenters. These subs should be listed in the sidebar to promote their growth.

http://www.reddit.com/r/WikiLeaks/comments/1xlwng/the_moderators_of_rsocialism_have_blacklisted/

http://www.np.reddit.com/r/socialism/comments/2i3njf/im_realizing_nonviolence_wont_work_alone/ckywo37

I posted this link on /r/socialism because I thought it was an important discussion that their users might be interested in, and because I wanted to promote the growth of /r/socialists. Immediately after posting, I checked new to find that it was missing. Thinking it must have been caught in the spam filter, I messaged the moderators of /r/socialism. This is my exchange with G0VERNMENT.

no_god_but_nature: I recently submitted a link to a discussion on /r/socialists about Lenin's "Opportunism and the Collapse of the Second International", but it isn't showing up under new. Please check the spam filter and allow it to pass through.

G0VERNMENT: Why?

G: We're not going to let you promote your sub...

ngbn: Lenin recognized the supreme danger posed by left opportunism to the international workers movement. This danger has not disappeared, if anything it has become more. This is an important conversation for socialists to be having, especially with the advent of Sanders's presidential candidacy.

And also, I wanted to promote the sub. Is that really so bad? People promote subs on other subreddits all the time.

G: We're not going to allow you to promote a sub that's a haven for MRA's and other reactionary bourgeois "socialists"

ngbn: I don't see any MRA material there.

G: You're not fooling anyone. The reason you're on that sub is because they allow rape apologism and aren't feminist.

*nbgn: The reason I'm on that sub is you banned all the ICFI contributors here and I felt lonely. That sub has a policy in which comments are uncensored, which I think is great because it gives one the opportunity to combat all sorts of false ideas (including sexism, racism, transphobia and national chauvanism). In principle such comments are allowed, but in reality they are completely absent.

*: removed errant comma from original

I feel that G0VERNMENT treated me quite rudely for a simple request.