4 ms·

That's not a website you would normally want to go anywhere near. It is a forum where stalkers and creeps go to obsess over and make fun of the lives of people

That's not a website you would normally want to go anywhere near. It is a forum where stalkers and creeps go to obsess over and make fun of the lives of people who aren't public figures.

kemonocode 7y ago
It's also a website with a culture of methodically archiving people's behavior, whether you agree with how it gets used or not. I agree with freedom of speech, but also I do think people ought to be held accountable for the things they say and do.
- throwanem 7y ago
  I'd be awfully hesitant to trust factual claims made by people who speak and behave as that site's users do. Nothing I've seen from them suggests a willingness to scruple at fabricating evidence.
  - Cyberdog 7y ago
    On the contrary, Kiwis are meticulous about verifying and preserving evidence. Posting information about someone without third-party archive links or some other way to verify what you're saying will result in you, at best, being politely reminded to post verification. If it's verified that you were intentionally posting false information to stir up drama, you will likely be banned and maybe even have your own thread made about you with all of your dirty laundry proudly on display. Yes, Kiwis dox and mock people and say gamer words, and that sort of edgi boi behavior isn't for everyone. But the information it collects is rarely inaccurate. EDIT: For what it's worth, it looks like Byuu posted in his own thread last month taking accountability for some of his bad behavior and got a mostly warm response from the Kiwis. https://kiwifarms.net/threads/byuu-byuu_nyan-setsunakun0.43056/post-5982121 https://kiwifarms.net/threads/byuu-byuu_nyan-setsunakun0.430...
    - tiles 7y ago
      This is such a strange response. Byuu's two posts later in the thread contain several corrections, particularly on their alleged cartridge hoarding behavior. It invalidates the claims of the original post while not denying any of the evidence was true. A well sourced Wikipedia article can still be biased. The presence of sources isn't mutually exclusive with bias.
      - Cyberdog 7y ago
        > It invalidates the claims of the original post while not denying any of the evidence was true. So the evidence is still true, then? And the paragraph at the top of the OP states that it is slightly out of date. > A well sourced Wikipedia article can still be biased. Obligatory XKCD: https://xkcd.com/978/ https://xkcd.com/978/ I'm increasingly becoming convinced Wikipedia is a toxic garbage dump. The Wii U article states that it had the fewest game releases of any Nintendo console. I tried adding the words "…since the Virtual Boy" to turn that into a factually correct statement and it got reverted. I don't have the time to get into a slapfight with another editor about facts, so the incorrect statement remains. Whatever.
        snvzz 7y ago
        I've found that sometimes it is better to add a {{fact}} macro to incorrect information, and let others do the hard work. Contributing to Wikipedia is unfortunately hard to navigate, with a lot of social trickery required just to get blatant incorrect information fixed.
    - 0134340 7y ago
      >Posting information about someone One of the biggest problems is that anyone can make up the same username anywhere online and use it in false flag attempts to harm someone's reputation and the dramaqueens at Kiwifarm don't care as long as it's "verified" by their very ambiguous standards, something which has happened there before many times. >to stir up drama Ironic since the whole product they're selling there is drama and invoking it not only on their own boards but elsewhere.
    - 7y ago
- dependenttypes 7y ago
  There used to be a banner in that site that said that white-knighting was not allowed. I understood that to mean that if someone posted something refuting another post that was criticizing that person they would get banned. I would agree with you if kiwifarms was a truly free site that aimed to stay objective but this does not seem to be the case.
- tiles 7y ago
  "Held accountable" on the post seems to include moral depravity like "he posted anti-Trump tweets". I don't think that's really accurate here.
saagarjha 7y ago
It's also highly unpleasant, with a lexicon reminiscent of 4chan.
- snvzz 7y ago
  I find 4chan a quite friendly place in contrast. This forum seems focused on hate and trying to harm people.
  - crankylinuxuser 7y ago
    Wow, you all weren't joking. That place is the chunks at the bottom of a cesspool. Even 4chan /b/ is friendlier.
    - nonbirithm 7y ago
      They're the kind of people who try to make themselves sound reasonable by saying some of their members are also part of vulnerable communities, then turn around and call people "spergs" as an insult and let it slide. In the end, all that matters to them is if they get a good laugh out of it, as it always has been.
bartread 7y ago
I mean, yeah, I'm pretty sure that byuu has done some things he regrets in life, including content he's posted online. That's hardly unusual for people who've been on the internet for a long time, and is something that we as a society are going to have to learn to deal with better than we do at the moment. People change, and dredging up stuff that people posted years ago is more than a little bit sad, and deeply unedifying for everyone. I'd never heard of Kiwi Farms before today and, honestly, I could cheerfully have gone my whole life without knowing about it. I started reading the thread, then skimmed the responses further down and was, basically, appalled. This website truly does plumb the depths of mental depravity. It's a cesspool of lazy, warped, corrupted thinking. Wikipedia has a pretty good overview of what you're getting into there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi_Farms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi_Farms As such, I would regard any perspective on byuu shared on that site as highly suspect, and I certainly wouldn't use it as a yardstick by which to assess him as a human being. Right: I think it might be time to go and disinfect my eyes and my brain.
a_t48 7y ago
Yeah - everyone says dumb things at one point or another. Maybe some of the callout is warranted, but collating every possible embarrassing thing someone has said is too much.

That's not a website you would normally want to go anywhere near. It is a forum where stalkers and creeps go to obsess over and make fun of the lives of people who aren't public figures.

kemonocode 7y ago

It's also a website with a culture of methodically archiving people's behavior, whether you agree with how it gets used or not. I agree with freedom of speech, but also I do think people ought to be held accountable for the things they say and do.

throwanem 7y ago
I'd be awfully hesitant to trust factual claims made by people who speak and behave as that site's users do. Nothing I've seen from them suggests a willingness to scruple at fabricating evidence.
- Cyberdog 7y ago
  On the contrary, Kiwis are meticulous about verifying and preserving evidence. Posting information about someone without third-party archive links or some other way to verify what you're saying will result in you, at best, being politely reminded to post verification. If it's verified that you were intentionally posting false information to stir up drama, you will likely be banned and maybe even have your own thread made about you with all of your dirty laundry proudly on display. Yes, Kiwis dox and mock people and say gamer words, and that sort of edgi boi behavior isn't for everyone. But the information it collects is rarely inaccurate. EDIT: For what it's worth, it looks like Byuu posted in his own thread last month taking accountability for some of his bad behavior and got a mostly warm response from the Kiwis. https://kiwifarms.net/threads/byuu-byuu_nyan-setsunakun0.43056/post-5982121 https://kiwifarms.net/threads/byuu-byuu_nyan-setsunakun0.430...
  - tiles 7y ago
    This is such a strange response. Byuu's two posts later in the thread contain several corrections, particularly on their alleged cartridge hoarding behavior. It invalidates the claims of the original post while not denying any of the evidence was true. A well sourced Wikipedia article can still be biased. The presence of sources isn't mutually exclusive with bias.
    - Cyberdog 7y ago
      > It invalidates the claims of the original post while not denying any of the evidence was true. So the evidence is still true, then? And the paragraph at the top of the OP states that it is slightly out of date. > A well sourced Wikipedia article can still be biased. Obligatory XKCD: https://xkcd.com/978/ https://xkcd.com/978/ I'm increasingly becoming convinced Wikipedia is a toxic garbage dump. The Wii U article states that it had the fewest game releases of any Nintendo console. I tried adding the words "…since the Virtual Boy" to turn that into a factually correct statement and it got reverted. I don't have the time to get into a slapfight with another editor about facts, so the incorrect statement remains. Whatever.
      - snvzz 7y ago
        I've found that sometimes it is better to add a {{fact}} macro to incorrect information, and let others do the hard work. Contributing to Wikipedia is unfortunately hard to navigate, with a lot of social trickery required just to get blatant incorrect information fixed.
  - 0134340 7y ago
    >Posting information about someone One of the biggest problems is that anyone can make up the same username anywhere online and use it in false flag attempts to harm someone's reputation and the dramaqueens at Kiwifarm don't care as long as it's "verified" by their very ambiguous standards, something which has happened there before many times. >to stir up drama Ironic since the whole product they're selling there is drama and invoking it not only on their own boards but elsewhere.
  - 7y ago
dependenttypes 7y ago
There used to be a banner in that site that said that white-knighting was not allowed. I understood that to mean that if someone posted something refuting another post that was criticizing that person they would get banned. I would agree with you if kiwifarms was a truly free site that aimed to stay objective but this does not seem to be the case.
tiles 7y ago
"Held accountable" on the post seems to include moral depravity like "he posted anti-Trump tweets". I don't think that's really accurate here.

saagarjha 7y ago

It's also highly unpleasant, with a lexicon reminiscent of 4chan.

snvzz 7y ago
I find 4chan a quite friendly place in contrast. This forum seems focused on hate and trying to harm people.
- crankylinuxuser 7y ago
  Wow, you all weren't joking. That place is the chunks at the bottom of a cesspool. Even 4chan /b/ is friendlier.
  - nonbirithm 7y ago
    They're the kind of people who try to make themselves sound reasonable by saying some of their members are also part of vulnerable communities, then turn around and call people "spergs" as an insult and let it slide. In the end, all that matters to them is if they get a good laugh out of it, as it always has been.

bartread 7y ago

I mean, yeah, I'm pretty sure that byuu has done some things he regrets in life, including content he's posted online. That's hardly unusual for people who've been on the internet for a long time, and is something that we as a society are going to have to learn to deal with better than we do at the moment. People change, and dredging up stuff that people posted years ago is more than a little bit sad, and deeply unedifying for everyone. I'd never heard of Kiwi Farms before today and, honestly, I could cheerfully have gone my whole life without knowing about it. I started reading the thread, then skimmed the responses further down and was, basically, appalled. This website truly does plumb the depths of mental depravity. It's a cesspool of lazy, warped, corrupted thinking. Wikipedia has a pretty good overview of what you're getting into there: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi_Farms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi_Farms As such, I would regard any perspective on byuu shared on that site as highly suspect, and I certainly wouldn't use it as a yardstick by which to assess him as a human being. Right: I think it might be time to go and disinfect my eyes and my brain.

a_t48 7y ago

Yeah - everyone says dumb things at one point or another. Maybe some of the callout is warranted, but collating every possible embarrassing thing someone has said is too much.