5 ms·

The person who runs Kiwifarms is deeply, deeply mentally sick. As are the users he's cultivated on that twisted ecochamber of hatred https://i.imgur.com/cpk8z8

The person who runs Kiwifarms is deeply, deeply mentally sick. As are the users he's cultivated on that twisted ecochamber of hatred https://i.imgur.com/cpk8z8W.png https://i.imgur.com/cpk8z8W.png He posted to the forum decrying his users for immolating anyone they could possibly get their hands on. Talked about how they've been booted from hundreds of hosting providers over the years and how he's spent thousands of dollars keeping that hateful raft of shit afloat And then concludes by saying "we are in the right" The person who lead the charge to cause Byuu/Near, a person who spent over 20 years of their life on a Super Nintendo emulator to end their own life proudly proclaims they're "in the right" These people need to be sectioned

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
wyoh 4y ago
- danShumway 4y ago
  > this never happened One of Near's last public social messages directly calls out Kiwi Farms abuse as a cause of their suicide. https://nitter.42l.fr/near_koukai/status/1408940057235312640#m https://nitter.42l.fr/near_koukai/status/1408940057235312640... It is pure revisionist history to pretend otherwise. Edit: I just realized that the actual assertion here is apparently not just that Kiwi Farms didn't cause Near's death, but also that Near didn't actually die and is still alive today? Which is such a ludicrous claim to make that it's probably not worth dignifying it with a response.
  - ajvs 4y ago
    Looks like someone didn't read the link because that thread it's already acknowledged in it.
    - danShumway 4y ago
      Is your assertion that the thread isn't real? Like, be clear here. Have the guts to say the wild thing you're implying out loud. Is your assertion that Near did not write that suicide message and that they are not dead?
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - IntelMiner 4y ago
- IntelMiner 4y ago
  Please get the mental help you need and stop visiting Kiwifarms
  - Vecr 4y ago
    - danShumway 4y ago
      > Since no one impartial actually knows anything for sure about the real person behind the account, no one can do any sort of investigation that's anywhere close to ethical. Quick reminder that Kiwi Farms has entire threads dedicated to digging up hearsay and dirt on trans/autistic targets, and for people to now say, "well, have we really rigorously proven that this person is dead, and has that proof come from a fully impartial 3rd party source instead of just from friends and family members?" -- is an extremely selective call for rigor. Since when has Kiwi Farms ever cared about the neutrality of primary vs secondary sources of information? I don't buy that Kiwi Farms is just stepping back and saying, "we don't want to jump to conclusions", because if they were really against jumping to conclusions, I'm not sure that their site would even exist in the first place. It's not my intention to play whataboutism on this, but: A) if you're really concerned about rigor during callouts, that alone is already reason enough for you to dislike Kiwi Farms. B) pushing someone to the point where they would fake their own suicide and basically abandon their online identity is also a really messed up thing to do, and I'm not sure that it changes anything about the situation or makes Kiwi Farms any less culpable or awful. "We only bullied someone into virtual suicide" doesn't make the site look any more sympathetic at all. C) A lot of people close to Near have confirmed their death, and it really quickly gets into conspiracy theory territory to claim that Near had the resources or community organization necessary to pull off a ruse like that. Really, the only reason why doubt is being thrown on this in the first place is because the outcome is inconvenient to Kiwi Farms, this is not a level of rigor that is typically demanded in other situations. D) Incidentally, if we're going off of Wikipedia's editorial standards for recently deceased people and asking how they should be applied in this situation, Wikipedia states Near's death as a fact, so apparently the evidence is good enough for them. ---- I can't tell people how they should or shouldn't defend Kiwi Farms, but my gut instinct is that to a casual observer, pulling an Alex Jones defense and claiming that the multiple suicides that have been blamed on Kiwi Farms are all community-pushed "false flag" events, is probably not going to endear people to the site. If anything, it just makes the site's community seem even more disconnected from reality.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

wyoh 4y ago

danShumway 4y ago
> this never happened One of Near's last public social messages directly calls out Kiwi Farms abuse as a cause of their suicide. https://nitter.42l.fr/near_koukai/status/1408940057235312640#m https://nitter.42l.fr/near_koukai/status/1408940057235312640... It is pure revisionist history to pretend otherwise. Edit: I just realized that the actual assertion here is apparently not just that Kiwi Farms didn't cause Near's death, but also that Near didn't actually die and is still alive today? Which is such a ludicrous claim to make that it's probably not worth dignifying it with a response.
- ajvs 4y ago
  Looks like someone didn't read the link because that thread it's already acknowledged in it.
  - danShumway 4y ago
    Is your assertion that the thread isn't real? Like, be clear here. Have the guts to say the wild thing you're implying out loud. Is your assertion that Near did not write that suicide message and that they are not dead?
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - IntelMiner 4y ago
IntelMiner 4y ago
Please get the mental help you need and stop visiting Kiwifarms
- Vecr 4y ago
  - danShumway 4y ago
    > Since no one impartial actually knows anything for sure about the real person behind the account, no one can do any sort of investigation that's anywhere close to ethical. Quick reminder that Kiwi Farms has entire threads dedicated to digging up hearsay and dirt on trans/autistic targets, and for people to now say, "well, have we really rigorously proven that this person is dead, and has that proof come from a fully impartial 3rd party source instead of just from friends and family members?" -- is an extremely selective call for rigor. Since when has Kiwi Farms ever cared about the neutrality of primary vs secondary sources of information? I don't buy that Kiwi Farms is just stepping back and saying, "we don't want to jump to conclusions", because if they were really against jumping to conclusions, I'm not sure that their site would even exist in the first place. It's not my intention to play whataboutism on this, but: A) if you're really concerned about rigor during callouts, that alone is already reason enough for you to dislike Kiwi Farms. B) pushing someone to the point where they would fake their own suicide and basically abandon their online identity is also a really messed up thing to do, and I'm not sure that it changes anything about the situation or makes Kiwi Farms any less culpable or awful. "We only bullied someone into virtual suicide" doesn't make the site look any more sympathetic at all. C) A lot of people close to Near have confirmed their death, and it really quickly gets into conspiracy theory territory to claim that Near had the resources or community organization necessary to pull off a ruse like that. Really, the only reason why doubt is being thrown on this in the first place is because the outcome is inconvenient to Kiwi Farms, this is not a level of rigor that is typically demanded in other situations. D) Incidentally, if we're going off of Wikipedia's editorial standards for recently deceased people and asking how they should be applied in this situation, Wikipedia states Near's death as a fact, so apparently the evidence is good enough for them. ---- I can't tell people how they should or shouldn't defend Kiwi Farms, but my gut instinct is that to a casual observer, pulling an Alex Jones defense and claiming that the multiple suicides that have been blamed on Kiwi Farms are all community-pushed "false flag" events, is probably not going to endear people to the site. If anything, it just makes the site's community seem even more disconnected from reality.