5 ms·
You probably aren't meaning to, but you're spreading outright lies that always originate with people who are mad at the Kiwis. This is just plain made up. Maybe
by psyc 4y ago
You probably aren't meaning to, but you're spreading outright lies that always originate with people who are mad at the Kiwis. This is just plain made up. Maybe you're thinking of 4chan circa 2004. Maybe you think all internet trolls are one big community. I don't know.
The problem is that just about nobody outside of KF has any reason at all to know anything about them, besides what they hear second hand from people who are upset with them.
Saying one word on the forum even hinting at the encouragement of what they term "GayOps" - or interacting directly with / harassing the subjects, is perhaps the only bannable offense there is. And that's not a term of endearment, and this is not a wink, wink, nudge thing. I know your mind wants to reject this, but it is the case. There's no secret chatroom. If there is it's a completely separate community because they wouldn't be able to talk to the actual community about any of it. The forum OGs will attempt to mock you into submission before things get to that point. The vast majority of the users have no interest in messing with them and it is against the culture. A few people will try to talk to the subjects on Twitter and in 7 years I've never once seen it go past that. Not once.
99% of their activity is screencapping public tweets, making mean-spirited quips about them, and... and nothing. That's it. That's what they do. People aren't mad about what KF does. They think they are, because people aren't capable of thinking clearly about this, particularly when they're the targets. People are really mad about what they say. They just can't believe it's legal to say the horrible things they say. But it is. And they're mad about where and how the Kiwis direct attention. And the more postmodern targets have lately taken to yapping about what they've termed "stochastic terrorism". That's the idea that the speech on the forum raises the statistical likelihood that somebody might decide to commit a crime OR that a target might commit suicide. Stochastic terrorism. This is how they're able to say with a straight face that the Kiwis are terrorists, committing terrorism, in addition to being nazis, fascists, alt-right, inciting violence and all the standard by the book things that you people have taken to calling every single person who doesn't exercise their right to talk about shit in the way you think they should.
Almost everything I've ever read about Kiwi Farms was blatant and obvious lies with an obvious agenda.
- xupybd 4y agoMy only actual experience with them is their refusal to remove video of my country men getting violently murdered. While I don't think they should have been forced to do that it was the right thing to do. The families should have been given that respect. Anything outside of that I'll admit I'm probably wrong or at best uninformed. I have no doubt that in this day and age they're being attacked in bad faith by the media.
- HereIGoAgain 4y agoI do understand your feelings on that.. The whole thing seems to have blew up when someone from their government requested a list of everyone who downloaded or viewed the video or manifesto. This was right around the time that they were very publicly arresting people for even looking at either. The owner wasn't happy about that and told them off.. Then the media (including sites like vice) reported it as "KF refuses to release information on the CC shooting" something the site is still blamed for to this day in some places.
- psyc 4y agoI can certainly understand how that would be upsetting. I'm sure you understand that KF isn't about respecting.... anybody. At all. They are as irreverent as anything I've ever seen. But yes, they're attacked almost exclusively in bad faith by everybody. Everybody. As soon as somebody says "There's a website dedicated to making trans people commit suicide!" in this our Age of Outrage, there is a part of most people that wants to believe it immediately. Which really makes me wonder why the media doesn't stick to reporting on what they actually say and do. Why isn't that bad enough? It would still make everyone mad.
- kelseyfrog 4y agoThis is a really good example of sealioning. Saving this for later. Thank you.
- hackeraccount 4y agoArguing that people acting disingenuously is a problem with the Internet seems like going after low hanging fruit.
- kelseyfrog 4y agoThe alternative is actively engaging with them, but the incentive structures are all messed up. If someone has more energy, time, and rhetorical maladaptions, they can "run out the clock" on internet debate. This becomes an effective strategy when we acknowledge that most internet "debates" aren't actually trying to change the minds of those engaging in them. They are performative acts intended to convince the readers which easily outnumber the participants by orders of magnitude. In essence, master debaters craft their message to appeal to viewers whilst simultaneous serving as a foil to the other participants.