- Joined
- Jun 21, 2023
Total Retard War: Lessons of War - Taking the tactics of Honeycomb.io's Field CTO Liz Fong-Jones and making them available to everyone.
- Thread starter Null
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 14, 2022
Private First Class Retard, reporting for duty.
I just want to confirm my unit has completed the mission to report sites to Cogent, will continue to do so, and would encourage anyone that has not done so to send some emails.
Take some lessons from Edward Bernays.
Provoking a mass reaction starts with understanding the landscape of people's pre-existing ideas.
Focus public attention on certain spots and away from others. Leave out things which complicate matters. Know your audience
Methods of communication change but human psychology does not.
THE most important message right now is "we are the good guys"
I just want to confirm my unit has completed the mission to report sites to Cogent, will continue to do so, and would encourage anyone that has not done so to send some emails.
This is unfortunately true. The best propaganda is simple.
Take some lessons from Edward Bernays.
Provoking a mass reaction starts with understanding the landscape of people's pre-existing ideas.
Focus public attention on certain spots and away from others. Leave out things which complicate matters. Know your audience
Methods of communication change but human psychology does not.
THE most important message right now is "we are the good guys"
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2022
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2014
You can't sell KF on its content, but the concept. Most people will never support what we do or how we do it. The question we should be forcing to the front of the discussion is, "Do you support political activists using corporate monopolies to control what information can and can't be shared on the internet?"
You could even take the angle that a blue state AG is refusing to enforce laws when cyber crimes are being committed against a politically inconvenient victim. Right wing populists are eating that shit up right now. It honestly wouldn't surprise me to find out Bob Ferguson has received money from groups associated with Schwab or Soros, and those make hot headlines right now.
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2022
A suggestion: make a new thread for this. I'd rather not sift through potential updates on Cogent or people making shitposts about the situation. You'd likely get more curated responses as well.
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2019
Exactly.
Like: Do you support the right to comment freely, HONESTLY, authentically, and anonymously? Without anonymity, there can be no authenticity or honesty. This is why most no longer trust the media--local, or otherwise.
But the Farms sources many, many newsworthy events and stories, both liberal AND conservative. Here, you can expect nothing less than the ability to expose yourself to both sides of the fence and make an informed opinion.
And rip on troonz and poonz.
grapeshark77
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2021
The monopoly thing is very appealing to a mainstream audience - just right now there's talk about a merger between two big entertainment companies on Xitter and everyone's mad. I think the idea of Cogent controlling the internet and abusing power would break through in a way that maybe nothing else has.
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2022
Oh but I can. I just thought of something. Terry A Davis. Out of everything in the Farm's vaults, we are the last site to contain documentation of his last days. And he is quite a hero. A genuis in fact. Cast aside by the medical system and his own family, but not us. Those pages directly after his death contain more sorrow than anything I've ever read. If that's not a reason for keeping the Farms, I don't know what is
I'm kinda waiting to see if Crunk is going to or not, I thought he was
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2014
Political neutrality isn't that useful right now since there's no political incentive for anyone to stick their neck out for us.
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2022
We must provide incentive. And I'm starting to see a path. Some of our archives are immensely valuable. Terry's is just a start.
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2023
Here's one: https://kiwifarms.hk/threads/what-are-some-truly-good-things-that-kiwi-farms-has-done.178571/
Check the I&T board.
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2014
I used to browse /int/ and some other boards there and I recall being told to not even mention "GamerGate" on 4C during the circus.
And then m00t went SJW because he was dating one, IIRC. So that's why 4C isn't "cancelled" -- SJWs seem to be taking over the site.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2012
I've never heard of this. I will get top men looking at it today.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2020
The more good write/ups, the better. I’d like to see a majority of the topics named in the last few pages OTT be put out in the world. Write it, all of it, publish any way you can.
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2021
Maybe it would be helpful to bullet out and define, then prioritize, the goals of the intended effort. Then set about deciding how best to achieve the goals.
I hope some good, professional stuff gets written. Both to have up as an affirmative statement, and for a library of info Josh can whip back to reporters rather than being stuck with the choice of either answering 50 long and stupid questions by tomorrow, or sending back a fuck-you, because as deserved as the fuck-yous are, they become more fake fodder for an unsympathetic narrative.
There's a difference among
- true/false about KF
- overview of KF
- good things arising out of the Farms or kind things done or attempted
- breadth of content on the site
- debunking/countering allegations by specific people or general rumors
- exposing specific bad actors
- etc.
and different strategic uses/times for each, plus many ways to convey each of them (e.g., to pick a bland one, for breadth of content you have choices for what to highlight. Could do so in a sentence, or use data (xxxxxx songs shared in xxxx music thread since xxxx). Picking one or the other would depend on what is your goal, and also which goal is most critical first.)
Maybe top goal is just a basic, corporate-style overview - brief, clean, neutral history, framed however you want - dates, site growth, purpose (the generic one; you can wait a couple paragraphs to get to the symbolic value...which needs to be very slickly done (see comments below)). Keep it light, crisp, upbeat, impersonal. A factsheet + a bit of gloss. Drama can be further down the page or a separate, very carefully crafted item altogether.
As for the list of good things - though I think the trans lifeline exposing is great, it is as some have said double-edged, and I think that on balance it might not have impact to too many. I might not even emphasize that it was a trans nonprofit; the good of exposing graft in charities is somewhat diminished if arises out of (actually or allegedly) low intentions.
To normies who don't follow these things (i.e., most people, including execs and decisionmakers at even tech companies), it's not that enormous of a good. They either don't care, or if they do and lean against KF, it's a dismissable win, and one drowned out by other noise. Whom do you gain from that? Maybe a fairly narrow band of rational, open-minded people who also think exposing the fraud of one (albeit important) trans organization actually provides some counterweight against a million messages joking about, mocking, or deploring their existence or the existence of some other group of people. Despite the good work, it's not going to be compelling to many people (bc they dislike trans already, just less than their fear that KF is the Antichrist), and it's not going to persuade very many of them to appreciate and embrace the agenda-neutral benefit of KF-based investigative interests and skills, when they perceive those as used for evil. And for pro-trans people, though exposure benefited their community, it also exposed some ugly parts of it, and for many in that community, it's worth the bad apples to protect the brand. I'd put it in a bulleted list, but not at the top.
The zoo stuff, and other instances where others off-site (or whatever) relied on or started from work done/things revealed here, though, could be great, especially any escalations that wound up saving or protecting innocents. Have to be deft, bc the site is so strongly non-interventionist, and that is very important to reiterate everywhere. ...but in extreme situations, serious issues have had to operate differently, to prevent harm or assist with info. I think it could speak well to highlight that though aggressive in tone, the site is a spectator sport and largely for shits & giggles...but when truly terrible things are happening, there is an understanding of gravity...and that's very different than most of the alleged meanness. A finger reaching out from here is exceptionally rare and all but verboten, but some serious work has been done here, too.
- true/false about KF
- overview of KF
- good things arising out of the Farms or kind things done or attempted
- breadth of content on the site
- debunking/countering allegations by specific people or general rumors
- exposing specific bad actors
- etc.
and different strategic uses/times for each, plus many ways to convey each of them (e.g., to pick a bland one, for breadth of content you have choices for what to highlight. Could do so in a sentence, or use data (xxxxxx songs shared in xxxx music thread since xxxx). Picking one or the other would depend on what is your goal, and also which goal is most critical first.)
Maybe top goal is just a basic, corporate-style overview - brief, clean, neutral history, framed however you want - dates, site growth, purpose (the generic one; you can wait a couple paragraphs to get to the symbolic value...which needs to be very slickly done (see comments below)). Keep it light, crisp, upbeat, impersonal. A factsheet + a bit of gloss. Drama can be further down the page or a separate, very carefully crafted item altogether.
As for the list of good things - though I think the trans lifeline exposing is great, it is as some have said double-edged, and I think that on balance it might not have impact to too many. I might not even emphasize that it was a trans nonprofit; the good of exposing graft in charities is somewhat diminished if arises out of (actually or allegedly) low intentions.
To normies who don't follow these things (i.e., most people, including execs and decisionmakers at even tech companies), it's not that enormous of a good. They either don't care, or if they do and lean against KF, it's a dismissable win, and one drowned out by other noise. Whom do you gain from that? Maybe a fairly narrow band of rational, open-minded people who also think exposing the fraud of one (albeit important) trans organization actually provides some counterweight against a million messages joking about, mocking, or deploring their existence or the existence of some other group of people. Despite the good work, it's not going to be compelling to many people (bc they dislike trans already, just less than their fear that KF is the Antichrist), and it's not going to persuade very many of them to appreciate and embrace the agenda-neutral benefit of KF-based investigative interests and skills, when they perceive those as used for evil. And for pro-trans people, though exposure benefited their community, it also exposed some ugly parts of it, and for many in that community, it's worth the bad apples to protect the brand. I'd put it in a bulleted list, but not at the top.
The zoo stuff, and other instances where others off-site (or whatever) relied on or started from work done/things revealed here, though, could be great, especially any escalations that wound up saving or protecting innocents. Have to be deft, bc the site is so strongly non-interventionist, and that is very important to reiterate everywhere. ...but in extreme situations, serious issues have had to operate differently, to prevent harm or assist with info. I think it could speak well to highlight that though aggressive in tone, the site is a spectator sport and largely for shits & giggles...but when truly terrible things are happening, there is an understanding of gravity...and that's very different than most of the alleged meanness. A finger reaching out from here is exceptionally rare and all but verboten, but some serious work has been done here, too.
If anyone ever wants to win support beyond hardcore free speech supporters (and in the real world most people are not going to die on that hill, particularly if it is associated with "using naughty words and being mean just because you can" - because most people don't care about doing that and tend to see things in terms of their own current behavior/ expectations, not absolutes), then presenting, first and incessantly, both the innocuousness of most of the knocking around here, as well as the valuable efforts and support to positive outcomes, is key. The speech principles matter, but they don't hit if people think you're evil. So the message needs to be more positive and less defensive, less "doom if you're not on this side" and more shining hill. (And yes, I'm picking my words carefully and on purpose; thinking about presentation can mean having to get over some oppositional urges - I mean, if you want to be in the game. I won't go all the way to invoking a "thousand points of light that KF collectively shines" metaphor bc I don't to be murdered, but allergy to creating a controlled and upbeat narrative can sometimes do detractors' jobs for them.
It's about framing, as disingenuous or distasteful as some may consider that. No one will stick their necks out for the right to criticize weak, crazy, weird, or disadvantaged people, to crank and vent in harsh and (to many) alarming ways, or to use slurs in either a serious or a juvenile way. And that's a neutral statement about perception, not a value judgment.
People like Liz have crafted and curated an image of themselves as fighting the good fight, brave warrior goddess of God-knows-what. It's crap, right. But it's enough to pass, so to speak, enough to get published to the masses, and enough to have a very un-good past washed over and a very questionable present and presentation ignored and given the benefit of the doubt.
KF, on the other hand, maintains a "fuck you if you don't like it" approach. Which is fine to have, but it means a conscious choice to ignore a powerful tool from the arsenal. And by not wielding that tool - crafting and curating an identity - the identity is crafted by detractors. Everyone scapegoats KF, based on reputation (some arguably deserved and much absolutely not) alone. Statements are (absolutely understandably, but I'm talking about a stranger-view/perception) defiant and agitating, couched in existentialist rights/protest language. But execs and large numbers of people are not built like the ACLU used to be, which is to say being associated with nazis (or pick your hated/feared group) in principle - because whether right or wrong, this is not their primary cause. And for them to support it, they want at least a veneer of something, a minimally palateable symbol to use as the hook to hang their hat on. And being defiant, angry, AND championing saying the n-word just for the sake of it is an uphill PR battle. Right, wrong, or indifferent, it just is.
This counts a million times more with companies. Realpolitik isn't dead for organizations - businesses are designed that way and have literal duties to do so (and extortionate tactics push that even more). Non-sociopathic individuals, on the other hand, don't typically go full Lord of the Flies unless and until they have to, and they generally feel better (i.e., can be brought around to support you and do what you want) when you a) make it easy for them, and b) don't require they be or seem like complete assholes if they don't want to be.
It's about framing, as disingenuous or distasteful as some may consider that. No one will stick their necks out for the right to criticize weak, crazy, weird, or disadvantaged people, to crank and vent in harsh and (to many) alarming ways, or to use slurs in either a serious or a juvenile way. And that's a neutral statement about perception, not a value judgment.
People like Liz have crafted and curated an image of themselves as fighting the good fight, brave warrior goddess of God-knows-what. It's crap, right. But it's enough to pass, so to speak, enough to get published to the masses, and enough to have a very un-good past washed over and a very questionable present and presentation ignored and given the benefit of the doubt.
KF, on the other hand, maintains a "fuck you if you don't like it" approach. Which is fine to have, but it means a conscious choice to ignore a powerful tool from the arsenal. And by not wielding that tool - crafting and curating an identity - the identity is crafted by detractors. Everyone scapegoats KF, based on reputation (some arguably deserved and much absolutely not) alone. Statements are (absolutely understandably, but I'm talking about a stranger-view/perception) defiant and agitating, couched in existentialist rights/protest language. But execs and large numbers of people are not built like the ACLU used to be, which is to say being associated with nazis (or pick your hated/feared group) in principle - because whether right or wrong, this is not their primary cause. And for them to support it, they want at least a veneer of something, a minimally palateable symbol to use as the hook to hang their hat on. And being defiant, angry, AND championing saying the n-word just for the sake of it is an uphill PR battle. Right, wrong, or indifferent, it just is.
This counts a million times more with companies. Realpolitik isn't dead for organizations - businesses are designed that way and have literal duties to do so (and extortionate tactics push that even more). Non-sociopathic individuals, on the other hand, don't typically go full Lord of the Flies unless and until they have to, and they generally feel better (i.e., can be brought around to support you and do what you want) when you a) make it easy for them, and b) don't require they be or seem like complete assholes if they don't want to be.
I hope some good, professional stuff gets written. Both to have up as an affirmative statement, and for a library of info Josh can whip back to reporters rather than being stuck with the choice of either answering 50 long and stupid questions by tomorrow, or sending back a fuck-you, because as deserved as the fuck-yous are, they become more fake fodder for an unsympathetic narrative.
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2019
One of the best write-ups I've followed was Trans Lifeline's decline.
There was plenty documented, along with anecdotal stories, about troons being put on hold/hung up on.
The Schofield issue was also very well written and documented. The positive outcome being the son, Bodhi, being resituated in a better home.
Or how about Stophie LaBuffalo Bill's tracing of an infant from a photo to make porn, along with his disturbing regularity of having his book signings and talks in dirty book stores?
And the Daddy of Five abuse case.
There are so many positives that were made possible by the stellar sleuthing, archiving, and documentation found here.
There was plenty documented, along with anecdotal stories, about troons being put on hold/hung up on.
The Schofield issue was also very well written and documented. The positive outcome being the son, Bodhi, being resituated in a better home.
Or how about Stophie LaBuffalo Bill's tracing of an infant from a photo to make porn, along with his disturbing regularity of having his book signings and talks in dirty book stores?
And the Daddy of Five abuse case.
There are so many positives that were made possible by the stellar sleuthing, archiving, and documentation found here.
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2022
That's why I want to do Terry. It came to me a hour ago. He is honestly a heroic figure, but his story has never been told, only cataloged, because no one wants to risk him saying nigger in a youtube video because they care about money.
We still have his archives, unlike 4 chan, which is lost. We could tell his story. The story of a man abandoned by everyone, yet still managed to create a magnificent piece of software with only imagination. Even when he died, he went out on his own terms, not to his madness. This is the story Liz Fong-Jones wants to destroy. And many others like it. This can be the reason for people to get involved.
Standardized Profile
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2018
Are we talking about the write-up here, or the I&T thread?
Edit: I'm outlining something and don't want to duplicate effort.
Edit: I'm outlining something and don't want to duplicate effort.
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2022
That thread is fucking dead. Until further notice, stay here
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2021
If we're discussing optics of the site I feel like we should focus in on the amalgamation of vice news and regular forum we objectively are. They want to deplatform this site for choking out minority voices (or some shit) when KF is full to the fucking brim of them? What? Take a stroll through the Beauty Parlor or Rat Kings for chrissakes. The LGBTBBQ is not free from critique or discussion, and KF is objectively a safe space for members of the community to discuss and archive problematic elements alongside more mundane commentary. There is jack or shit this site does that any paparazzi rag doesn't also do, fuck's sake they're objectively worse since we've never caused the death of British royalty.