Liz Fong-Jones / Elliot William Fong / @lizthegrey - 'Consent accident' enjoyer, ex-Google employee, nepotistic sex pest, Robert Z'Dar look-alike who wants authority over the Internet

[Super-Chevy454]

On this day 5th June 2024, Liz (Zhen) Fong-Jones, Field CTO of Honeycomb.io, contributed a Wikipedia post on how the acronym "LGBTP" should be redirected to the article "conspiracy theory". What a nice and meaningful way to spend your life (and investor money).
View attachment 6058038

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_June_5#LGBTP

I archived that discussion on Archive.today and GhostArchive.

https://archive.ph/GTtqv

https://ghostarchive.org/archive/Ae4fV

 

[dick brain]

"Yeah I'm into BDSM: blocking, dilating, seething and malding."

 

[Super-Chevy454]

Ironic that he pushes the idea that LGBT grooming is just a conspiracy theory, when he was groomed himself.

I wonder what kind of mental gymnastics he'll do when it won't be a conspiracy theory anymore?

 

[Temperance]

Figured I should post this here too. Crosspost from the Becky Gerber thread:

For now, I just want to point out that Becky is friends with Liz Fong-Jones.

I remember seeing this last year and getting a bit MATI. This was less than a month after Becky falsely accused KF of hosting CP of her.

https://archive.is/VcdUV
(If you're curious, this was the Wired article Dong Gone linked. The title was changed for some reason.)

After losing several pregnancies due to the non-stop stress of being harassed by that website for years of my life, it is truly rich listening to nonsense about "censorship." My children are dead. I will never hold them. It's hard to care about the free speech of terrorists in comparison.

Dead children should not be the cost that we pay for some sadists to get their rocks off harming others.

Note: Becky is a prolific liar. She basically counts every late/irregular period as a "miscarriage", and she has also previously blamed these alleged miscarriages on her employers.

I suspect Liz and Becky got to know each other thanks to the Mother Jones hitpiece. They both provided quotes for it, alongside some other lolcows with grievances against the Farms.
(Becky is referred to as "Yonah" and "Gerber" in the article, btw. She lies about the Farms trying to drive her to suicide, making threats to SWAT her, and contacting her parents to gloat about her miscarriages.)

 

[Unifier of Hispania]

2SLGBTQIAP+

LGBTP is an old 4chan meme (P stands for Pedophiles)

LGBTTTQICAPF2S+2P63S23P64S2MKULTRAFULLHD4KCIAFBINSAKGBFSBMI666 is the currently accepted acronym.

 

[Procrastinhater]

Note: Becky is a prolific liar. She basically counts every late/irregular period as a "miscarriage", and she has also previously blamed these alleged miscarriages

I'd love to know what happened to these people's brains that they somehow equate them choosing to come here and read their threads with "harrassment."

It really takes a special kind of retard. If they didn't actively follow their own threads they would have no idea what we are saying about them, but they're inevitably so narcissistic they obsessively hunt down any mention of their names.

It's like a Jew deliberately deciding to join a fucking Holocaust Deniers mailing list and then complaining about getting harrassing schizomail about wooden doors, cremation time + volume calculations, and unconnected chimneys.

Its not harrassment when you choose to seek it out dipshit. If you're that weak that mean words on the Internet upset you don't go looking for them problem solved.

 

[cherrysour]

I'd love to know what happened to these people's brains that they somehow equate them choosing to come here and read their threads with "harrassment."

Holy SHIT, yes, that's what I've been saying. How is it harassment when you have to opt in?

 

[Procrastinhater]

Holy SHIT, yes, that's what I've been saying. How is it harassment when you have to opt in?

Its not but people like Dong Gone are so narcissistic they think they have an absolute right to control what anybody says about them, and they obsessively search the Internet for any mention of their name, visit sites they know full well are not going to have a positive opinion of them, in Dong Gones case because he seeks out conflict with the same site himself, and they try to act surprised and offended when they find exactly what they went looking for.

Of course even they don't really consider it harrassment themselves, their offense and their outrage is entirely performative.

 

[Sexy Senior Citizen]

I'd love to know what happened to these people's brains that they somehow equate them choosing to come here and read their threads with "harrassment."

Holy SHIT, yes, that's what I've been saying. How is it harassment when you have to opt in?

There are several reasons they equate might having a thread here with "harassment":

1. Their egos will not stand the slightest bit of criticism. The absolutely will not stand us digging up any truth they've worked to bury. Remember, Liz Fong-Jones, Field CTO of honeycomb.io, consent accident enjoyer, is part of a group that works to bury your online history.
2. A large portion of "harassment" is potential, or unrealized, harassment- harassment that could conceivably happen, but has not occurred yet. Lolcows either fake evidence of harassment or say "bro just trust me" when asked to produce evidence of our harassment. We know this because the very few times they receive any kind of actual harassment, they publicize it.
3. Many mention feeling "unsafe" because of our relentless digging. More often than not, they have skeletons buried in their closets that, if unearthed, would incite violent reactions from normies. LibsOfTikTok has encountered similar reactions for similar reasons.
4. Some cows have experienced harassment from what was dug up from online archives. Chris-Chan's trolls were able to so successfully manipulate him he now has his own retarded bodyguard. A troll sent Russell Greer a bag of dirt with the message "You're a dirt bag." However, we have no way of either identifying or combating the issue, and we have a strong site culture against such actions. People who do such things are discovered, halal'd, and banned.

Its not but people like Dong Gone are so narcissistic they think they have an absolute right to control what anybody says about them, and they obsessively search the Internet for any mention of their name, visit sites they know full well are not going to have a positive opinion of them, in Dong Gones case because he seeks out conflict with the same site himself, and they try to act surprised and offended when they find exactly what they went looking for.

Of course even they don't really consider it harrassment themselves, their offense and their outrage is entirely performative.

Exactly, and it gives him a chance to play the victim. It's like kicking a hornet's nest, and then blaming the hornets for stinging you. Of course, he has no problems harassing other people as needed, like the hypocrite he is.

May his blindness be incurable and may his crotch rot devour him slowly.

 

[Procrastinhater]

Many mention feeling "unsafe" because of our relentless digging. More often than not, they have skeletons buried in their closets that, if unearthed, would incite violent reactions from normies. LibsOfTikTok has encountered similar reactions for similar reasons.

I find their hysterical reaction to LoTT particularly telling.
What they are saying is that if normies discover the shit they say and do themselve they will be so disgusted they will want to physically harm or murder them, but they never make the connection that if that is truly the case, then it's obviously them that is the problem.

Admitting that they are so disgusting and vile that any normie, exposed to what they really are, will be compelled to kill them, is not a good look.

 

[Temperance]

Just happened to come across Liz's involvement in GLAAD thanks to a random google search, and I was surprised that it's only been mentioned here once before. Last month:

Fong Dong and the co-founder of Tall Poppy are members of the GLADD Advisory Committee.

For those unaware, GLAAD is one of the giant Gay Rights organizations which fully pivoted to Troonery after gay marriage was legalized in the United States. They're very influential - big into lobbying politicians and browbeating social media websites into censoring anything "anti-LGBT".

Here's what I found regarding Liz Fong-Jones:
https://glaad.org/releases/fourth-a...lgbtq-safety-to-major-social-media-platforms/ [Archive]
https://glaad.org/smsi/social-media-safety-index-2024/ [PDF attached below.]

May 21, 2024 – GLAAD, the world’s largest lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ) media advocacy organization, today announced the findings of its fourth annual Social Media Safety Index (SMSI), the respected in-depth report on LGBTQ safety, privacy, and expression. Five of the six major social media platforms – YouTube, X/Twitter, and Meta’s Facebook, Instagram, and Threads – received failing F grades on the SMSI Platform Scorecard for the third consecutive year. TikTok earned a D+.

Read the full report now at: GLAAD.org/SMSI/2024

Offering specific findings and recommendations, the report calls on companies to urgently prioritize LGBTQ safety, especially to address the extraordinary quantities of anti-trans hate, harassment, and disinformation running rampant on their platforms. Despite score improvements from previous years, all companies fail to meet basic standards of many of the Scorecard’s 12 indicators which address a range of issues including data privacy, moderation transparency, training of content moderators, workforce diversity, and more.

Spoiler: Full text of announcement

GLAAD’S FOURTH ANNUAL SOCIAL MEDIA SAFETY INDEX GIVES FAILING GRADES ON LGBTQ SAFETY TO MAJOR SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS​

TikTok Earns D+ while Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Threads, and X All Graded F
Despite moderate score improvements since 2023 on LGBTQ safety, privacy, and expression, all platforms insufficiently protect LGBTQ users

May 21, 2024 – GLAAD, the world’s largest lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (LGBTQ) media advocacy organization, today announced the findings of its fourth annual Social Media Safety Index (SMSI), the respected in-depth report on LGBTQ safety, privacy, and expression. Five of the six major social media platforms – YouTube, X/Twitter, and Meta’s Facebook, Instagram, and Threads – received failing F grades on the SMSI Platform Scorecard for the third consecutive year. TikTok earned a D+.
Read the full report now at: GLAAD.org/SMSI/2024
Offering specific findings and recommendations, the report calls on companies to urgently prioritize LGBTQ safety, especially to address the extraordinary quantities of anti-trans hate, harassment, and disinformation running rampant on their platforms. Despite score improvements from previous years, all companies fail to meet basic standards of many of the Scorecard’s 12 indicators which address a range of issues including data privacy, moderation transparency, training of content moderators, workforce diversity, and more.
From GLAAD President and CEO, Sarah Kate Ellis:
“Leaders of social media companies are failing at their responsibility to make safe products. When it comes to anti-LGBTQ hate and disinformation, the industry is dangerously lacking on enforcement of current policies. There is a direct relationship between online harms and the hundreds of anti-LGBTQ legislative attacks, rising rates of real-world anti-LGBTQ violence and threats of violence, that social media platforms are responsible for and should act with urgency to address.”
In the 2024 SMSI Platform Scorecard, some platforms have shown improvements in their scores since last year. Others have fallen, and overall, the scores remain abysmal, with all platforms other than TikTok receiving F grades (TikTok reached a D+).

• TikTok: D+ — 67% (+10 points from 2023)
• Facebook: F — 58% (-3 points from 2023)
• Instagram: F — 58% (-5 points from 2023)
• YouTube: F — 58% (+4 points from 2023)
• Threads: F — 51% (new 2024 rating)
• Twitter: F — 41% (+8 points from 2023)

Created in partnership with Ranking Digital Rights (RDR), the SMSI Platform Scorecard looks at 12 LGBTQ-specific indicators and evaluates each of the six major platforms, drawing on RDR’s standard methodology to generate numeric ratings for each product with regard to LGBTQ safety. The SMSI Scorecard does not include indicators on enforcement of policies. GLAAD and other monitoring organizations repeatedly encounter failures in enforcement of community guidelines across major platforms.
Specific LGBTQ safety, privacy, and expression issues identified in the Platform Scorecard, and in the SMSI report in general, include:

• Inadequate content moderation and problems with policy development and enforcement (including issues with both failure to mitigate anti-LGBTQ content and over-moderation/suppression of LGBTQ users);
• Harmful algorithms and lack of algorithmic transparency; inadequate transparency and user controls around data privacy;
• An overall lack of transparency and accountability across the industry, among many other issues — all of which disproportionately impact LGBTQ users and other marginalized communities who are uniquely vulnerable to hate, harassment, and discrimination.

This year’s report also illuminates the epidemic of anti-LGBTQ hate, harassment, and disinformation across major social media platforms, and especially makes note of high-follower hate accounts and right-wing figures who continue to manufacture and circulate most of this activity.
Key Conclusions of the 2024 SMSI include:

• Anti-LGBTQ rhetoric and disinformation on social media translates to real-world offline harms.
• Platforms are largely failing to successfully mitigate dangerous anti-LGBTQ hate and disinformation and frequently do not adequately enforce their own policies regarding such content.
• Platforms also disproportionately suppress LGBTQ content, including via removal, demonetization, and forms of shadowbanning.
• There is a lack of effective, meaningful transparency reporting from social media companies with regard to content moderation, algorithms, data protection, and data privacy practices.

Core Recommendations:

• Strengthen and enforce existing policies that protect LGBTQ people and others from hate, harassment, and misinformation/disinformation, and also from suppression of legitimate LGBTQ expression.
• Improve moderation including training moderators on the needs of LGBTQ users, and moderate across all languages, cultural contexts, and regions. This also means not being overly reliant on AI.
• Be transparent with regard to content moderation, community guidelines, terms of service policy implementation, algorithm designs, and enforcement reports. Such transparency should be facilitated via working with independent researchers.
• Stop violating privacy/respect data privacy. To protect LGBTQ users from surveillance and discrimination, platforms should reduce the amount of data they collect, infer, and retain. They should cease the practice of targeted surveillance advertising, including the use of algorithmic content recommendation. In addition, they should implement end-to-end encryption by default on all private messaging to protect LGBTQ people from persecution, stalking, and violence.
• Promote civil discourse and proactively message expectations for user behavior, including respecting platform hate and harassment policies.

From GLAAD’s Senior Director of Social Media Safety Jenni Olson:
“In addition to these egregious levels of inadequately moderated anti-LGBTQ hate and disinformation, we also see a corollary problem of over-moderation of legitimate LGBTQ expression — including wrongful takedowns of LGBTQ accounts and creators, shadowbanning, and similar suppression of LGBTQ content. Meta’s recent policy change limiting algorithmic eligibility of so-called ‘political content,’ which the company partly defines as: ‘social topics that affect a group of people and/or society large’ is especially concerning.”
GLAAD’s SMSI Advisory Committee
Providing expert input and guidance on the project, the GLAAD SMSI advisory committee includes respected leaders working at the intersections of tech accountability and LGBTQ social justice. Committee members include: ALOK, writer, performer, and media personality; Lucy Bernholz, Ph.D, Director, Digital Civil Society Lab at Stanford University; Alejandra Caraballo, Esq., Clinical Instructor, Cyberlaw Clinic, Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School; Joan Donovan Ph.D, Founder, Critical Internet Studies Institute and Assistant Professor of Journalism and Emerging Media Studies, Boston University; Jelani Drew-Davi, Senior Communications Specialist, Kairos; Liz Fong-Jones, Field CTO, Honeycomb; Evan Greer, Director, Fight for the Future; Leigh Honeywell, CEO and Co-Founder, Tall Poppy; Maria Ressa, Journalist & CEO, Rappler; Tom Rielly, Founder, TED Fellows Program and Founder, PlanetOut.com; Dr. Sarah T. Roberts, Faculty Director, UCLA Center for Critical Internet Inquiry; Brennan Suen, Deputy Director of External Affairs, Media Matters for America; Kara Swisher, editor-at-large, New York Magazine; Marlena Wisniak, Senior Advisor, Digital Rights, European Center for Not-for-Profit Law.
The Social Media Safety Index was created with support from Craig Newmark Philanthropies, the Gill Foundation, and Logitech.
Read the full report now
About the GLAAD Social Media Safety Program:
As the leading national LGBTQ media advocacy organization GLAAD is working every day to hold tech companies and social media platforms accountable, and to secure safe online spaces for LGBTQ people. GLAAD’s Social Media Safety (SMS) program researches, monitors, and reports on a variety of issues facing LGBTQ social media users — with a focus on safety, privacy, and expression. The SMS program has consulted directly with platforms and tech companies on some of the most significant LGBTQ policy and product developments over the years. In addition to ongoing advocacy work with platforms (including TikTok, X/Twitter, YouTube, and Meta’s Facebook, Instagram, Threads, and others), and issuing the highly-respected annual Social Media Safety Index (SMSI) report, the SMS program produces resources, guides, publications, and campaigns, and actively works to educate the general public and raise awareness in the media about LGBTQ social media safety issues, especially anti-LGBTQ hate and disinformation.
About GLAAD: GLAAD rewrites the script for LGBTQ acceptance. As a dynamic media force, GLAAD tackles tough issues to shape the narrative and provoke dialogue that leads to cultural change. GLAAD protects all that has been accomplished and creates a world where everyone can live the life they love. For more information, please visit www.glaad.org or connect with GLAAD on Facebook and Twitter.

Liz Fong-Jones is a member of GLAAD's SMSI Advisory Committee. (SMSI = Social Media Safety Index)

Committee members:

• ALOK, writer, performer, and media personality;
• Lucy Bernholz, Ph.D, Director, Digital Civil Society Lab at Stanford University;
• Alejandra Caraballo, Esq., Clinical Instructor, Cyberlaw Clinic, Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School;
• Joan Donovan Ph.D, Founder, Critical Internet Studies Institute and Assistant Professor of Journalism and Emerging Media Studies, Boston University;
• Jelani Drew-Davi, Senior Communications Specialist, Kairos;
• Liz Fong-Jones, Field CTO, Honeycomb;
• Evan Greer, Director, Fight for the Future;
• Leigh Honeywell, CEO and Co-Founder, Tall Poppy;
• Maria Ressa, Journalist & CEO, Rappler;
• Tom Rielly, Founder, TED Fellows Program and Founder, PlanetOut.com;
• Dr. Sarah T. Roberts, Faculty Director, UCLA Center for Critical Internet Inquiry;
• Brennan Suen, Deputy Director of External Affairs, Media Matters for America;
• Kara Swisher, editor-at-large, New York Magazine;
• Marlena Wisniak, Senior Advisor, Digital Rights, European Center for Not-for-Profit Law.

Quite the rat king! I recognize a few of these names. @Null, I think you'll be interested in this.
Leigh Honeywell runs Tall Poppy and is (of course) a close associate of Liz Fong-Jones. Alejandra Caraballo (aka Alex or Big Gay Al) is the Harvard troon lawyer who has his own lolcow thread. Alex also falsely accused Kiwi Farms of hosting "CSAM" awhile ago.
ALOK (aka Alok Vaid-Menon) being named here is what really blew my mind, though! He's the drag queen freak who openly asserted that little girls are "kinky". He has an old/dead KF thread here.

• edit: Read this possible correction about the "little girls are kinky" thing. Alok blames these posts on a former partner.

It looks like Liz is a founding member of this GLAAD advisory committee, which I think was formed in 2021. He's named in their 2021 report (in the pdf). Same with Leigh Honeywell.


ALOK and Alex Caraballo joined in 2022. I wonder if Liz had anything to do with that...

 

[Fishmalk Observer]

This may sound overly harsh, but i wish everyone involved in this was dead

 

[Lord of the Large Pants]

This may sound overly harsh, but i wish everyone involved in this was dead

Or is it not nearly harsh enough?

 

[sirthisisanarbys]

why are faggots so gay this thread makes me

 

[Temperance]

ALOK (aka Alok Vaid-Menon) being named here is what really blew my mind, though! He's the drag queen freak who openly asserted that little girls are "kinky". He has an old/dead KF thread here.

After actually reading through the Alok thread, I'd like to make a correction or at least add an asterisk to this.

The "little girls are kinky" statements were real, but they were posted by the Facebook account of "DarkMatter". DarkMatter was basically a duo performance group consisting of Alok and a pooner/genderspecial woman named Janani. Apparently, both Alok and Janani would post on the DarkMatter social media accounts (without signing their name), so it's ambiguous who exactly made the "little girls are kinky" posts.

Alok denies it was him, and it does sound plausible that those posts could have been written by Janani. However, I also want to note that the DarkMatter duo broke up with bad blood between them, so this could just be Alok pushing the blame on his former partner. Janani also never gave her side of the story, as far as I can see.

For more info, see:

It appears Darkmatter shared that kinky little girls thing in late March/early April and when facing backlash from fans reposted it instead of apologising. Darkmatter who had been doing loads of events suddenly slowed down, then an apology is posted and there's no more events for months. Janani only appeared a couple of times subsequently while actively distancing herself from Darkmatter. Then Alok announces he's "taking a break", goes off on solo tour and then Darkmatter officially ends.

The one thing I can't verify is who actually posted about "kinky little girls". They never signed their posts on DarkMatter and the post mentions having been a cute little girl - it feasibly could have been Janani who posted it. I can't see any evidence it specifically was Alok. On the other hand it seems like received wisdom at the time (and I do remember it at the time) that the post was from Alok and that Alok apologised for it, and also it seems more like the sort of shit Alok would come out with (Janani came out with some off the wall shit too, but the focus on femininity feels more like an Alok post).

Yeah, I've always kind of wondered about this myself. Describing himself as being raised as a little girl doesn't really fit the way Alok talks about himself so I've always thought there was a chance Janani wrote it.

He's never corrected the record on it but that might be because of bad blood between them and not wanting to talk about her.

@Tard Whisperer in the Dylan thread found that Alok actually has addressed it on his personal website back in 2021 -
Very interesting that Janani is a "former colleague" and there's no acknowledgement of DarkMatter by name. I wonder if they've both realised how cringe their performances were.

 

[AnOminous]

Alok denies it was him, and it does sound plausible that those posts could have been written by Janani. However, I also want to note that the DarkMatter duo broke up with bad blood between them, so this could just be Alok pushing the blame on his former partner. Janani also never gave her side of the story, as far as I can see.

And somehow he only started denying it when it was controversial. I really don't care which of them said it, they're both degenerate perverted pieces of shit who should be cordially invited to face the wall.

 

[KingFrampt]

19 days until Liz Fong-Jones birthday! Please remember to wish him a happy birthday

 

[Accidental Protege]

This may sound overly harsh, but i wish everyone involved in this was dead

I mean, it would immediately make the world an objectively better place for everyone else.

 

[Sexy Senior Citizen]

19 days until Liz Fong-Jones birthday! Please remember to wish him a happy birthday

Happy Birthday, Lizzie! One year older, and we're still standing! How's it feel, knowing you're wasting your life going after one silly bird forum?

 

[Joe Cool]

Happy Birthday, Lizzie! One year older, and we're still standing! How's it feel, knowing you're wasting your life going after one silly bird forum?

And that consent accident? Archived for all eternity and indexed by all of the major search engines for anyone who cares to look. Fantastic own goal, Elliot.