Wylted

I have a lot to discuss with my team, to help me figure out the best course of action moving forward. 

Moderators currently over moderate. So by influencing them to moderate less, you lessen the amount of moderation.  

Whether the influence be from persuasion or from New policies. 

Yes they are, LOL

Why is religion fair to criticize, but bringing up problems that disproportionately affect various races and genders are not? 

I won't be watching you play tetris, but you still have my moral support. 

HOW  serious do you get with tetris? I watched "pro" Terri's players in a documentary talking about how "rolling" is the future of tetris and tappera have no place in professional tetris. 

Are you a tapper or a roller? Whatever the hell those things are. 

Why would they not think so. Assuming they were alive to say, why would you think none would be willing to speculate that maybe they were the victim of a cruel experiment by the government? 

I wonder that as well. I feel like the whole capital thing, might have just been a lightning rod to find and be able to monitor people who are willing to fight for their rights. The same way the BLM movements acted as a lightning rod to put a lot of silent antifa prior to that in some sort of database for monitoring.  If the government decides to really lose control soon, than enough dissenters have came out of their shell, that the feds have an even stronger tactical advantage. 

This is very disrespectful.  I have found some of his actions to be distasteful in the past as he was a bit manipulative in some ways I found inappropriate, but this is no way to treat somebody. 

This is a new active member of the site for all intents and purposes. You saying you will increase activity while simultaneously and immediately attacking somebody after their first post in 2 years, seems counter productive to your aims. 

I hope you stick around this time. I missed you. 

Why do you think I am not being sincere by saying good things about you? You stated earlier that it hasn't lost you a single vote, or won me any. So why would I say positive things about you?

Let's get beyond this facade of self confidence. I'm going to tell you, you don't need a facade. You are genuinely a good person and I really respect you standing up for what you believe in. 

Obviously if you have a persecution complex, you would say it is real persecution. You thinking I called you a domestic abuser or taking what lunatic said in a similar vein, makes it obvious you have one to anybody reading those comments from a bird's eye view. 

Why would me comparing the logic that is used by domestic abusers to the logic you use elsewhere be me painting you as a supporter of domestic abuse?

If you see that, in that way than you need to stop with the victim complex. 

You have to be lying or have some sort of victim complex to take that interpretation away. I saw you do that with lunaticr also where you somehow got confused about an animal abuse analogy.  

That is not how somebody in a healthy mental state interprets that. Stop with the persecution complex. I felt my post in op painted you in a good light and just stuck to discussion of why your responses to conflict and platform were not good for the site or position you want. 

those were questions that gave you the opportunity to win over fence sitters leaning towards pie. I think it would do a lot for your outlook on life, if you didn't see every challenge as an attack on you, but perhaps as an opportunity

I never dropped out. I said I was suspending campaigning.

Here are the questions.

Question 1

How will you approach forming a working relationship with whiteflame?

Question 2

ll you defend members from unfair censorship, if they have moral values you find repugnant? 


And let's say the defense would be you having to defend their right to argue in favor of something disgusting. For example.

1. A user hates women and posts a bunch of arguments arguing they are inferior in some way. They are then banned for hate speech. Will you defend them? Let's leave out examples of mere proselytizing and promoting hate, those probably should be banned, but just focus on making arguments.  

2. How will you help a user whose posts provide good arguments for an ignorant position, but say supa locks the thread because it could result in a heated debate on a debate site. 


Question 3

Are you capable of proving your ability to use discretion.  The ability to use discretion is important to a working relationship.  Let's say you earn whiteflames trust and he starts leaning heavy on you as an advocate for users he interacts with less than you. 

A lot of those conversations may be very private and ugly facts about users could come out that was only the privy of mods. Say whiteflame concludes a particular case of harassment is not harassment and the user should go unpunished. You guys fight hard over it and he basically says "fuck you, not banning the harasser " . Your only two options are

1. Drop your argument and let the harasser get away with it

Or

2. Air your personal grievances with whiteflame publicly and break his trust and ruin the relationship necessary for a working relationship.

Will you and can you be trusted to take option 1.

I know I have the ability to maintain that relationship with whiteflame and have previously proven it as I have interacted with him a lot off site and we have both told each other personal things, and both of us have seen each other never betray that trust.  Can whiteflame trust you like he trusts me, so a working relationship is possible?

I'm glad you kept your cool in that instance. Hopefully we see more of that from you in the future.

The second section of this has campaigning advice to work within the rules of the election. If you see anything incorrect let me know so I can avoid unintentionally causing somebody to break any rules

I appreciate anybody reading this campaign update. It shows you care about the future of the site and want to stay up to date, even if you don’t happen to support me. This is going to cover a few things, feel free to skip around if you think a topic is not relevant to the election.


Why we need debate on a debate site

I found an article recently that stated the following

“our organization might prefer consensus and harmony.  In creative settings where the stakes are high, it is imperative to stimulate debate and criticism to improve the quality of ideas. Dissenting for the sake of dissenting is not useful, but when it is authentic, it stimulates thought. The secret to success is sincerity. Obligation to dissent is critical.  Everyone with a critical opinion should always speak up about it.  Dissenting opinions are useful even when they are wrong, as they clarify and embolden everyone’s thinking.” https://www.thnk.org/insights/building-a-culture-that-welcomes-dissent/

There is a lot of studies backing up that point as well, feel free to read through the article. Banning certain opinions shouldn’t be done. The only exceptions should be for legal reasons or for things that actually prevent free speech. Spamming would harm the free marketplace of ideals, as well as bullying and threats. Any promotion of illegal activity (not glorification) would also put the site in jeapordy as well as the free marketplace of ideals by extension.

We can see in this election how having a dissenting opinion is valuable. I can tell by reading through this thread. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/7129-why-you-should-not-vote-for-rationalmadman

that RM’s platform has been altered by meeting the marketplace of ideals. It’s still got the same core arguments, but should I lose to him, I would feel proud that I had some part in helping him craft a better platform that will be better for the site.

Despite RM benefiting from the free marketplace of ideals, he still seems to snub it. That’s fine, the biggest enemy of free speech, has always been free speech. It’s legitimately easier to attack, because it welcomes attack.

The best evidence for free open speech and dissent being a good thing on this site, is how well RM’s platform has evolved because of it. Read the first few pages of this thread to see what the early version of his message looked like.

https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/7106-a-witch-a-thang-a-yin-a-yang-a-rational-man-and-a-boomerang

the last few pages of this thread show what his message has improved to.

https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/7129-why-you-should-not-vote-for-rationalmadman

Don’t get me wrong, I still think his platform is weaker than mine, which can be seen here. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/7117-build-back-dart-better-campaign-announcement


The proper way to campaign for me

Message spamming people is against the rules on this site. However I want to explain what spam is and is not. RM has indicated he believes that any campaign related emails are spam. The mods can feel free to correct me, but I think he is handcuffing himself a little much in this respect.

If you have a relationship with somebody and routinely message them on the site, than it is not spam to send a message to your friend saying “I think RM is the best candidate and voting started today, please vote”.

The spam they don’t allow is just randomly sending messages to everyone in your in box who has ever messaged you, or really anyone you don’t have a prior warm relationship to. I have to be more careful than my supporters. I will probably only send reminders to people who have contacted me during this election cycle.

There is this instinct with some people to never go in that gray area, but the election by it’s nature is competitive, and if you aren’t playing all the way to the edge (ethically) than you are unfairly handcuffing yourself.

I would like to take this time to remind my more vocal supporters, not to attack RM personally. He’s pushed my buttons and I have done some things I am not proud of in response, but I for the most part have not got personal with him. I expect the same from you. If he pushes your buttons and you feel emotional, walk away. Count to 3. breathe. Then go make a thoughtful response or just none at all.

RM is a human being. He is deserving of love. More so than love, he is deserving of respect. He shouldn’t be abused, just because he cares enough about the site, that he has decided to run for president and be a lightning rod of criticism. That is a very brave thing for him to do, and he should be commended.

Oppose him, not by attacking him, but by talking to fence sitters about why his policies are bad or why he would be bad for the position. (Using only actions made during this campaign) . If you want to, make threads where you hyper focus on a single problem with his platform or even his temperament. Be careful with the latter though, as it can drift into a personal attack if you don’t guard yourself.

RM lacks Tempered Reason

Speaking of temperament. I want to point out, that by it’s nature the office of presidency is a very diplomatic position. In my campaign thread I mentioned why I would be better at diplomacy than an RM.

However, we have some recent examples of RM, lashing out with the very people who he needs to persuade once he is in office. The examples appear elsewhere but occur strongly in this thread. https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/7118-should-we-crack-down-on-members-of-the-religion-forum

His interactions with the head mod starts on page 2 and continues until page 3. It takes 5 minutes to read and you can all judge for yourself whether these are interactions that are likely to be persuasive to somebody who has the power to implement the changes you want to see.

RM knows that not only are members of the religion forum important to how this election turns out, but that the atheists are more likely to like my message, so his response is to lose his temper and try to make me look bad by pulling up old threads. One for an interfaith service for the religion forum and one that argued that the existence of God should be argued in the philosophy question.

Those threads can be found here

https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/6729-atheists-are-no-longer-welcome-here
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/6730-announcing-the-sites-first-worship-service

The threads were obviously made to be tongue in cheek. I am never agnostic but do flip back and forth on whether I believe God is real or not, though recently my belief in him has strengthened, so maybe I am staying theistic.

Take a look back at RM’s campaign thread. I posted in the beginning before deciding to run, a few questions that could help him to ease my concern about what an RM presidency would look like, and that are probably circulating in the heads of fence sitters thinking of voting for him but weren’t entirely decided.

His responses were instead of calmly answering the questions and assuming best intent on my part, he immediately attacked me on a personal level. His responses deeply concerned me. I definitely thought after that, he would be a disaster for the site as president. Beyond that. There is just something about RM that makes me like the guy.

I know, it’s weird. Maybe it is because he has a unique way of looking at the world, maybe it is because I can tell that despite his flaws, he really does have a deep sense of empathy. Either way I can’t help but to like him, so him lashing out at me in the thread and saying he has no respect for me and could care less about my vote, to a certain extent hurt my feelings.

His emotional responses aren’t conducive to good leadership. Good leadership requires tempered reason, when a leader has only soft power on their side, it requires a lot of diplomacy which isn’t something that can be done, when you act without thinking

TLDR

1. Free speech makes us all better
2. campaign for me by being respectful as well as not spamming, while remaining proactive.
3. tempered reason is an important trait in leaders that RM has not displayed an ability to do

It might not be about him, but about the utility of the site being an open marketplace of ideals. 

Correct. Name one big thing you have changed your mind about since the beginning of 2022? Are you capable of considering you are ever wrong?

Post 111, is one of the reasons why I changed my mind. It's just an attack. It is saying 

"Look at some thing that wylted has done bad and may piss off a certain segment of people who would vote for him"

It's just an attack. When I bring up your flaws, I am mentioning how they would relate to your ability to be the president. You have dirt on you. I don't care to bring it up, anybody who has been around long enough can point out several examples of your dirt. 

I don't care about your past though. I won't even bring up any bad things from 2 weeks ago. It doesn't matter. What matters is who you are today. As president you will do the same things David did that has left the site decimated and on oxygen support. He over stepped his authority and went ban crazy, and the site is now almost dead. Your solution to the site being on life support is to do what put it on if support to a larger degree. That is a fact

We like meritocracy and disdain anything that goes against it, whether that be a welfare state or Inheritance or nepotism. 

With that said, I want to make sure my child can live rent free until he is ready to purchase a home, and I would hope I can pay for his education so he doesn't go into deep debt.

As somebody who was emancipated at 16 and had to do everything on my own, it's been very tough. Nobody should have to fight that hard for a mediocre life. 

Why don't you list out it's problems and we can work together to fix the ones we agree with. I think banning troll threads would be silly, so we won't agree there, but how can I be of service?

I understand the feeling. That's what caused me to lose my faith. I read the Bible in a really literal way and it disgusted me. Other religions did not seem much better. 

This is an old troll thread so I can't really defended anything stated in the op, but sometimes the road of knowledge can be winding, especially for those willing to challenge their own beliefs. Here is mine

Begin - theist because parents were

2. Start to become atheist because the Bible is teaching unethical things

3. Realize I have misinterpreted some things and become christian

4. Start deep diving more into the Bible and like what it says, but no evidence for God

5. Through personal revelations and experiences find God again

Stage 6 I might be atheist again. When you are open to learning and doing a lot of it, your opinions can change frequently. In 20 years we might reverse roles, maybe I meet you in 20 years and you are a Christian and I am the atheist. 

Those were troll threads. The religious forum would seem to exist without atheists

Y

If you actually believed that,you would drop out of the race, because I would actually be effective at making that happen, while you are basically a less stable version of David whose over moderation has almost killed the site. Your presidency would be the final nail in the coffin to this site

When I did that it was in Wilmington Delaware. I have moved to Florida and when my schedule settles down, plan to do it again but not as a captain. 

This has actually been gone over. His approach would drive members away. He agrees with bans on people whose ideology he disagrees with. On a debate site, that sort of approa h to create a hive mind type of society is harmful. If you haven't noticed the site is pretty dead and that is a direct result of those sort of actions that were taken by David who had RM's same approach. 

Lunatic's post in op actually does a really good job of explaining how I would bring in more people to the site and stop the downward slide that began with bsh1 and excellerated with David. The mods post David were okay, however the precedents they set still need to be opposed as you can see from the damage to the site.

Polytheist,  I don't know the particular details of your beef with Stephen, but I can say that I would be more effective at creating the change to protect you from legitimate harassment than RM. 

The only real power a president has is their ability to influence the mods. You can take a look at the thread in the religion section and observe RMs interactions with the mods and see if those interactions are conducive to persuading the mods or just annoying to the mods. I think Ragnar whiteflame and supa interact with RM that thread and you can judge his effectiveness at appealing to them or not. 

I wouldn't trust China state media. The truth is not what they are after. 

Maybe that is the way other websites work. Banning people you disagree with, so you can bring a hive mind to the site, won't work on a debate site. The site is currently dead other than the campaigns and it is because of policies like David's that created a hivemind like atmosphere. 

That is a really sad reflection on the current state of the site, if it is by only a slight margin. 

This is what he believes in his mind he will do. His e

Heart is in the right place perhaps. Please see lunatics thread explaining why it would be a terrible ideal if he became president

Site wise, between here and ddo, I have played 4 games of survivor and have led my team to be the last ones standing in 3 out of those four games. 

When I lead, my team wins. Winn ING this election, makes the entire site my team. 

I don't lose. It's up to the site to elect me though. I am handcuffed and can not fight as hard as my last victory for presidency on DDO. I also don't want to fight as hard. It's important that the people who support me fight hard this time. That the people who care about the future of this site, have read lunatics thread and do something about preserving this site, because as of now it is floundering and ready to die. As I speak the threads were dad for the last 3 hours, zero debates are in the challenge period. The site is close to ruin, because of over moderation and Rm's solution is to increase moderation. My priority is to fight the disease that is likely going to destroy this site, if nothing is done.

I have. I was team captain of a pool team in the APA that I led to go deep in a national tournament in Vegas.

I was also a general manager at Wendy's , and had the best numbers of any store in my district and my managers always maxed out on bonuses.

I quit because I got tired of feeding people's addiction to shit food and got into sales. I started in a call center and was one of the most persuasive people in the office and just this week, I was offered a sales job making up to 6 figures. 

Not only am I a proven leader, but I am proven as a master persuader as well. I can provide citations if needed, and PM them to you, though it may take some time to dig up old phone numbers, the new ones will be easier. 

Incorrect. You'll see me being very careful with precedents, since the next election I won't be qualified for and RM will most likely win. 

Granted brutal is not as much of a danger to the site, but I read through some of his most recent threads. He is very ideological and his ideal of sparking discussion is creating a thread and posting a 2 hour video and saying discuss. 

Are you teisting what I am saying or just misinterpreting it?

Nobody said anything about behaving blindly anti establishment.  I told you where my biases lay, because previously you said my biases would be about left right ideology.

Unfortunately I am human and cannot eliminate my biases completely. All I can do is be on guard against them and try my best to not let them get in the way of my decisions.  Certainly it is pretty obvious I'd better guard against those biases better than RM or brutal, and I think it is in my favor, that I am aware enough of my biases to acknowledge them. 

She literally made all the trolls be in the financial industry.  It's obvious what she was doing and I only seen half of one movie

Also he defines asset as something g that makes you money and liability as something that costs you money and urges you to have more assets than liabilities. 

It's not ancap stuff LOL. The book was terrible though and you are better off forgetting it. I will sum it up.

Their is a quadrant where you are either employee self employed, business owner or investor.  

Anyone in the e or s quadrant is a dumb ass and should be pitied for their stupidity. Best summary I have

I read the entire lion witch and wardrobe series but only remember the lion witch and the wardrobe.

I also really enjoyed the phantom tollbooth, but I can't recall a single thing from the book. 

Space oddysey 2001 is a movie you can only enjoy while on acid. 

That's ridiculous.  

I am no ideologue. I don't care about anybodys  belief system or political ideology. 

Brutal is an ideologue however. I've read through his posts. 

Name one time you have seen me take any political ideology seriously?

The only consistent ideology you see me talk about is anti establishment.  The people most likely to get banned are anti establishment rule breakers, whether leftist or right wing. Who do you think I am more inclined to be biased towards. The pro establishment mods (because they are literally the establishment) or the anti establishment people more likely to find themselves needing my help?

I literally have friends who are black Israelite and hate whites. We bond over talking shit about the government, while they tell me I am evil. 

I'll even defend RM if he is unfairly banned, and most of his bans are unfair. 

I do appreciate the endorsement and agree with everything you have said here. I would like to correct one point

While the other two campaigns were about ego gratification. I genuinely don't want to run here and tried to avoid it. If literally one person who is  even remotely equal to me runs and also who is more electable, I'd drop out and fully endorse them.

I wish you would run, to take this burden off my shoulders, but I get the feeling nothing will convince you to do so. 

Rm blocked me, so that is how I communicate with him

Nobody reading that post, would think it is an endorsement LOL. 3rut7l go look at what RM is talking about to see if anybody would interpret that sarcastic comment, that way

Rm is literally trying to spin me saying networking is the only real power a president has,  as me having some sort of hold on the sites power brokers. Lol

You can't be stupid enough to think me saying to run it by the religion forum was an endorsement if the ideal. If you are legitimately that dumb, please take nootropics. 

So you literally have the same platform as everyone else. Great job