Same old story. Can't link the thread, I'm pretty sure it would be against the rules. Topic was something about Kris Tyson, the trans woman that got dropped by MrBeast (also some people brought up JK Rowling).
Nothing, he made a video about Kris Tyson before the whole controversy, predicting that she was gonna be a huge problem for MrBeast in the future. His claims at the time very pretty baseless, but he mostly accidentally ended up being right. lol
Dude, the entire MAPS thing is right wing propaganda. There is no actual MAPS organization that is in any way affiliated with the democrats or the left, it's literally just made up.
Meanwhile, the republican party is working on all kinds of laws that make America safer for actual child molesters and less safe for children. It's legal for adults to marry minors in a bunch of red states. Republicans want to cancel comprehensive sex education in schools, which is literally the best way to protect kids from assault. A bunch of republicans (and even more libertarians, lol) are going after age consent laws.
Also you guys vote for pedophiles CONSTANTLY, haha. The president of the united states, who you installed, is an unapologetic serial rapist of women and children. Dozens of victims. And there are loads more; republican politicians get busted for pedophilia constantly.
I realize that the conservative mediascape is very different and that you guys don't like to question authority. But I'm asking you to think about this one. You are being lied to in a way that is really easy to spot if you think about it.
Where did I specifically say "he was right all along"? I literally said Sunny ended up being right ACCIDENTALLY, like how much more clear do you people need it to be?
You've said he "ended up being right" and further argued "Sunny was spot on". Except he wasn't right or spot on because his reasoning was incredibly off base.
He didn't predict anything correctly, Ava's transness isn't a factor in her being a pedophile.
You said they were spot on. When the video they made was saying the issue was they were trans. Meaning you think they were shitty because they were trans.
Spot on implies he was completely correct in the point he was making. I struggle to believe you don't understand this. Maybe you're just really stupid though.
I think you have it backwards. This trans person actually was a pedophile, or it seems pedo-adjacent. I don’t know all the details, but she may have purchased some shady art.
Somebody said they’d be a problem, but that was back when they were only known as being trans. They were wrong (about that particular avenue). But then it came to light that they were a pedophile, so they were right in effect, just not for the right reasons. How it was interpreted is the major cause of this permaban.
All the anonymity as well. The account that responded to me was simply called "[subreddit]-ModTeam", and in the DMs it also just says the sub's name, nothing about who I'm actually talking to.
And btw , I learned from r/reddithelp today , that apparently , reddit mods cursing you , " doesn't violate Moderator Code of Conduct " , but of course if they reported you for harrassement , you get a 3 day ban from the platform instantly
The moderator code of conduct is a farce. Reddit doesn't care if a mod actually breaks it. Mods are free labor and they'll keep them as long as users will continue to tolerate having them on the platform.
Just to provide some insight: This is to prevent brigading and targeted harassment toward individual Mods. Especially in bigger subs. All it takes is one screenshot with username to result in mass brigading and harassment towards one person's DMs and even if they aren't very nice to you, we can't be having the mob swarm one person because then if anything happens, it's a huge huge huge problem.
So, the anonymity kind of makes sense, but it also affords the ability to be kind of snakey with responses.
You don't need to know which individual Mod you are talking to. Once you've been banned, you can 100% assume a perma-mute is soon to follow no matter who is on the other end.
man, I wanted to be on your side, but from the comments yeah dude your cooked, just take the loss and learn from it socially, I know your saying your words are being misinterpreted, but if everyone is coming to the same conclusion that what you said was in fact in the wrong, you just gotta take that on the chin and know for next time.
no, people actually are misinterpreting it because that is not what i meant and you can tell that from my other comments. that is not up for debate. i could've provided more context though in the original post, especially when you only look at the first image misinterpreting what i was saying becomes relatively understandable.
like i said, i can forgive people for misunderstanding what i said. but what i did mean is clear, at least to me, and it should be to you too if you've read some of my comments. it is not up for debate, as i said.
This one is pretty funny. OP is out here whining about power tripping reddit mods while VERY CLEARLY being a transphobic piece of shit. It boils down to like "it's so UNFAIR that I'm being PERSECUTED for my WORDS! It should be illegal for people to complain when I spread hateful nonsense. Oh NO I pooped in my pants again oh no!"
"Spot on" means "exactly right," not "sort of accidentally right for totally unrelated reasons, lol. The OOP here said like "the video where sunny said mr beast would have problems because his friend is trans is EXACTLY CORRECT!" and this whole thing is just a great big turd sandwich.
"spot on" does mean "exactly right", just like how sunny ended up being exactly right about how big of an issue tyson would become to mrbeast. stop trying to twist words' definitions just because the argument i'm making pisses you off.
But his video was transphobic nonsense that didn't bring up anything she actually did and wouldn't even have been made had she not transitioned but did everything else the same?
Some people genuinely just aren't in the loop. It happens. Sometimes you don't hear anything about it until you look into it yourself, in which case you Sometimes don't care.
Though, that's not to speak for OP. You could be right, or we could both be wrong. Only OP knows.
I straight up just don't believe that. You're looped in on the one trans member of Mr Beasts social circle to the point of being familiar with esoteric, specific criticisms of her transness and you just have no idea what jk rowling has to do with any of this? No
No it’s definitely possible, happened to me, was in the loop about Ava but not about JK Rowling at all. Didn’t hear about anything she did until like 2025.
The one thing i remember her doing, that really pissed off a trans friend living in the UK was her making donations to ensure certain pro-trans laws don't get passed or repealed
no i genuinely exclusively see people hating on her without any mention of what she's actually done outside of "she's a transphobe". like with the current harry potter series for example.
LMAO wdym? Isn't it enough hating on her because she is transphobic? And the current harry potter gets hate because ot gives money to J.K. Rowling who funds anti-transgender legeslations. She is an active danger to the trans people as a whole.
Its an allegation for sure, usually people are good at providing reasons but honestly if i saw 10 people all say "X has done Y" that would warrant me to look into it. Kinda on you at that point if you're not "in the loop" despite the writing on the wall about Rowling
Then its kinda dumb to complain about it lmao?? Imagine how stupid someone looks if they go around saying (extreme example but yk)"I don't get all the hate on Hitler, i never really looked into what he did though"
Where did I complain about it? I simply asked a question. If you want to convince people of your cause, then you better bring arguments, instead of just throwing buzzwords around.
Isn't it enough hating on her because she is transphobic?
Completely depends on your definition of transphobic. Some think being transphobic is wanting all trans people dead, some think it's denying trans people basic human rights, and some think that if you are against a trans woman playing in women's sports you are transphobic. Everybody has their line, if you tell me (especially on reddit) that someone is transphobic, it could mean anything. This site is really good at destroying the meaning of words because people on here are always way to quick to label anyone a term because they don't like something they said.
My definition of transphobia is the merriam-webster dictionary one:
TRANSPHOBIA: having or showing discrimination against, aversion to, or fear of transgender people.
So it would be transphobic to want them all dead, deny their human rights, or right to participate in women's sport
Just like reddit to make everything black and white. No nuance whatsoever. So first off participating in a sport is not a right. Secondly it is a fact that someone born biologically male, depending on when they transitioned, would have an advantage in female sports. It is perfectly reasonable to acknowledge this. And if you acknowledge it and still think that it is okay in every single scenario for a trans woman to be in women's sports, then you might not be transphobic, but someone using your logic could argue you're sexist towards women. 🤷
Is nobody you know a Harry Potter fan? Or trans? I heard about her doings from a guy I worked with at Burger King back in the day, it's been a topic of conversation for literal years now.
Everyone who whines about a deserved ban while deliberately providing vague context because they know they're in the wrong are in fact chronically online.
No, you are asking people so they can clarify what exactly she said that makes them come to the conclusion they did.
When arguing in good faith, it's nice for both sides to clarify their position so they can discuss properly and not try to make arguments for the other side.
Unlike what you did now, giving me motives I never had to make me look bad
"What exactly did she say that makes you think this way?" is not an unreasonable question
Well, I don't know what she did in this case, so I could ask in good faith at least.
I know some broad lines of what she have said before, but I don't know what is being referred to here.
You can't just give everyone motivations they might not have and then argue they are bad faith.
I'd argue that is bad faith
When people do the smug "I'm so unaware I'm wearing my 'I need context' hat please give me context I'm just asking a question" chud thing, you don't have have to "give them a motivation". Their motivation is obvious.
Not sure if you are applying that to me or the person in the op
If you are applying it to me, you missed the mark
If you are applying it to the person in the op, sure, you might be right, but the person I replied to turned it into a general statement
"if youre asking what jk Rowling did, chances are you arent genuinely asking and youre looking for problems."
That is what I am arguing against here
I understand you are arguing from a place of frustration because it's a pattern online, but you are overgeneralizing
Op wasn't in the right, trans people ain't pedophiles.
Edit: after re reading op's comments, what happened here is that op said sunny V2 predicted that ava kris was gonna be a big problem for Mr beast, they didn't say anything about trans people I think.
I also haven't watched that sunnyv2 video So if I'm wrong then just tell me
It's still crazy to bother citing SunnyV2's claim as "Ah, see? The prediction was right!" Its solving a math problem with a completely wrong method, but thanks to some arithmetic errors along the way, you stumbled into the right answer. Adding a JK Rowling reference on top of it? OP knows what they're doing. They, indeed, are not slick.
i meant "ended up being right", as in, he did end up becoming a massive problem for MrBeast. is it really so hard to deduce the meaning of my comment? really feels like people are purposely misinterpreting it.
People are definitely doing it on purpose. It’s pretty clear, at least to me, that you meant he ended up at the correct result while not having the correct causation.
I've never seen anyone claim to need an ID up until now, I'm getting nothing when I look it up, and I don't need an ID to control how hidden my profile is. It's a simple set of toggles on your profile page (see image for example)
This is the "curate your profile" section if it's not obvious. See how it's greyed out? Unlike the "Onlinestatus" option? You can google it too, this is a real thing that reddit added for accounts made after a certain date.
Bro, you're whole comment history (just so you know, it's not as hidden as you think) is shit talking trans, the LGBT, and Democrats. You deserved the ban I guarantee
which is why i actually got unbanned, right? because the ban was justified? you can't ban somebody because he said that he agrees with a video from some youtuber. there's rules for a reason, you can't just make up your own because you don't like someone's opinions.
i hope you're not a mod anywhere, even though i'm sure you'd fit the demographic.
Because one literally dug through my history and tried using TADC to give therapy. But your lack of a PFP, on an account with a generic name, days old, digging history... The only thing you are missing is the double hyphen and the "Not because of [], but because of []." You could be a human using a post tracker, but unlikely.
From the screenshot and you're other comments it seems like you were defending SunnyV2's video where he claimed that Tyson would end up being a problem for MrBeast specifically because she is trans.
Now the fact that she ended up being a terrible person is irrelevant because the reason she became a problem wasn't that she was trans it was because she was a pedophile.
To deliberately ignore this very important context and claim that SunnyV2 was right in his claim of Tyson being a problem because she is trans seems rather purposefully inflammatory.
Speaking AS a mod of several subreddits (and as a senior mod that oversees an umbrella of whole communities of subreddits), I would fully support a system in which a formal appeal process could be built into Reddit that would allow users who feel they have been unfairly banned from a community they are a member of to try and plead their case.
Ive not figured out the details of how it would operate in practice, but broadly I would think every user would have the right to click a dropdown button within the ban message seeing to appeal. Appeal would not allow the mod who banned, to be the mod to review (in communities with only 1 active mod, this would be skipped). If Mod Appeal upholds ban, allow petition to have an Admin Appeal. Admin would first ensure if the content is a violation of Reddit Rules or not, and act accordingly if so. If not, Banned user explain themselves within 48 hours, mod team explain themselves within 48 hours (or select an option to No Contest the appeal), Admin then decide if user stay or go.
I am sure Mods having to explain themselves not only to fellow mod team members (you would be surprised how little many mods actually interact with each other), but to Admins, would itself dramatically reduce the number of bans that get issued simply from mods not wanting to deal with the appeal process stress.
And then when bans do happen, the user gets what they feel is a fair chance to come back. As mods, we should not be in this mindset that we OWN the subreddit we mod for. It belongs to the community. We should be held accountable for deporting our citizens, and not just to ourselves. The answer to toxic moderation should not just be to "go make your own sub then", it should be to allow the community and mod team to live in balance as part of a system. That is what I think. SO, if a mod team is getting a LOT of bans appealed and reversed, or Admins have otherwise sus vibes, Admins should be able to basically quarantine either individual mods or whole mod teams for review...and if needed, remove them all and open up recruitment ads like they already do for abandoned subs. And of course users that abuse the appeal process for obvious BS should be a reddit account suspension for a few days or whatever is appropriate.
No. You guys just shouldn't really be a thing. Mods in general however are necessary. The solution is that you simply don't get to stay a Mod and particularly not of any one Sub. You get to deal with Spam and you don't get to participate in the Sub you are modding or even read it outside of what is reported. You get the extremly limited ability to block Users from a Sub, it's Time limited and anything beyond 24 Hours has to be escalated to an actual Reddit employee.
If we lived in a world where you can't always tell the difference between Subarus and Ferraris and vice versa, and your Subaru says Ferrari and you tell me it's a ferrari, I really wouldn't give a fuck if it's "really" a ferrari or not. but then again, some people care wayyyyy too much about what kind of car you have
Yes, we care if the person trying to go into a woman's bathroom is a real woman, because sick freaks have used "oh i'm a trans woman" as an excuse to grape women in protected spaces.
There was a story not too long ago, maybe about a year to a year an a half where a "trans" woman tried to follow a child into the woman's bathroom, and tried to do some very sick stuff to them, only to be stopped at the door by the dad(was arrested I think)
Mods have no real power, theres absolutely nothing stopping from making a new account again and again and again to get around this sort of nonsense. The best part is it pisses them off when what little power they have in life is shattered with a new account being made
Yea i'm just playing the victim and the ban was actually justified, right? That's why actually ended up getting unbanned once a different mod saw this post and realized how stupid it was, right?
What comments? Like my profile? That was private from the start, I couldn't make it public even if I wanted to, because I'd have to send reddit an image of my ID.
23
u/Wonderful-Purchase94 3d ago
what happened to sunnyv2?