User talk:Ambition of Truth

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Stop x nuvola.svg

This user is banned indefinitely from editing RationalWiki.

Please review the Chicken coop before commenting or unblocking.

New logo large.png Your welcome to RationalWiki is lukewarm at best, Ambition of Truth.

This observation is due to the nature of your initial edits. Pull up a goat and try not to make trouble.

We realize it is possible that you do not understand the nature of the site or our objectives.

Please see our guide for newcomers and our community standards to clarify things for you.

If you're still interested in contributing, please see what our articles are intended to be.

սպրիգգինա (խոսել) (ներդրումներ) @ 23:01, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Autopatrolled[edit]

Because of your edits to and time on the wiki, Autopatrolled has been added to your user rights. This lets you bypass most of the abuse filters, bypass the CAPTCHA, and edit more frequently. If you have questions, bleat ask away.

We hope you enjoy your newfound ᴘᴏᴡᴇʀ — and these external tools:

  • Rbutr shows user-submitted rebuttals to your current webpage.
  • Google Scholar Button (Chrome, Firefox) searches your highlighted text in Google Scholar. Easily check academic citations!
  • web.archive.org and archive.is can save permanent copies of webpages. Never lose a crank website or racist Tweet ever again! Ɖøn Ĵuan Harass 18:35, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Egalitarianism[edit]

Personally while I have to disagree with you on some things, I do respect your opinion, for it is obvious you are not here to troll. I believe that all viewpoints should be challenged, and constructive discussions should be encouraged, because if we truly believe in free speech, we have an obligation to both listen to the opposing viewpoint, and challenge them as well. Orthodoxy is never a good thing, but I don't think that accusations of "SJW's" suppressing free speech is true, we're not, and it's ironic how the biggest cries of "censorship" come from those who are most keen to censor others' opinions. Just go to Stormfront and post something that isn't racist trash, and you'll see what I mean. Ɖøn Ĵuan Harass 18:40, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. The exchange I had with Ikanreed, Spud, and GrammarCommie on the MGTOW article left me with the impression that they aren't open-minded or willing to allow articles to deviate from their point of view, even if it was something as trivial as me adding more information as to what constituted their ideology. I stopped editing for a while because I felt that if I get dismissed as a "raving idiot" for not obeying the third/fourth-wave orthodoxy, then there's not much of a point in trying to help or add a point of view that was not 100% in line with third/fourth-wave feminist thought if it was just going to get reverted with the page becoming set to Protected.
I joined RationalWiki because I felt that it does a good job of exposing liars on the Right, but I felt some concern that it's lack of criticism (or lack of tolerance for such criticism) of people like Riley Dennis's declaration that people are obligated to have relationships or sex with transgender people, or support for Antifa left something to be desired. On top of that, I see nothing mutually exclusive with libertarian-left politics and MGTOW's core philosophy. Conservatives don't like MGTOW because they think men should practice domnei, but some women who call themselves "conservative" are really just female supremacists who would never give up the rights suffragettes and feminist activists helped them get whilst opining that men should be subservient to them. MGTOW is an ideology that I've seen them vocally oppose because the last thing they want is for men out there to not get into a relationship with them in the first place so they can abuse them.
I know that a lot of people call themselves MGTOW who are really just Incels, MRA's, or even racists who hijacked r/MGTOW on Reddit, which is why r/MGTOW2 was created in response. --Ambition of Truth (talk) 11:12, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
Lmao, "sure the site we set up for discussing our views became overrun and moderated by misogynist psychos, but that's not us". I'm not open minded to giving "fair" treatment to dumbass internet ideologies built on a bedrock of hate. That's not what open minded actually means.
You are a raving idiot, and couldn't tell me a goddamn thing about "third wave" feminism, much less what defines any kind of orthodoxy in an inherently heterodox movement. I'll be honest, to you that's pretty obviously a vaguely woman shaped mental hole you file everything you don't like under. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 17:53, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
I could tell you a thing or two about third wave feminazism, but your fingers plugging your ears seem to block any meaningful information reaching that part of your head where your brain should be. It's a waste of time making points that have already been made thousands of times to people that want to keep RationalWiki the laughing stock of the internet. Congratulations on ruining this website. --Ambition of Truth (talk) 00:23, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
Being the "laughing stock" of weirdo satan sex mythologists and creationists is kind of the same thing as being right. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 02:06, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
Find me one reliable liberal who thinks RationalWiki in it's current state is trusworthy. Though having read this, I realize that it's pointless trying to talk logic and reason to people who's logic is equal to Antifa's. --Ambition of Truth (talk) 13:56, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
Alright, you've done something I personally find objectionable, and now I'll engage with you again if answer the following questions: what is "logic"? What makes logic "equal"? How do you assess the equivalency of two pieces of logic? Please note that there are factually correct answers to these questions. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 19:59, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Problems.[edit]

You don't seem to like me. In fact, you seem to dislike me enough to use me as punching bag when you think I'm not looking. That's flat out not ok. I haven't done such to you, so why the fuck would you think it's ok to do it to me? If you have a problem with my opinions you could, you know, ask me about them... Or you could continue to use me a strawman punching bag. I honestly can't stop you either way, but I also won't sit back and let you beat on me without biting back. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 20:10, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

gynocentrism[edit]

i deleted ur essay as this is not ur incel blog and ur ramblings were not rational. wtf is wrong with u tho? EK (talk) 22:09, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

I restored the essay. AoT may be a bigoted moron, but his essay violated no rules that I know of. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 22:48, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
since there are no rules against it i wrote my own. EK (talk) 12:30, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

You can make the article now[edit]

All I had to do was demote you to sysop. Oxyaena Harass 00:28, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Everyone's favorite feminazi undid that. But I made changes to the edit filter to allow you to bypass it anyway. — Dysk (contribs) 12:51, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. Apparently EK is still butthurt about that essay I wrote, which I think is hilarious. Gynocentrism Watch (talk) 13:00, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Block[edit]

Feel free to rant about how I unfairly blocked you for ideological reasons here :) — Dysk (contribs) 12:48, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

I warned you...[edit]

A case involving you has been raised at the Chicken Coop. Feel free to comment. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 15:50, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

A unanimous vote decided in favor of sysoprevoke and banned. Action taken. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario!(Mod) 18:38, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ambition_of_Truth&oldid=2105883"