PDA

View Full Version : To the moles of other campaigns




Elwar
06-03-2011, 10:46 AM
I just wanted to commend those of you here from other campaigns that have been working extra hard to destabilize one of Ron Paul's best sources of grassroots coordination. Some of you have worked tirelessly, racking up thousands of posts to seem "legit" so that you could cut down the positive energy behind getting Ron Paul elected piece by piece.

As a supporter of the free market I can understand. You are all capitalists, doing what Ron Paul wishes everyone could do. Exchanging your services in exchange for payment. Sure, the sources might be from people who wish to stop your ability to freely do so, but at this moment you are enjoying the benefits of capitalism.

It is ironic that those of you on here working for your masters in exchange for payments are following the capitalist course while true supporters of Ron Paul are willing to do so for free. Your socialist employers are surely envious of Ron Paul's supporters and if given the chance would probably implement legislation to force people to do what you are doing now for free.

But nothing you can do or say will sway those of us who know Ron Paul's character and can read his voting record. He has supported liberty for the past 40 years and there is nothing you can do to change that other than trying to nit pick small decisions here and there to try to distract people from the big picture.

The candidate or group you are currently supporting is working toward the end of America. We cannot continue down our current path. We are done with the status quo. You are the status quo.

As a fellow capitalist, I just hope that you are taking the money you earn here and putting it into commodities while you still can. Otherwise all of this work to take down Ron Paul will be for naught because you will be left with nothing to show for all of your effort.

sailingaway
06-03-2011, 10:48 AM
thousands of points? I think those are people who are pissed that Rand is popular and a bunch of Ron's support is going that way, clearly, after he bows out of the picture. I think they wanted to push things in a different (candidate) direction.

Others are moles, sure. But I doubt they are being paid enough to invest in commodities. Thirty silver coins, maybe..... :p

Elwar
06-03-2011, 10:56 AM
Thirty silver coins, maybe..... :p

heh...

http://bibledaily.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/30silver.jpg

belian78
06-03-2011, 11:06 AM
The only thing I can think to add, is if there are paid operatives here, how fulfilling of a life could that really be? Sitting and trolling on a message board... I guess its a great indicator of character, eh?

Travlyr
06-03-2011, 11:09 AM
The only thing I can think to add, is if there are paid operatives here, how fulfilling of a life could that really be? Sitting and trolling on a message board... I guess its a great indicator of character, eh?

No doubt, not to mention a great indicator of intelligence. The top tier always throws the grunts under-the-bus when they are done with them.

Dr.3D
06-03-2011, 11:15 AM
Would these be the fair weather friends we have noticed are increasing since Ron announced he is running again? I see a lot of them with a 2007 join date, and yet they don't have a clue about what's been going on here for the past three years.

sailingaway
06-03-2011, 11:19 AM
Would these be the fair weather friends we have noticed are increasing since Ron announced he is running again? I see a lot of them with a 2007 join date, and yet they don't have a clue about what's been going on here for the past three years.

Yeah, there is definitely a crew with a few hundred points from 2007-8 who have caught my eye. But some old friends who just get busy elsewhere between campaigns seem to have come back, too.

Teaser Rate
06-03-2011, 11:25 AM
I really doubt that other campaigns are going to spend some of their limited resources to pay staffers to troll on opposing candidates’ forums when their time could be put to much better uses.

Even if they did, they wouldn’t do it on this forum because 1- Ron Paul is not perceived as a legitimate threat 2-his constituency is very dedicated and loyal to him, there’s little a mole could do to change their minds to shift their support towards another candidate.

Dr.3D
06-03-2011, 11:28 AM
I really doubt that other campaigns are going to spend some of their limited resources to pay staffers to troll on opposing candidates’ forums when their time could be put to much better uses.

Even if they did, they wouldn’t do it on this forum because 1- Ron Paul is not perceived as a legitimate threat 2-his constituency is very dedicated and loyal to him, there’s little a mole could do to change their minds to shift their support towards another candidate.
I doubt they would do it to change minds or shift support, but more to derail threads and keep things from being focused.

jrskblx125
06-03-2011, 11:35 AM
I absolutely think other candidates troll this site daily. Look at the organization we have. They wish to emulate us, but they cant because we are a true free market of grassroot support. Their candidates literally know nothing about freedom. Theyre all muff cabbage! Its like all other govt programs. Throwing money at things solves no problems. In campaigns sure they do if you lie cheat and steal with that money. They cant compete with our energy. Our supports grown ten fold in 4 years based on polls. We are the front runner whether the media wants to admit it or not. Keep growing that grass people!!!!

PaulConventionWV
06-03-2011, 11:35 AM
I really doubt that other campaigns are going to spend some of their limited resources to pay staffers to troll on opposing candidates’ forums when their time could be put to much better uses.

Even if they did, they wouldn’t do it on this forum because 1- Ron Paul is not perceived as a legitimate threat 2-his constituency is very dedicated and loyal to him, there’s little a mole could do to change their minds to shift their support towards another candidate.

Convenient the one who denies it is one whose rep "can only hope to improve."

reduen
06-03-2011, 12:00 PM
I really doubt that other campaigns are going to spend some of their limited resources to pay staffers to troll on opposing candidates’ forums when their time could be put to much better uses.

Even if they did, they wouldn’t do it on this forum because 1- Ron Paul is not perceived as a legitimate threat 2-his constituency is very dedicated and loyal to him, there’s little a mole could do to change their minds to shift their support towards another candidate.

My guess is that there would be many that would not need to be paid for their efforts. They would just do it to pass the time and for the fun of it.... I have seen way too many “Ron Pauler's” do the same thing to other candidates for me to think otherwise...

I myself do not practice deception as I do not believe that you can stop "sin" by "sinning" or achieve peace by waging war. However, I will do my best to make sure that those who would be mislead by other candidates have what information that I have on them so that they can make an informed decision….

Elwar
06-03-2011, 12:00 PM
I doubt a campaign would pay someone exclusively to troll this site, but I can certainly see a campaign paying a few members to be their "Internet campaigners" who not only go out and praise their candidate on stories that allow comments, but also to go to other candidate's sites and try to throw off their base here and there.

I used to spend a small amount of time on "Fred Thompson Forums" in 2007 and who knows if it had very great affect but I used to send Thompson supporters to that site and ask them if they supported what those people were peddling. It usually brought the praise for his candidacy to a halt.

realtonygoodwin
06-03-2011, 12:01 PM
Do you really think other candidates honestly view Ron as enough of a threat to hire moles to infiltrate an online message board??

reduen
06-03-2011, 12:03 PM
I absolutely think other candidates troll this site daily. Look at the organization we have. They wish to emulate us, but they cant because we are a true free market of grassroot support. Their candidates literally know nothing about freedom. Theyre all muff cabbage! Its like all other govt programs. Throwing money at things solves no problems. In campaigns sure they do if you lie cheat and steal with that money. They cant compete with our energy. Our supports grown ten fold in 4 years based on polls. We are the front runner whether the media wants to admit it or not. Keep growing that grass people!!!!

"Keep growing that grass people!!!!"

Ummm.... You do remember who's supporters that you are talking to don't you? ;)

ifthenwouldi
06-03-2011, 12:04 PM
Self-delusion is fascinating.

scottditzen
06-03-2011, 12:05 PM
I'm guessing a good mole would be one who could "poison the well" so to speak.

Like, make 9 good posts praising Ron. Then in the 10th post say "Hitler was just misunderstood...."

Visitors come to the site, see Hitler post (or lack of criticism of it), and assume Ron Paul supporters are insane.

Live_Free_Or_Die
06-03-2011, 12:14 PM
Would someone asserting, cite a specific example of what is being discussed here? What is with abstract shadow conversation? I would object if some one asserted this forum has lost it's spine...

sailingaway
06-03-2011, 12:20 PM
I really doubt that other campaigns are going to spend some of their limited resources to pay staffers to troll on opposing candidates’ forums when their time could be put to much better uses.

Even if they did, they wouldn’t do it on this forum because 1- Ron Paul is not perceived as a legitimate threat 2-his constituency is very dedicated and loyal to him, there’s little a mole could do to change their minds to shift their support towards another candidate.


LOL! Ron until the Iowa poll blip was polling 2, 3 or 4 and way above others in the race, and is being written up as a frontrunner and kingmaker. You frankly are one of the ones I am keeping an eye on. And while we are dedicated, we are here to bring in others as much as to amuse ourselves, and you know it.

Also, I read an article recently where Obama's campaign is staffing up social media commentators, and heck, the FBI is doing it. Trolling isn't fringe anymore.....

Yieu
06-03-2011, 12:23 PM
I'm guessing a good mole would be one who could "poison the well" so to speak.

Like, make 9 good posts praising Ron. Then in the 10th post say "Hitler was just misunderstood...."

Visitors come to the site, see Hitler post (or lack of criticism of it), and assume Ron Paul supporters are insane.

I have come to the same conclusion. I have seen some here trying to tarnish our good name in this manner. It is especially annoying because they often try to be extremely subtle about it, and make a great deal of more "honey" posts to pretend to be one of us and few "poison" posts, so as to avoid a ban and make themselves appear credible. And then if/when they are banned, they tend to just return with a different username and different IP, so how can they even be stopped?

sailingaway
06-03-2011, 12:24 PM
Do you really think other candidates honestly view Ron as enough of a threat to hire moles to infiltrate an online message board??

Oh yeah, and their supporters consider him sufficiently so to do it for free.

sailingaway
06-03-2011, 12:26 PM
I have come to the same conclusion. I have seen some here trying to tarnish our good name in this manner. It is especially annoying because they often try to be extremely subtle about it, and make a great deal of more "honey" posts to pretend to be one of us and few "poison" posts, so as to avoid a ban and make themselves appear credible. And then if/when they are banned, they tend to just return with a different username and different IP, so how can they even be stopped?

Yeah, and I try to comment, but the forum philosophy tends to be 'you can be a total dick if you want to be, I'm just not going to engage with you and feed the troll' and I'm not sure it is read that way by the casual passer by.

Bryan
06-03-2011, 12:29 PM
I really doubt that other campaigns are going to spend some of their limited resources to pay staffers to troll on opposing candidates’ forums when their time could be put to much better uses.

I don't know about trolling, but Trey Grayson admitted to having people here during his campaign against Rand:


During his race against Rand Paul, Grayson says his campaign monitored the Ron Paul forums and chat rooms just to see how his followers were reacting and what they were planning.

Source: http://business-news.thestreet.com/the-mercury/story/5-things-you-dont-know-about-ron-paul/11117881

Bryan
06-03-2011, 12:32 PM
I have come to the same conclusion. I have seen some here trying to tarnish our good name in this manner. It is especially annoying because they often try to be extremely subtle about it, and make a great deal of more "honey" posts to pretend to be one of us and few "poison" posts, so as to avoid a ban and make themselves appear credible. And then if/when they are banned, they tend to just return with a different username and different IP, so how can they even be stopped?
The poison posts are going to be a violation of the forums guidelines. Please report them.

The guidelines are the defense against issues... it's also why every supporter needs to stay above the board in all that they do, so they aren't looked on as dropping poison pills.

Our Code of Ethics, guidelines and more:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?22-Site-Policies-Usage-Guidelines-and-Other-Important-Information

parocks
06-03-2011, 12:51 PM
It doesn't have to be a campaign to pay the trolls. The Fed doesn't like Ron too much. They probably have a bit of money.

moostraks
06-03-2011, 12:55 PM
The poison posts are going to be a violation of the forums guidelines. Please report them.

The guidelines are the defense against issues... it's also why every supporter needs to stay above the board in all that they do, so they aren't looked on as dropping poison pills.

Our Code of Ethics, guidelines and more:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?22-Site-Policies-Usage-Guidelines-and-Other-Important-Information

I think you have done a great job banning one particular poster who keeps reincarnating. Reminds me of wack-a-mole. I don't envy your job, esp. as we get closer to election time...

Yieu
06-03-2011, 12:57 PM
The poison posts are going to be a violation of the forums guidelines. Please report them.

The guidelines are the defense against issues... it's also why every supporter needs to stay above the board in all that they do, so they aren't looked on as dropping poison pills.

Our Code of Ethics, guidelines and more:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?22-Site-Policies-Usage-Guidelines-and-Other-Important-Information

Thank you for all the great mod work you guys do, I've been impressed with it lately, keep it up.

I hope others read your post here and are encouraged to report these type of infiltrator posts we mentioned. But there are some users who are very good at being "just subtle enough" in their poison remarks that it makes it harder to argue that they were being overtly racist. I report overtly racist comments that are in clear violation of the rules, but it is a big problem because there are users who make thousands of "regular" posts and hide a few subtly racist posts after having "built credibility" with thousands of non-racist posts. And because their racist posts are only subtly racist rather than overtly racist, it makes it much harder to argue that they are breaking the rules. They know this and it is why they do it -- they know they can skirt along the edges of the rules in this manner. I don't like calling people out, but I think we should all start reporting even subtly racist posts so that the SFers can't get around our rules like that.

To spell it out more clearly: If someone wanted to take down a campaign, a good and effective way to do so would be to try to build credibility by making thousands of posts that look like supporter posts, then toss in a few dozen subtly racist posts, while making sure the racist posts are just subtle enough that it just barely skirts around the edges of the rules. Using this method, such a troll could say "prove it!" when someone claims they are bigots, and the person making the claim would feel helpless because they would have to wade through thousands of posts to find comments that are only slightly racist rather than overtly racist, making it harder to prove they are an infiltrator. This in fact happened just recently. And the fact that such users had spent such a long time building credibility first makes it harder to ban them, and if you ban them they will return with a new username and IP. I suppose the best solution is to be more vigilant in watching for such infiltrators, and report them more often, and write a public response to show the movement-at-large does not think that way.

In conclusion, everyone, lets start reporting even the subtly racist posts rather than only the overtly racist posts, to help purge the infiltrators.

Thank you to the Admins and Mods who keep our forums clean. Half the battle is the rest of us reporting things when we see them. Our image is at stake here.

Live_Free_Or_Die
06-03-2011, 01:14 PM
Transparency trumps secrecy. Reason trumps exclusion. This whole thread is repugnant if people are unable to cite specific examples.

I am reading this post above me here talking about purging racist infiltrators yet the very notion of purging a group of people without evidence is pretty damn collectivist.

Ok... if it happened recently point it out.

Calling for witch hunt bans because you are unable to leverage truth and reason is not what I would call advocating liberty. I see you joined in 07 and you have been posting a lot recently but where are your several posts over the past couple years complaining about so called racist posts or bans as they have been allegedly occuring?

Yieu
06-03-2011, 01:27 PM
If the criteria for me being a collectivist is there being "no evidence" then rest assured, only posts that are obviously trying to bring down the movement would get reported, thus no collectivism.

I have had this same conversation with Bryan in another thread a while back, but it is not worth the effort of digging it up. I also do not like to bring up this topic and try to keep my discussion of it brief, because it tends to attract attacks on one's character, as can be seen here with the name calling. If only posts which are in violation of the rules are reported, then there is no "witch hunt" because there would be clear evidence. Lately I have been hunting and tracking down Fire11 in all his reincarnations, because we have sufficient evidence against him.

I apologize if I offended anyone. If anyone is offended, I will go back and delete as many posts of mine as are necessary until I have not offended anyone anymore. I do not like to discuss this sort of thing because above all I do not want to offend anyone. It appears that I have, so I am encouraged to be quiet. I have few posts because I am a quiet person and introverted, I try not to post if I do not have something to add, and I see nothing wrong with that.

Again... I apologize, please forgive me for any offense I might have made.

Live_Free_Or_Die
06-03-2011, 01:39 PM
I am not seeking an apology. Nor am I due an apology. But, ok... I get it, I called your post out and others for a specific example.

This is the part I don't get. Why are people railing about bad behavior in public threads demanding secrecy solutions? If people (and I am not singling anyone out) are going to rail about uncited bad behavior in public threads the railing in itself is going to create division. I don't get it, but then again maybe I don't get it because I don't hesitate to call something out I disagree with.

Yieu
06-03-2011, 01:47 PM
I was not under the impression you thought an apology was due; it is never my goal to offend, and it appears that I may have, and for offending others I try to apologize because it is not my goal. What you said about threads such as these possibly causing division is true... there is a good side and a bad side to such threads; they can cause divisions, but they can also remind people to use the report feature (not out in the open where it can cause a division) so that mods can evaluate the situation. It is not merely "bad behavior" that we are trying to avoid though -- the reason for reporting a racist post is more than just because it is racist. The larger reason is that such posts tarnish the Good Doctor's name and can hurt the campaign. This is why racists are more accurately called infiltrators, with a goal of bringing the campaign down.

If what I posted is too divisive, then I will remove it to avoid problems.

Yieu
06-03-2011, 02:10 PM
I was trying to find a good thread that Cowlesy posted about finding there are infiltrators amongst us, I think it was from 2008, but the search function drops too many results so I can't find it. Here are some other relevant threads, though.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?187712-ACORN-Infiltrating-Tea-Party-Events-To-Make-Them-Appear-Fringe-Racist
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?230247-The-Goals-Of-The-Moles

Teaser Rate
06-03-2011, 02:18 PM
LOL! Ron until the Iowa poll blip was polling 2, 3 or 4 and way above others in the race, and is being written up as a frontrunner and kingmaker. You frankly are one of the ones I am keeping an eye on. And while we are dedicated, we are here to bring in others as much as to amuse ourselves, and you know it.

Also, I read an article recently where Obama's campaign is staffing up social media commentators, and heck, the FBI is doing it. Trolling isn't fringe anymore.....

Please don't ban me, Mr. Romney said he's going to send me do door-to-door canvassing if get expelled from yet another forum. (and the gold-plated brochures I'd have to carry around are really heavy)


On a serious note, I don't think it's a good sign for any community when its management openly decrees that it is actively monitoring the behavior of individuals who espouse different opinions. To be honest, this whole thread seems a little cultist to me.

sailingaway
06-03-2011, 02:30 PM
Different opinions are one thing, trolling is another. If our supreme court can know pornography when they see it, we can know trolling. And Yieu is precisely correct about the category of troll that skirts the line consistently enough that they are clearly a 'problem' but not blatantly enough on a single occasion to be immediately banned. Since it isn't my site, it seems to me that is for Josh and Bryan to figure out, given that we all believe in property rights, correct?

Live_Free_Or_Die
06-03-2011, 02:40 PM
I agree there may be a good/bad side and we might both agree how arguments are raised or constructively criticized goes a long way to fuel or dispel division.

Regarding racism specifically since that is a recurring theme here... I don't see how an individual poster is going to tarnish Ron Paul's name or take the campaign down. I find it extremely hard to believe this forum is that shallow.

Let me offer a specific example. During the 07 campaign Ron Paul was asked about contributions from racists. I believe Dr. Paul said why should I give the money back to them. I am going to use it for a good purpose. I am not endorsng them, they are supporting me. (something along those lines).

If you feel something is racist I really don't see why it is even a big deal to follow up a post with the clip I mentioned above and say... yo, Ron Paul does not support racism, but he does appreciate your support. Please try to keep in mind there are forums to advocate racism but this isn't one of them...

However I am a vocal critic of banning people. Personally I have advocated restricting posting privileges in lieu of out right bans but hey... that's just me. Have there been a couple controversial threads on RPF that could be characterized racist? Sure, and there are a couple people who have been banned.

I do personally advocate the only peaceful tool free people have ever had to police allegiance is discrimination in contracts and/or discriminating with your feet or wallet. Some people would consider that 100% politically incorrect but it is also 100% true and 100% historically correct.

So while I am sympathetic to complaints of racism, I do not consider discrimination evil, just a poor understanding of economics. People discriminate all the time whether it's a spouse, food, religion, etc. A lot of people are racist whether they admit it or not when it comes to choosing a partner and prefer to marry in their own ethnic group (just look at marriage statistics ~7% interracial). I would rather live in a world that freely discriminates and only has a small minority of close minded people that discriminate solely based on race than a world of equality in everything.

The bottom line is racial discrimination is bad economics and hinders business profit. It's pretty damn hard to envision a white Wal Mart or a black Wal Mart.

Teaser Rate
06-03-2011, 02:40 PM
Right, but there's also a fine line between having an open discussion between intelligent people sharing a common goal and a closed community which has a set of beliefs all of its members must accept in order to be allowed in.

I believe that your comment about keeping an eye on people skirts that line, especially since you have been given a position of authority on this forum.

sailingaway
06-03-2011, 02:54 PM
I believe I already said it wasn't different opinions that were the issue, but suspicion of sabotage, so to speak. Pinpointing sabotage is the difficulty.

Theocrat
06-03-2011, 03:29 PM
Do you really think other candidates honestly view Ron as enough of a threat to hire moles to infiltrate an online message board??

That is what I was thinking.

sailingaway
06-03-2011, 03:40 PM
That is what I was thinking.

If you really don't think Ron is a threat to the field, you haven't been paying attention. Romney may not be focused on him, as yet (except to make a play for the libertarian vote, per Fox) but all the candidates trying to 'break out' have to get past him.

Cowlesy
06-03-2011, 03:49 PM
Right, but there's also a fine line between having an open discussion between intelligent people sharing a common goal and a closed community which has a set of beliefs all of its members must accept in order to be allowed in.

I believe that your comment about keeping an eye on people skirts that line, especially since you have been given a position of authority on this forum.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_w-8JKaTohe4/SWQIbrqxx-I/AAAAAAAAP58/90JiP-3i0eY/s400/big_brother_1984.preview.jpg


^^me.

moostraks
06-03-2011, 03:59 PM
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_w-8JKaTohe4/SWQIbrqxx-I/AAAAAAAAP58/90JiP-3i0eY/s400/big_brother_1984.preview.jpg


^^me.

lol...

Feeding the Abscess
06-03-2011, 04:23 PM
Enough with the shadow conversation. Name names or don't bother with the whisper campaign.

Philmanoman
06-03-2011, 04:42 PM
personally i couldnt name a name.but i do know there was one guy in the past couple of months that came here and talked about world people and all kinds of weird stuff in his post.to me it was obvious he was here for one reason.he changed names on here a few times and you could tell easily it was the same guy.what was the one...about 7ft guys...using them as an army...what was his motive?was he working for someone?i dunno but its definitely odd.im not sure how i feel about this post.just pointing out theres at least one obvious guy with an agenda.maybe its just to have fun n poke jokes...who knows

Yieu
06-03-2011, 04:47 PM
Enough with the shadow conversation. Name names or don't bother with the whisper campaign.

That would only cause infighting.


personally i couldnt name a name.but i do know there was one guy in the past couple of months that came here and talked about world people and all kinds of weird stuff in his post.to me it was obvious he was here for one reason.he changed names on here a few times and you could tell easily it was the same guy.what was the one...about 7ft guys...using them as an army...what was his motive?was he working for someone?i dunno but its definitely odd.im not sure how i feel about this post.just pointing out theres at least one obvious guy with an agenda.maybe its just to have fun n poke jokes...who knows

You're talking about Fire11, our persistent troll. We are on the lookout for him and report him when seen.

loveshiscountry
06-03-2011, 05:23 PM
Don't give them credibility.