Are you sure your intent wasn’t to participate in the “white people are deviant and evil“ demoralization campaign?
Absolutely. Not only do I not think that is true, it's also not a good look for the White race.
Disproportionate amount of people believe that all serial killers are white and the vast majority of sex offenders are also. People hold these false beliefs because you are re-posting information that enforces these false beliefs. Good job white man!
Again, this is a particular subset of sex offenders; specifically female teachers. I don't know anything about crime statistics within this particular tranche, nor do I pretend to. I wouldn't be surprised if there weren't any data available.
Also, what do you consider main stream news?
Anything owned by a majority stakeholder (i.e. the half-dozen or so companies that own over 90% of media outlets). The stats may not be exact and I presume that doesn't diminish the clarity of the definition I am offering.
If you want to see what a sex offender looks like simply pick up your local newspaper.
Sadly, this is probably true.
It is also possible that you were attempting to criticize women in positions of power or the public education system in general.
Also no. I copied an image file to make it readable to a wider audience of users here.
as you said, you don’t editorialize you simply pass on information that you think will have a healthy and informative impact on your audience, right?
Not what I said at all. I said I didn't editorialize on this content. I have, rarely, done so in the past and it's an uncommon occurrence. Most of the time that will involve tagging for nudity, gore, etc. when it's not clear from the main post. Occasionally, I will type something like "WARNING - Hideous kike" if there is a particularly disgusting heeb featured within the content. That's about it.
Again, the intent is to make the material more accessible and to focus conversation on the topic rather than how it was delivered.
I noticed early on that many were willing to criticize the choice of content delivery rather than do something about it.
I also noticed that when I started offering alternative means of consuming content that people spent less time arguing with one another about this format or that.
A secondary benefit is that it makes our site more usable by folks that have connection issues with a particular image host.
Thirdly, an unanticipated benefit that has come to light over time is that, by distributing content over multiple image hosts, users are able to access content when it has been removed from a single image host.
As much as the potential motivations you offer do not resonate with me, I do appreciate your willingness to inquire about it, even if you have done so in an accusatory tone, rather than to simply assume that I am intentionally doing something you don't like.
Fascinus 1 points 2 months ago
Absolutely. Not only do I not think that is true, it's also not a good look for the White race.
Again, this is a particular subset of sex offenders; specifically female teachers. I don't know anything about crime statistics within this particular tranche, nor do I pretend to. I wouldn't be surprised if there weren't any data available.
Anything owned by a majority stakeholder (i.e. the half-dozen or so companies that own over 90% of media outlets). The stats may not be exact and I presume that doesn't diminish the clarity of the definition I am offering.
Sadly, this is probably true.
Also no. I copied an image file to make it readable to a wider audience of users here.
Not what I said at all. I said I didn't editorialize on this content. I have, rarely, done so in the past and it's an uncommon occurrence. Most of the time that will involve tagging for nudity, gore, etc. when it's not clear from the main post. Occasionally, I will type something like "WARNING - Hideous kike" if there is a particularly disgusting heeb featured within the content. That's about it.
Again, the intent is to make the material more accessible and to focus conversation on the topic rather than how it was delivered.
I noticed early on that many were willing to criticize the choice of content delivery rather than do something about it.
I also noticed that when I started offering alternative means of consuming content that people spent less time arguing with one another about this format or that.
A secondary benefit is that it makes our site more usable by folks that have connection issues with a particular image host.
Thirdly, an unanticipated benefit that has come to light over time is that, by distributing content over multiple image hosts, users are able to access content when it has been removed from a single image host.
As much as the potential motivations you offer do not resonate with me, I do appreciate your willingness to inquire about it, even if you have done so in an accusatory tone, rather than to simply assume that I am intentionally doing something you don't like.
Anyway, hope that helps :)