Think about the think tanks behind this and the motive. Imagine voices, sadly many of them American and Canadian, educated voices, saying these things: Person 1: "Who supports such things? Who will oppose us as we implement our strategy? How can we best identify them?" Person 2: "They think impulsively. If they like something, they'll quickly click it before pausing to think about it. Remember, no one suspects us. You could never persuade them we're actually working against them, slight laughter." Person 1: "Slight laughter back. Utter of words calling us and you nasty name. Like, redneck fuckers. Or, stupid fucking rednecks. More laughter." Then the order comes down:

Make their likes visible. That'll encourage more to come out in favor of it in fact. Then we can put our transgender code warriors on the names and start quietly gathering information to doxx them when the time comes. Can we do this?"

Transgender coder calls back from cubicle: "Oh yah babe. That's easy."

And so it is done.

For the dislikes, here is likely the protocol that happened and happens. Person 1: "You know they're going to ask why their downvoters are never seen. Can we..... show them a little? Give away at least a few names?" Person 2: "No, no good." Person 1: "Why not?" Person 2: "Then they'll see who never gets downvoted and who's doing the most of it, and that we're doing it together. Soon they'll be asking or demanding we show all private messages between them and their coworkers, or them [edit: and] us, or worse, doing away with PMs altogether. It blows the game. They must never be seen. Hide all the names." Person 1: "But what do we tell them when they ask why we did that?"

Person 2: "To Prevent Fighting."®

Now look at any forum and ask yourself if concealing the downvoters prevents fighting. You see? It's not to do that, it was never to do that. It is to conceal the relationship between the gangs of downvoters and between them and the moderation team. If you knew who was doing what you would notice patterns and the entire forum website would collapse as people FLED.

And that is what it is for.

By the way, Person 1 in Scenario 2 no longer works there. He or she was fired on trumped up charges of being racist or insensitive, et cetera, or a lie that their performance standards fell. The real reason is they asked too many nonmarxist questions.

That is how it works. They think you're fools. I am not a fool. That, and the fact I posted this, is why you will soon notice I have been banned here. What I just posted tends to bring out the Final Boss on moderated websites.

Quickly.

Think about the think tanks behind this and the motive. Imagine voices, sadly many of them American and Canadian, educated voices, saying these things: Person 1: "Who supports such things? Who will oppose us as we implement our strategy? How can we best identify them?" Person 2: "They think impulsively. If they like something, they'll quickly click it before pausing to think about it. Remember, no one suspects us. You could never persuade them we're actually working against them, slight laughter." Person 1: "Slight laughter back. Utter of words calling us and you nasty name. Like, redneck fuckers. Or, stupid fucking rednecks. More laughter." Then the order comes down:

Make their likes visible. That'll encourage more to come out in favor of it in fact. Then we can put our transgender code warriors on the names and start quietly gathering information to doxx them when the time comes. Can we do this?"

Transgender coder calls back from cubicle: "Oh yah babe. That's easy."

And so it is done.

For the dislikes, here is likely the protocol that happened and happens. Person 1: "You know they're going to ask why their downvoters are never seen. Can we..... show them a little? Give away at least a few names?" Person 2: "No, no good." Person 1: "Why not?" Person 2: "Then they'll see who never gets downvoted and who's doing the most of it, and that we're doing it together. Soon they'll be asking or demanding we show all private messages between them and their coworkers, or them or us, or worse, doing away with PMs altogether. It blows the game. They must never be seen. Hide all the names." Person 1: "But what do we tell them when they ask why we did that?"

Person 2: "To Prevent Fighting."®

Now look at any forum and ask yourself if concealing the downvoters prevents fighting. You see? It's not to do that, it was never to do that. It is to conceal the relationship between the gangs of downvoters and between them and the moderation team. If you knew who was doing what you would notice patterns and the entire forum website would collapse as people FLED.

And that is what it is for.

By the way, Person 1 in Scenario 2 no longer works there. He or she was fired on trumped up charges of being racist or insensitive, et cetera, or a lie that their performance standards fell. The real reason is they asked too many nonmarxist questions.

That is how it works. They think you're fools. I am not a fool. That, and the fact I posted this, is why you will soon notice I have been banned here. What I just posted tends to bring out the Final Boss on moderated websites.

Quickly.