Comment: mostly agreed, +1

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Im not making an accusation (see in situ)

mostly agreed, +1

A few members here have a history of accusing people of 'trolling' the second anyone disagrees with them, *especially* if you happen to disagree with them on any conspiracy theories.

The 'troll' accusation, more often than not, feels like a defense mechanism to me. "You CAN'T disagree with me! I'm always right! The only explanation is that you're being paid to disagree!" For a member base that prides itself on individualism and open-mindedness, there are quite a few who do NOT like having their worldview challenged, and will play this card whenever possible, which often leads to a 'crying wolf' situation down the line.

After all, why use shills to infiltrate a movement rife with infighting and self-cannibalization?

Actual, factual shills, paid or not, stick out like sore thumbs because they'll pick a single issue and harp on it until doomsday; they won't simply have minor disagreements with other members.

edit; typo

A signature used to be here!