Hi, just bringing this to your attention:
Last week, @KittyhawkMontrose and @alsoknownas1 both called out a moderator for "grudgemodding" on two separate threads, leading to several of their posts being purged from the BBS.
Personally, I see this as a bigger issue regarding free speech, staff transparency, and the ability to debate controversial subjects as a whole. which is the whole reason I'm getting involved (that and setting aside a 2-year old feud of my own over a greater issue)
Now, I'm transgender. I wouldn't be where I am now if not for the Stonewall riots in 1969. Forgive me if I don't get the exact details right, but to summarize, before Stonewall, homosexuality was heavily frowned upon, even criminalized in certain cases. In the 60s, police were raiding gay bars, which were a safe haven. One of the bars raided, a New York tavern called Stonewall Inn, led to many people rioting, including trans people, who were also being shit on at the time. This has overall led to better rights for both groups, and also why the "T" exists at the end of "LGBT", which Americans now seem to have forgotten nowadays.
If Newgrounds (or rather it's "police") are going to "raid" and shut down posts, or on-site protests like this one (or attempt to), they are effectively stagnating change from happening when they need it the most, in the same way Americans (and police) shat on LGBT people and Stonewall.
Like Stonewall, this case on NG also specifically addresses how the government/site treats certain subjects. In Stonewall's case, the bar was owned by the Mafia and didn't have a liquor license, the "greater issue", to my knowledge, seemed to involve gay rights in general, which as I mentioned, were already very bad at the time, while in NG's case, "inciting drama" has to take a backseat compared to the ability to have a free discussion without being nannied, no matter what excuse "that mod" might say.
Now let's address where this (still) ongoing issue has led so far.
1: A new problem.
@Rosarjc, whom also features the same shit as Kitty and A1 during Takeover Tuesday (a group I'll now dub Team Montrose), created a comic mocking the issue, with Kittyhawk trying to explain that her post is appropriate, to an orange dinosaur (intended to be "the mod").
This is very definitely an act of protest, which I will not deny. There are no rules in the Art Guidelines that specifcially adresses acts of protest, last time I checked.
- No other rule seems to be broken from this comic.
- It does not promote hate or advocate for any real-world polticial groups, or minorities.
- It is completely hand-drawn by the artist, no AI or third party assets.
- The only thing I think it could break is that it may "bully another user.", aka, the mod in question, who is depicted as an orange T-rex, not as a direct representation of the mod itself (ie. the Regular Show GBF case)
So what happened after that, According to @alsoknownas1
- Ros had his meme deleted.
- @Cosmiccookie2000, who reviewed this post, was descouted
- A1 was descouted whilst trying to re-scout CC2000, and also pruned
- CC may have been descouted again, but A1 wasn't sure.
- Another user, @JoeSomebody2 had his comments mentioning us (and DioShiba's replies) deleted from DioShiba's thread (see "case 3" of section 3)
In the case of A1's descouting, he's not really an artist, his solo submissions look more like this, not exactly proper art pieces like his wife's stuff.
While in CC's case, he may
Both cases could be coincidental, but given it happened so close to ros's removal, it could very definitely be a deliberate attempt to punish users for supporting the movement. I have not seen any modmail for both cases.
2: Kittyhawk's Offer:
Currently, Kitty is offering a month of Supporter to the first 50 people who can recreate ros's delisted comic.
https://kittyhawkmontrose.newgrounds.com/news/post/1536212
Theme:
Redraw the comic in your own style. If you don't like being associated with NSFW stuff, you can alternatively substitute Kittyhawk and NSFW (see case 1 of section 3), with her husband's AI debacle (see case 2).
That last one was my idea.
Notes:
Users are encouraged to also create archives using archive.is, so that even if the entries are also deleted (which is very possible), there will still be evidence that they existed and that a moderator deliberately took it down, and further proof that there is an ongoing attempt to censor the movement, or protests in general.
I also recommend using the Wayback Machine as well, just in case. ARCHIVE EVERYTHING I SAY!!!
Deadline:
Next Monday (May 26th), so about a week from now. The idea is that at least one submission stays up long enough for "Team Montrose" to feature it on Takeover Tuesday, making it a hot item and guaranteeing exposure.
3: What would Tom Fulp Do?
Honestly I don't know.
I messaged @TomFulp on the 13th, detailing everything that has happened since then. No response.
To summarise what I originally told Tom. This involves three cases, as well as a prior thread on April where Kittyhawk got tempbanned by the same moderator. If you're new to this situation and are just skimming, read this.
CASE 1: NUDEGROUNDS
A thread on tasteful nudes (a-rated) was briefly locked. Kitty and other users had their posts deleted, supposedly because of three factors.
a- it allegedly being a repeat of another thread, and users were just reposting existing work.
b- the nudes were too explicit for the thread, despite it being A-rated.
c- For at least one post, he felt it contained cartoonish anatomy.
CASE 2: AI SCRAPING
A1 got his posts deleted on a thread about AI-scraping, for proving that NG technically couldn't do anything because they've already been scraped manually.
Like with Nudegrounds, the post was also supposedly "inappropriate", because it showed characters, even though it was explicitly about scraping.
I had a similar case in October, which A1 said was "eerily similar", but I had no consequences or removals.
MOD RESPONSE:
In Kitty's original thread, the mod tries to defend himself on several occasions regarding both cases:
First, he iterated all 3 points on Case 1. And he doubled down on Case 2, claiming it was off-topic.
Both Kitty and A1 argue this is stifling free speech and open discussions, likening the whole ordeal to Reddit's moderation. Kitty also questioned point C, as the mod couldn't explain why it was "cartoonish anatomy", and pointing out that Newgrounds is known for having cartoonish anatomy,
Other users have also also argued that the claims were vague and unjustified.
Second, he also claimed he stopped giving modmails because he'd get shit for it whether he did or not:
Kitty claims they were deleted for "personal reasons" and on two occasions the mod was both "a serial harasser", and that he was stalking users, because the lack of modmail meant a lack of transparency, effectively giving him an excuse to get away with bullying and censorship.
Third, he claimed that the duo had had their posts reposted and deleted four times, implying Kitty was the "harasser", whilst also denying their claims that he's the stalker, which Kitty responded by saying he started it by banning her under false pretenses, referring to the April ban, as well as claiming he deliberately tries to avoid confrontations.
Overall, these reponses did not go well. The mod did not provide much evidence to justify his claims, and the evidence he did dish out were all debunked either by Kitty or by other users.
CASE 3: WHY IS THERE SO MUCH DRAMA?
After those initial cases, @DioShiba made a thread talking about why there's so much drama around the NSFW art community, as explained in Kitty's 2nd post, as well as A1's updated post.
Once again, both Kitty and A1 had their posts deleted, forcing them to archive. The mod told them "internet drama that doesn't need cultivating", before blocking them outright.
While some people might say these actions are mainly to stamp out drama, the truth is, the root cause of the problem is ironically, because there was no transparency in that mod's actions and that's what caused the deletions in the first place!
DioShiba did debate A1 in the latter's thread arguing that no one is innocent.
A1 claims it is a power dynamic, a moderator who can delete and ban users, vs a user who can't, thus the mod's actions were even less justified than Kitty and A1.
This goes on for multiple comments, but the point remains the same. The mod is abusing his power, is hiding behind lies and coverups because he thinks nannying and covering up opposing views is the best way to stamp out drama and keep the site safe, as opposed to addressing it head-on. Clearly this isn't sitting well with the NG community.
The fact the April ban was overturned should've been a blemish on his record, and these further actions should have the camel's back shattered by now.
A1's most recent comment in this debate (as of writing the message):
As of writing, I have not gotten any response from Tom. A1 tells me that three other people also tried to contact him to no avail.
To close this off: I'd like to thank everyone at Team Montrose for doing a good job debating and archiving this whole fiasco. I'd hate it to be forgotten in the coming months.
Do also check up on the other posts to read up on what happened:
That's right, we're animating the legendary sprite series to the core!
