Rebolt
This document is a compilation that demonstrates how the revolt.chat instance is a total mess of a toxic place for double standards and arbitrary mod abuse, rendering the project as something that can't be accepted nor trusted in this current state. Every vow to fix the problems listed on this document are naught but empty words over necessary actions. The community, moderators, and developers altogether have proved to us that Revolt is never up for the change. Don't self-host Revolt, instead consider using alternatives such as Matrix+Cinny, Strafe.chat, Nerimity, or even come back to that place. As will be seen; anything is better than Revolt.
Links to image files (hosted on Imgur) will be marked like this, the names of involved Revolt users and servers will be boldened like this, and links to other sites will mostly be archived on archive.today for future referral. Here's an appendix of this document's contents:
General Issues
Development & Support
It's common knowledge for the average user that Revolt is no legal entity (yet), such as a registered company, so if anyone expects a certain level of professionalism both in software development and customer support, he may be in for a rude awakening. The development of Revolt is one of the slowest ones for an open-source software, mainly because some of the team focuses on many other projects stimulaneously, including Lightspeed, GIFBox, and Revolt's AutoMod bot.
The "team" behind Revolt is no more than a bunch of random teenagers on the internet (ranging 18-23) who treat the development of Revolt as a hobby or as a sub-project. The main developers are really a sum of 2 people; Insert (@insert#6271), the founder who is rarely communicative with the community but focuses on the aforementioned projects, and Lea (@Lea#5128), who is the most active developer on Revolt yet spends more time socializing and playing video games such as Beat Saber VR, Minecraft, Fortnite, Among Us, and Valorant instead of focusing on the product. The rest are active and significant contributors who also earned the "Developer" badge, a dangerous and inappropriate authorization for random unknown people to software metamorphosis and strongly motivated platform moderation influences.
As for customer support, all one needs is to email contact@revolt.chat and wait a shit-ton of time for a response, if he got one that is, let alone a coherent response. For instance, user TrueDeMoN100 (@TrueDeMon100) had to contact support because he was reporting a bot for potentially breaking the privacy policy, which was in turn made by a major contributor who earned the "Developer" badge. The alarming feature of the bot was that the bot unwillingly backs up an entire server's chat messages and archives it, even providing an option to restore the messages on a new server, so on September 3rd, 2022, this user sent an email for his inquiries on what's being done with this information, as there was no privacy policy or guidelines specifically reserved to bot developers, allowing anyone to add his bot to Revolt and let it perform any action for malicious intents. The response to the email was postponed indefinitely as one of the mods was at their grandparents and wouldn't be home till next week.
After two weeks had passed, the user contacted them again and was told on September 13th that he would get a response through email, but the surprise was that the owner of the bot called him out in an off-topic Revolt channel for that email. This is a huge breach of privacy knowing that the Revolt support team literally shares your email data and your username with bot owners and code contributors through group chats instead of dealing with the issue at hand; a total contradiction of Revolt's slogan where "you can be sure that your conversations are confidential and your data is secure." It becomes apparent here that the Revolt support team may not sell your data, but actually do give it away freely.
In another example, there was a user who has been mass spamming account creation, flooding random servers with spam messages. In this picture, we see a prominent user by the name of ShadowLp174 (@ShadowLp174#0667) asking for the data for ML training, and we see Insert gloating about the amount of the messages he collected. These kinds of jokes are unacceptable.
Double Standards
Illegal Content (e.g., Piracy)
Revolt's Acceptable Usage Policy (as of June 3rd, 2022) clearly states:
"[We do not allow] using Revolt for illegal operations. These include, but are not limited to, hacking, the cracking or distribution of pirated software."
The Revolt administration allowed Lea, a Revolt admin, to brag about seeding illegal content with the torrenting protocol as well as letting the admin publicly share a link to a self-hosted repository of 3.6TB of unethically pirated Nintendo content through the user bio for a very long period of time, to say nothing of promoting the link on the official server, Revolt Lounge. This site that goes by the domain name of futacockinside.me, at that time, included games and homebrew toolsets for consoles as new as those for the Nintendo Switch, so it conclusively disproves Lea's disclaimer on the site rambling about "preservation" and that "all the hosted games are from discontinued consoles and are no longer being sold." It was also open to public downloads before August, as can be deduced from the site's popup saying that "file downloads are currently restricted," that until the beginning of September 2023 that the link was consequently removed from Lea's user bio, with the site's pirated content redirected to the hidden walls of an Authentik log-in page on a cloud service by the name of amogus.cloud; all this for the criticism it has received.
A justification for this clear violation of the site's rules was given from a moderator by the name of Vale (@Vale#0210) right here, where he says that the "content isn't hosted on Revolt," but if "hosting" is the problem and not the "distribution" (i.e., linking to a website), which is a direct opposition to what the AUP states, how come did an entire server (i.e., IslamPortal) get removed off the platform for merely linking a site as will be shown below? Moreover, how come did the random user's YouTube link from earlier get censored from their bio as well? This is an obvious case of favoritism and double standards, coupled with extreme censorship.
Upon further investigation on Revolt Lounge, the official server, it becomes clear that this same admin lives for seeding and dies for leeching; Lea is seen to upload "literal terabytes" as well as ask for a Steins;Gate 0 torrent, and even send a magnet link of the entire Morbius movie on the main chat.
Hate Speech (e.g., Racism & Anti-Theism)
For being such "tolerant" leftists who have undergone "all sorts of discrimination" based on sexuality and gender identity for their adherence to the LGBT community, the Revolt admins seem to be subjectively selective on the issue of "hate speech," and only act upon certain forms of "hate speech" arbitrarily. They by themselves allow lots of prejudicial racist and anti-theistic content against specific races, nationalities, and religions on both their platform and their official server, Revolt Lounge (whose channels got archived and was reopened as Revolt on October 5th, 2023, as an attempt to draw off attention from all the past dramas and mod abuse on this server).
For instance, we see the same admin from earlier, Lea, up here shamelessly equating apes and monkeys with black people. The excuse for this was that "it's just a joke," but with that reasoning similar anti-LGBT memes and comments should be allowed to stay in the Revolt Lounge too. Reasoning? "It's just a joke," yet apparently, homophobia and transphobia (even if unintended, like unintentional misgendering or mere public disagreement with the LGBT lifestyle) seem to be a promise of an instant ban; not only on Revolt Lounge, but on the entire platform as well.
Other examples of pure hate speech come from the staff team's permission to inciteful mouthfaring on religions held sacred, especially Islam; a quarter of an hour was enough a time to call it and its followers "stupid and braindead," call an Islamic server a "shithole," leave a racist comment about suicide bombings, and we also got here a troll roleplaying as an arab ex-Muslim oppressed by the Sharī'ah (funny because all Middle Eastern countries are secular), who found a golden opportunity to spout idiocy over hilarious nonsense about intolerance in Islam out of nowhere, just to express new levels of hatred and hilarious leftist tomfoolery all inside the official server, Revolt Lounge, albeit it claims to be "inclusive," "anti-toxic," and "apolitical."
As for Christianity on Revolt, it's no better; all one needs is to reflect on the fact that the first thing moderator Vale thinks about when talking about creating Christian servers is promotion of hate speech. We also can see that the only Christian server on Revolt, Christendom, was unconsciously under constant surveillance and monitoring by the Revolt mods through unethical and dishonest practices involving lying on application forms and usage of alternate accounts, and thus was removed for shitty arbitrary reasons including "not being welcome inside the platform", with almost half of its members' accounts all suspended.
If anyone were to join the Revolt Lounge (now known as Revolt) and spend some time there, they'll immediately notice that most people with opposing worldviews (such as Muslims and "conservative" Christians who have certain disagreements) will get suspended for odious and invalid reasons on their public logs channel, and one such reason comes from ruling out "disagreement" with the leftist worldview as "hate speech" against its adherents; almost all such cases of hate speech elasticity are swept under the carpet and hidden from the public eye, while Revolt explicitly allows condescending the French and American populace and their cultures. While there surely exist no rules on Revolt's Acceptable Usage Policy (as of June 3rd, 2022) condemning or suppressing hate speech within the legal boundaries at all, this still is relevant in four ways; first, the admins are breaking their own server rules (i.e., CoC #4), second, they're driving away users from their own platform with their incompetent and immature moderation, third, they're employing biased double standards on the issue of hate speech when it comes to who is made fun of, and fourth, I'll leave this image speak for itself.
Immaturity & Mod Abuse
What I love about the Revolt community and its admins is their maturity; their shaping of a welcoming aura and a safe chatting environment for newcomers, like Insert stuck in the 2000s and being a brony and his support and praising of a Satanist abortionist server, Lea's constant rambling and projection when it comes to child pornography so much that it breaks the search system, the official moderation bot's mature profile banner, their professional moderation of their platform where they arbitrarily ban people and provide proper reasons like "being dumb," "annoying the chat (a.k.a., having a "black" gorilla as profile picture as was seen earlier)," and "talking back to a moderator." This is quite expected from a toxic community that genuinely has a problem with a man giving sincere advice to a crippled porn addict and pursue a higher purpose in life other than asking people for nHentai codes and PornHub recommendations on a SFW server. Oh, and don't forget that the same admin, Lea, complains about having to moderate a simple server and some admins have a tendency to reject simple questions about the justification of mod abuse for transparency's sake, here for me as well. Not only that, but it's also their intent to abuse mod privileges and actually shamelessly celebrate it.
Rewords
This is quite important to know; the Revolt devs have a tendency to shit on the user's rights by rewording their policies and rules to better fit their own whims on certain issues. For example; user TrueDeMoN100 from earlier sent Revolt an application to verify his server, Coding Simpletons, only to get DM'd back by Insert who, when no reasons to deny the application were found, literally reworded their criteria guidelines just to make up a reason to say a flat out "no."
In fact, this document did a huge impact on Revolt's stability that they're beginning to question their own rules by considering to change their Acceptable Usage Policy as a method of coping because they found no real reason to arbitrarily abuse their power on the hundreds of suspended accounts and removed servers without any reference to the AUP, and it seems that they have no shame doing so (which is a big middle finger to the users).
Software (e.g., Privacy & Self-Hosting)
We get that it's still a work-in-progress kind of software and that most parts of the software are broken (e.g., broken library and voice servers), but it still is ridiculous that a "transparent" and "privacy-friendly" project that "focuses only on the user" doesn't prioritize fundamental aspects of privacy, like End-to-End-Encryption (E2EE) and a commitment to staying 100% free & open-source, as they have proprietary blobs on their codebase such as the Admin Panel and the Discover section, both of which are huge parts of Revolt as a software, requiring self-hosters to recreate all this by themselves which isn't worth the efforts for a buggy and extremely centralized chatting service which forces a user to use different accounts for each and every instance. Revolt is no safer nor more private than Discord in this current state, let alone being efficient or out-of-the-box in all aspects, as self-hosted instances aren't the same product version as the stable build at revolt.chat.
In addition, Revolt is known for its lack of a good documentation for self-hosting. This hinders all unexperienced and non-tech-savvy users to set up their own instance as Insert and all of his supporters want people to do if they object the literal 451°F on the main instance.
Server-Specific Issues
IslamPortal
This is the infamous section dedicated for a detailed analysis and grading of the many mental gymnastics in order to remove my server, presented by the involved Revolt developers (Paul Makles (@insert#6271) and Lea Dickmann (@Lea#5128)) and notorious Revolt Lounge members (Cat-a-clysm (@Cataclysm#6905), Loki Calmito (@loki#7571), and Sneexy (@Sneexy#3963)) on many platforms (e.g., the IslamPortal Removal Rentry document, the official Revolt server, the Revolt Drama server, Lea's support emails, screenshots provided by user Gersonzao (@Gersonzao#5874), and Insert's comment section on a blog about Andrew Tate (now censored, hopefully I archived it)).
To get better context, here's a recap of events; MeD (@ççç#6618) is the one writing this, a user of Revolt since May 2022 who ran away from Discord and Guilded to look for an open-source alternative. After a long stay, he decided to remove his Discord account and move out to Revolt for all the fancy features they have, and thus made IslamPortal; the first religious and the only Islamic server on Revolt, which has been made on September 12th, 2022, and has since then gained dozens of Muslim and non-Muslim members. On April, 2022, he decided to work on another side project also called IslamPortal, which was a GitHub site (medkouk.github.io/islamportal) built by a static site generator reserved for Islamic refutations, later including external critiques of other worldviews, and on June 1st, he added a bunch of articles on the site by the name of "Harms of LGBT," "Harms of Transgenderism," and "Trans Genocide." MeD linked the first article on his bio, and after only a few days received a strike and the entire bio was removed. The perpetrator also mass reported his GitHub, so GitHub forced him to remove the articles within one week. He moved out from GitHub Pages to Codeberg Pages (islamportal.codeberg.page), and after a shorter lifespan of 15 days, the site got completely removed as well, and his server got unlisted from Discover. After simply asking about it on Revolt Lounge, the server got removed after a long wave of mod abuse and targeted mass reporting of his site again as personal attack, all based on nothing other than hasty reactions and hilarious emotional tantrums rather than well formulated rational thought, while taking intentions into account. All they did was hurry up and "yeet" his server, while attempting to "publically" shame his name on the platform.
When the server was removed, he received a Rentry document called "IslamPortal Removal" enumerating some shitty arguments about why the decision was made. On September 6th, he decided to write another Rentry document by the name of "Objection to Server Removal" in response, whose points were to show that the Revolt admins have failed to prove that we truly broke their AUP or the EU laws (which is impossible to disprove, especially since Lea had the nerve to email him back and resort to the rules of another platform to justify the removal). The writing of this document consequently resulted in ignoring the emails he sent them on Revolt Support (contact@revolt.chat), and then saying that bigots don't deserve a response without elaborating how the document was "so full of hate speech and misinformation," even extending to another Revolt admin by the name of Rexo (@Rexogamer#3096) who claimed that he lied on the disclaimers on purpose because he had twisted intentions and a user called Sneexy (@Sneexy#3963) not trusting this document because "he" wrote it (i.e., commiting a genetic fallacy), and after some time, getting both of his accounts suspended and threatened with an email block by Lea if he asks more questions about it. This shows how dangerous their power abuse is and how delusional these people are.
The entire IslamPortal situation, as you will see, simply revolves around shutting down criticism of the ideology of the Revolt admins (leftism) with empty claims (e.g., "blatant bigotry," "hate speech," and "purposeful disinformation") when all the aforementioned claims are false, first and foremost, and don't necessarily break the AUP, second of all, which means that the Revolt admins' decisions to remove the server and suspend the accounts of hundreds of users are absolutely arbitrary, illegitimate, and unruly.
Anti-Atheism
"Some articles throughout the site provide slight offense to atheists in the tone of the articles and insults written.[Insert]"
Insert is trying to dig so deep to find a problem on the site, whatever it may be, and that by including this section on his document to make the reasons seem lengthy; absolutely no insults were ever written on atheism-related articles nor did they have a negative tone towards atheists as human beings, so you're making all of this up. So pathetic and desperate to sustain his arguments.
Disinformation
"The IslamPortal server is centered on its affiliate site which contained disinformation on gay and trans people, especially on the articles Harms of LGBT and Harms of Transgenderism.[Loki]"
This is an entire misinterpretation of events; as is seen on the backstory earlier, I made the server on September 2022, seven entire months before the site, which was made on April 2023. In addition, the site (at its creation) didn't include any critiques or articles on LGBT or any ideology external to Islam for that matter; all the original GitHub site had was refutations to alleged scientific errors and contradictions in the Quran (i.e., the Holy Book of Islam) before getting extended with the LGBT articles on June 2023, two months later. The actual truth is that server has nothing to do with the site.
While the site promotes the server (i.e., links the server) and vice versa, promotion isn't enough a reason (let alone it being a "reason" at all) to remove a server. In fact, I could use their own justification against them; Lea would have been banned a couple of years ago for linking that self-hosted illegal piracy site on own user bio, which clearly goes against the AUP (as shown above), while my site doesn't even break the AUP because "free speech" and even "hate speech" (i.e., the "freedom to offend" that doesn't advocate to violence within the legal boundaries set by the EU laws) isn't disallowed on the platform, according to the AUP.
The zest of the matter is that it shouldn't be necessarily implied that the server is entirely centred on the site even if they share the same name; WordPress.org isn't WordPress.com. My site and its correspondent server both are linked in a way yet still provide entirely different services. As far as documented, the latest description of the server in Discover, before the removal, was this (with no mentions of the site as a side project whatsoever, exceptions apply to my bio): "The first Revolt Muslim server; Muslims and non-Muslims are welcomed alike, regardless of faith or belief. Literally the only morally superior server on Discover."
Anyhow, the "disinformation" claim only attacks the server through a criticism my site instead of focusing on my server, and this shows how absolutely daring and desperate these people are to find fault. Even if we say that I was hateful on the site (for sake of argument); removing my server for things I haven't done inside it is a bad move. Facebook doesn't ban me for breaking the ToS on Twitter, only Twitter does that. There is nothing about this on the Terms of Service (i.e., punishing someone for breaking the rules of another platform).
"The article Harms of LGBT implies that being LGBT is something that you can choose, which even when taking the listed sources and summaries in good faith, is false because there have been studies to show that it can be genetic (as referenced in the "Pseudo-Science" section).[Insert]""
I would love to see Insert backing up such empty statements (i.e., LGBT can be genetic), because by scientific consensus, being LGBT is a choice, and is not embedded into our genetics. I'm not going to argue whether or not homosexuality is genetic and whether the genes influence behaviors and sexual orientations or not because I already did that in extreme detail here. It laughably still isn't a valid reason to remove a server by pointing the reader to pseudo-scientific and propagandist narratives that have been debunked countlessly.
"Briefly looking into some authors on the papers cited, it's easy to see that there seems to be a strong bias and misrepresentation of the truth; Paul Cameron's articles have been cited on the article, even though he has received widespread criticism for published papers on the grounds of misinterpreting existing scientific literature and data.[Insert]"
This is nothing but a deperate and dishonest resort to ad hominems; what Insert really trying to say is that the sources have suddenly become biased and disputed because some random author is blacklisted and criticized for his extremist anti-LGBT political views by a retarded "anti-white supremacy" institution such as the Southern Poverty Law Center. The truth about Paul is that he publishes his own interpretation of the studies which can be viewed as "biased," so even if he's wrong sometimes, that's a human thing and one can't necessarily assume that it was intentional. Insert here is committing two fallacies at the same time; poisoning the well (i.e., disregarding the reliability of other works based on flaws in one or more works), and attacking a strawman (i.e., assuming one's intentions and criticizing the assumption instead of the work). Whilst he might be a bit biased towards one side for sure, his claims are completely backed by data and he doesn't intentionally "lie" or "skew stuff" (unless one could prove that), the only "wrong" or "bad" thing he could do is having his own extreme interpretations (as if that's "unscientific"), and some of his surveys having a bit less answers (as if he "intentionally does that").
Dr. Paul Cameron's studies are a prime example of how extremely difficult it may be interpersonally to achieve objectivity on socially contested topics, such as gay marriage and adoption. Dr. Toby Canning, for example states in Stacey and Biblarz (2001) on page 41-42 that: "Paul Cameron, an opponent of gay fatherhood, willfully misrepresented research on the punitive effects of gay male parenting on children, but despite the American Psychological Association's expelling of Cameron, and the American Sociological Association's condemnation of Cameron's practices, numerous publications and court proceedings have continued to rely upon his research."
However, Cameron questioned Canning and his committee members on the accuracy of that statement, and thus they had a correction inserted into the dissertation copy on page 119 as follows: "Paul Cameron was not expelled from the American Psychological Association or the American Sociological [sic], nor is there any evidence that he 'willfully misrepresented research'. Toby Canning and his dissertation committee (Malcolm Gray, Bob Jacobs, Cyd Strickland, and Thomas Vail) sincerely regret these inaccuracies. We acknowledge that Dr. Cameron's extensive research on homosexuality and homosexual parents (e.g., 38 articles listed on PubMed) appears in peer-reviewed journals." Although Paul Cameron's researches have been criticized in a similar tone (Herek, 1998; Schumm, 2000), they should not be ignored. As one example of double standards often applied by those holding strong opinions on controversial topics (Redding, 2013), Herek on page 227, 231, and 242 criticized Cameron's surveys for having only a 20% response rate, for using very small subsamples, and for including respondents who may not have understood the questions.
The problem here is that many prominent scholars (e.g., Lin & Lundquist, 2013; Kreager, Cavanagh, Yen, & Yu, 2014; McClendon, Kuo, & Raley, 2014; McWilliams & Barrett, 2014; Umberson, Thomeer, Kroeger, Lodge, & Xu, 2015) favorably cite widely acceptable researches in peer-reviewed and top-tier journals (Rosenfeld & Thomas, 2012; Rosenfeld, 2014; Weisshaar, 2014) that had only a 13% response rate, had at least one subsample of only 4 participants (same-sex married persons with a child, less than 1% of the more than 470 same-sex couple participants), and included nearly 100 dead persons as part of "stable" couples. Criticism must be careful and scientific standards equitable for progress to be made, but Insert is just stupid and won't feel an ounce of shame for committing all the aforementioned logical fallacies while acting all mighty and smug.
The fact is that it's not productive to critique the historical backgrounds of a person; this is the third committed fallacy in a single exhibit note, which essentially is the genetic fallacy, a logical fallacy in which arguments or information are dismissed or validated based solely on their source of origin rather than their content. Insert never cared to elaborate on how Paul is misrepresenting the data actually present in the article, but only said that this particular guy misuses data without providing any single example on one of his researches that were linked as source on the article, and thus resorted to a Wikipedia article. He's got to be kidding me.
Wikipedia is one of the stupidest sources to derive truth from especially from controversial issues like these. Wikipedia maintains and depends on the general consensus of random internauts and paid professionals (e.g., that one time where the CIA edited articles on the Iraq War (2003) and its former executive director, William Colby, as revealed by the now defunct database Wikiscanner in 2007), whether it's factually true or false; it's important not to jump to conclusions first, one gotta look at the actual studies, arguments, and conclusions, then they'll give better insight rather than committing the worst and most common logical fallacy. I still can't believe how Insert dares to claim that 500+ cited scientific sources were biased and cherry-picked, yet used random user-edited Wikipedia as his source.
"It's unfair to disguise the mental issues and criminal records listed on Harms of LGBT as a cause of homosexual behavior when in reality it's quite often a cause of societal treatment.[Insert]"
If this is true, the burden of proof is on Insert to prove that homosexuals are discriminated against as much as the listed mental health and criminal statistics on that article have shown. Since the rate of discrimination doesn't match the higher rate of poor mental health and crime, the correlation between their mental health conditions and homosexuality are an indication of it (i.e., homosexuality) being a severe mental illness that must be corrected (absolutely zero offense is intended towards the reader, but at least try and prove me wrong). In fact, as noted by most of the listed statistics, discrimination has got nothing to do with those mental issues in a general way.
"The mental health autism rates for transgender people are definitely not a side-effect of transsexual behavior, and given the tone of the article as a whole, it seems to come across very ableist.[Insert]"
Insert here is "assuming" the goals of the cited studies by their tone and is merely attacking a strawman, as well as making the false cause logical fallacy. The sources showing a link between autism and gender dysphoria don't aim to show the former as a "side-effect" of the latter, and Insert is merely presuming that a perceived relationship between things means that one is the cause of the other, but this would make absolutely zero sense. Autism is not developmental, it's very common knowledge for it to be something that occurs during brain development in childhood; teens and older persons don't develop autism all of a sudden. Rather, what the sources were showing is that the higher rate among transgender individuals undeniably shows a correlation between the two, and this could explain the fact that more vulnerable people are targeted to be encouraged to take HRT and "gender-affirming care."
Tying it back to the correlation between autism and transgender people, Insert seems to think calling autism a disorder is "ableist," and it seems as though he'd continue with this broken mindset even if an autistic person and a professional psychologist both strongly disagreed with him. If we really need to explain how embarrassingly this is stupid then it's not even worth trying to appeal. This ain't environmental, a person can't be blamed for something that can't be helped; my best friend Fumiyako (@rebolt#6686), the site co-maintainer and lead writer, told me back then that he has been diagnosed with mildly severe autism (ASD level 2), and that he has been recovering from some symptoms (i.e., eye interactions, difficult facial expressions, speaking lightly and shortly, hard verbal communication, etc.), yet me and him were somehow best buds on the internet, so this disproves this assumed "ableist" nonsense. Ironically, even our main page's second disclaimer at that time disproves this worthless statement, literally word by word.
"There was a statistic on Harms of Transgenderism saying that trans people have reduced lifespans (by 60%) in contrast with their other counterparts.[Loki & Sneexy]"
Bullshit. There absolutely exists not a single study about reduced lifespans on the article archive of Harms of Transgenderism, let alone this made up "60%" statistic.
"On the Revolt Drama server, the owner and his affiliates were advocating for conversion therapy, and spouting nonsense like gay people having low IQ.[Cat-a-clysm]"
Bullshit (x2). I invite anyone reading to join the Revolt Drama server to read the #IslamPortal channel history or search up for conversion therapy, or anything about "IQ"; literally nothing, so Cat-a-clysm is merely projecting his/her insecurities and indulging in fantasy. In addition, it wasn't mainly me (@rebolt#2160) who was arguing in that server and those people weren't "my affiliates," so that accusation holds no weight.
"It's proven that the site has disputed sources listed with no notice so this is especially problematic.[Insert]"
First of all, this is a loaded statement; it wasn't proven through all past attempts that the sources are scientifically unreliable or misinformative. Second of all, disputes are natural things for scientific documents, especially on controversial topics like these, so there was no real reason or an absolute need to put a notice unless the reader was really, really stupid. Finally, had I wanted to "disinform people," I wouldn't have allowed critics to have a platform, but that absolutely isn't the case; I provided people a platform to report errors (ironically on the IslamPortal server) and I acknowledged the possibility of there being errors on any article on the site's main page, and on both the articles, Harms of LGBT and Harms of Transgenderism, I linked to the original document I loosely borrowed the scientific citations from so that if you find anything wrong, you just contact the ones in charge through their Discord server, present your concerns, or debate the sources on the document. This all has nothing to do with the IslamPortal server, and Insert is merely sugercoating and sustaining his insecurities with false claims.
Gender Verification
"The IslamPortal server included a verification system which required users to verify their gender 'without impersonation', however, gender is not the same as biological sex. This does appear from a first glance to be intentionally discriminatory against trans people.[Insert]"
The fact that this point was yet again literally parroted from a random member just shows how desperate Insert is to make his list lengthy. The problem here is that it's damn well-known that, according to the gender philosophy, psychological gender isn't biological sex (albeit argumentations about the distinctions between gender and sex don't make any logical sense and are in dire need of stronger philosophical arguments), and that sex is "assigned" rather than "observed," yet Insert got mad at using "sex" instead of "gender," even though I chose that wording specifically so I wouldn't offend trans people in a sense by saying "there's only two genders" as an opposition, especially considering that Revolt's userbase is probably 30% transgender and 95% pro-trans. I've literally included the terms "birth-assigned" and "sex" on the verification channel, so how is Insert still assuming that what I referred to was "gender" exclusively? How is the word "impersonation" still assumed to be "impersonating gender" rather than "impersonating sex"? This is no more than a hateful personal attack.
"This question is also invasive to someone's private parts.[Cat-a-clysm]"
This entire "argument," as presented by user Cat-a-clysm, defeats the point of a "question." My server, my rules, and I ask what I want (e.g., biological sex) for people who want to join, otherwise they could just leave peacefully because the server requires that one question to be fulfilled; I'm not forcing anyone to answer that, think of this as an application form. I could literally ask anything about your private parts when joining the server; it may sound immoral to you people (it's not since Cat-a-clysm was projecting his or her obsession with penises even though the question never referred to that), yet it's not like it's "breaking the rules" or anything.
Worth to note that a bunch of trans people who have joined the server were treated as equally as other non-Muslims; separation is one of the central values in Islam to protect Muslims against unnecessary intersex interactions, as is expected from an Islamic server. The server's structure basically separates Muslims from non-Muslims (exceptions apply to Certified Members) and male Muslims from female Muslims. However, it doesn't separate non-Muslims based on intersex groundings, so we can safely conclude that trans people are especially safe on the server.
We shouldn't even have uttered the word "gender," because we knew a large portion of you people will get mad at using this term even though an Islamic server was never meant for them in the first place.
Hate Speech
"IslamPortal's owner and its affiliates are dehumanizing LGBT people and are against their existence.[Loki]"
Misinterpreting our positions is a huge stretch, fucking dunce.
"The site contains enormous amounts of hate speech against the LGBT populate, yet the owner tries to sugercoat it by claiming it's a disagreement with the ideology, not the people adhering to it. The hate received against the IslamPortal server is deserved and justified because most of the moderation team is queer. The owner of that server should've known better.[Loki]"
The problem is that my claims are true; nowhere did I advocate for hatred, acts of violence, or suppression of legal rights against any individual or organization. Ironically, anyone I've seen enforcing a narrative I never advocated for has got to be a filthy cunt whose worthless life revolves around deeming all religious people as promoters of hate speech, and whose smartest thing that's ever come out from his mouth was my dick. As for the second part, Loki is basically accepting the arbitrary power abuse based on the Revolt moderation team's bias towards their worldviews. I could no longer take his arguments at face value.
Kicking Trans People
"The admins at IslamPortal have been responsible of kicking trans people off the server at its entrance.[Cat-a-clysm]"
Straight up false; all people were let through the server regardless of their identifications and affiliations. Chatty, a former IslamPortal member, was perceived to be trans while getting verified (due to "she/her" pronouns despite being male) yet was still allowed to join. If the person who made this claim, Cat-a-clysm, brings up all the people getting kicked from the server after some time (including own self), that's because they didn't care to read the rules of the server saying that all unverified members would be kicked after 3 days, so it's not about people being trans, it's about people not caring about the server's enforced rules. In addition, Cat-a-clysm is probably the worst person to make this claim, since ironically, all Muslims and religious people are banned off his/her low effort emote server before even joining the server, and for no specific reason. He/she has also been recorded to join a Christian server by the name of Christendom (now removed) just to spam trans flags, call God "immoral," insult Christians, harass a random server member, and police his speech.
Societal Consequence
"This website can still be used as a vehicle for hate, there will be people who read the website and take things at face value.[Insert]"
This is a really stupid thing to state since literally every statement can be a vehicle for hate by this logic; Islam and Christianity have been twisted by terrorists (e.g., ISIS, KKK, etc.) to create their own interpretation to murder people despite the religions condemning such acts, so it's infinitely unfair (and retarded) to blame the religions instead of the actions of these groups or individuals. Similarly, a genuine critique can be twisted as a manifesto to incite violence against the LGBT community, despite it condemning doing so four to five entire times on the entire site and even twice off the site. If communication has "dangerous implications" and is a "vehicle of hate," consider closing your chatting platform, Insert.
Taliban Flag
"The banner for the server is an inverted Taliban flag, which is recognised by some countries as a terrorist organization.[Insert]"
Ironic how Insert mentions "inverted" when setting a flag on fire, stepping on it, or inverting it into an opposing color signifies opposition against the ideology related to that flag (not making any declaration here, just pointing out how the argument fails on all groundings).
The recognition of the Taliban as a terrorist organization for "some countries" is not a valid argument in the first place; every single country that labels the Taliban as a terrorist organization is not Europe-based (nor even US-based), thus the moderators can't enforce regional laws in this case, and including this argument is a dishonest tactic to evoke emotional reactions and make their justifications seem like a lengthy list. In fact, the flag itself is also considered that of Afghanistan's, and not solely for the Taliban. It's internationally recognized as a sovereign state.
As for people who definitely don't know anything about the black-and-white flag, I'm just not gonna put another shitty Wikipedia article about the "Islamic (Tawheed) flag" and leave the scene like the incompetent Revolt admins did with Paul Cameron. I'm doing the explanation myself; the meaning of the symbol on the flag is called al-Shahādah (الشهادة), which is the monotheistic Islamic oath and creed, and the first of the five pillars of Islam, also part of the call to prayers, which is declared on loudspeakers five times a day on every Muslim-majority country. It reads: "There is no god except Allah (ﷻ). Muhammad (ﷺ) is the Messenger of Allah (ﷻ)."
Back to the Afghan flag; they have two variations of flags to use, and both of them are white with black calligraphy on it. One is with the Shahādah only, the second is with the Shahādah plus some calligraphy under it reading: "Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (IEA)." As we can see; the flag that the argument is referring to is the one with only the Shahādah on it, so it's not exactly a "Taliban flag" (as was seen on pro-Palestinian protests in many Muslim-majority countries like Turkey, or even Chicago in the U.S.), unless Insert really wants to apply his idiotic mental gymnastics here, and that's why I want to declare that he's merely recycling an issue brought up by that exact same illiterate random member we kept talking about earlier on without doing proper research, just to intentionally make negative Islamophobic narratives.
User Testimonies
This is a glossary of user (and former user) testimonies against the Revolt platform. Note that some testimonies may be edited for readability purposes, and keep in mind that this document doesn't necessarily support any opinion on this section, except for MeD's (which is the author).
MeD (@ççç#6618/@rebolt#2160)
MeD is the compiler of this document, the former owner of the removed IslamPortal Revolt server, and an imaginary "threat" whose both accounts were banned from Revolt altogether. He has left Discord on April 2022 and has been since then an active member on the Revolt platform who also had a minor contribution to the translation of Revolt into the Arabic language. On October 7th, 2023, he wrote his only review on Trustpilot:
"A toxicly leftist and uninclusive userbase (especially if anyone goes against the leftist status quo), arbitrary bans, unethical and immature moderation team, buggy client, incomplete software, no commitment to staying 100% open source, no commitment to judging infractions according to the Acceptable Usage Policy, suspension of accounts justified by logical fallacies and strawmen, hate against religion and religious people, favoritism towards atheistic Satanism, censorship, no freedom of ideological disagreement, and a bad reputation overall. User since April 2022, if that matters; I was so hyped for this project that I ended signing up with my PS4's defunct web browser at that time. It's unfortunate to see such a great project become so "revolting" when the service is still in beta, only having a few tens of thousands of members (whom only a few hundreds are active)."
Fumiyako (@rebolt#6686)
Fumiyako is the former co-owner of the removed IslamPortal Revolt server and a minor contributor to this document. He joined Revolt in September 2022 and left after Revolt's decline, in which he summarized on his Revolt bio as:
"User-first platform my ass."
Nëïgsëndöïg Cöcülës (@Android#8267)
Neigdoig was an extremely active Revolt user and Free Software advocate who was appointed as a moderator in dozens of servers. Despite already finding refuge on Matrix, the Revolt moderators seem to keep lying about "breaking German laws" and then strongly refusing to elaborate on why his account was suspended. On October 9th, 2023, he detailed his experiences in a Matrix DM:
"As a former user of Revolt, myself and the author are witnesses against the pigsty of all of the corruption of the Revolt moderation team. Sure, they're doing their job, but it's unfortunate that it had to be this way. As I kept using it, I have seen some very disgusting controversies, and discussed those with Insert, though we've had disagreements on what had exactly happened, and the interpretation of such incidents, in which I was a part of one of them. These were events that changed Revolt for the worse, despite me inviting people on there as a sexier Discord alternative. I'm saddened that the moderators think of me as someone who wasn't good enough for the them to keep on, despite not being able to prove why I had violated such terms and conditions, so I deleted my account in protest. It saddens me as a Free Software advocate that this waste bucket is absolutely proprietary, to put it lightly."
Bryden (@BrydenIsNotSmart#1523)
Bryden is the founder and main developer of the Revolt Bot List website, and yet another active user who was suspended for no apparent reason. He now is the founder of Strafe.chat, which seems more promising a project than Revolt. He wrote this review on Trustpilot:
"There's no freedom of speech whatsoever. If you don't agree with their leftist mindset they won't like you. If you try to challenge them, you're banned. Staff and community are terrible and inappropriate."
Sky (@ForGetFulSkyBro#4740)
Sky is the active contributor to the Revolt Bot List website, the bot developer of Functious (the first bot for polls and giveaways, as well as many other uses), and the developer of a bunch of other interesting projects both on Revolt and outside of it. The reason for his account suspension is still unclear, but it definitely must be something stupid, so he wrote this rant on his blog and this review on Trustpilot:
"When I first joined Revolt back in February of 2023, I found it to be really cool open source app with a fun API to work with. At first, I created bot called Functious to be the very first bot of certain subjects such as polls and giveaways. After some time, I got friends to join and even create their own little projects to work on such as RBL (Revolt Bot List) and other bots. I must admit that the community behind Revolt were of different opinion than us but of course, I kept that all to myself as I have no reason to start drama where it's not needed. DMs and private servers were the only places we would discuss such differentiating opinions (according to Insert and Lea, it's against the law to have such opinions?). So by them suspending my account just proves that they spy on messages by suspected people which seems like an evasion of privacy that all Revolt staff members have access to. Quite contradictory toward their slogan. Another thing I have noticed is that religion doesn't really matter to Revolt staff team. In the past few months, two religious servers have been removed from the platform and the mods/owner of such servers were terminated. The first religious server I seen get taken down was IslamPortal, and the reason for this can be simply shortened to just 'bigotry' and 'discrimination'. The second religious server that got removed was called Christendom which of course revolved around Christianity. The reason for the take down was for fostering hate speech, conspiracy theories (???) and targeted harassment. Yet, while they are removing such religious servers, one still remains which of course is a Satanism server. Seems like Insert has no problem keeping the server on the platform, but they try their hardest to find the smallest piece of 'evidence' to remove other religions. It's a community that believes having a different opinion equates hate speech."
TrueDeMoN100 (@TrueDeMoN100)
TrueDeMoN100 was an extremely active user on Revolt, until he wasn't. He wrote a total of two critical reports about Revolt on 2022 and 2023, and a message on Privatebin, in which he wrote a huge rant that included:
"I was warned twice for defending America, that may have not been the words they used but it's the only time I ever get warned is when I engage in subjects about America. I speak in positive recognition and defend my country regardless of the right or wrongs, because that is where I'm from. Because I show my support of my country in my profile I was warned for 'baiting people'. I had a button which said proud to be American which linked to the song on YouTube, and I was warned for that. Talk about jealous zealotry. How is showing my love for my country 'baiting people'? I've had that button in my profile for over 10 months and it wasn't a problem till I engaged in this discussion. If showing my love for my own country in my profile is 'baiting people' then try to ban me for loving where I am from."
Unarthadox
Unarthadox is a Lutheran Protestant and the creator of the second religious and only Christian server on Revolt, Christendom. After the ban on both the server and his account for absurd reasons, as we've seen earlier, he writes this on a Discord DM:
"Revolt is a horrible platform full of horrible people. The fact that you don't have to scroll down on the Discover page to find multiple 18+ or 'femboy' related servers already shows a lot about the community. They hate religion, they hate both political conservatism and religious conservatism, and they will go out of their way to make up excuses to ban anyone they don't like, mainly conservatives. The staff team constantly break their own rules, and they disguise themselves on alternate accounts to go into servers that have manual verification and snoop around for any material they can pin on users they don't like. Revolt is a totalitarian platform; you have to agree with everything they say and do, or get banned. Any action of speaking out against them will give you either a strike or a ban, depending on how they felt that day. The staff team makes decisions based on their own emotions, and not reason."
Mon
Mon (as known by his Discord username @monberrie) is your average former Revolt user. He sent this message on Discord in reference to this document:
"I fully agree with all your points, even as a Christian, and you honestly deserve respect unlike those ungodly bigots."
Gersonzao (@Gersonzao#5874)
Gersonzao is one of the most active Revolt users and an enthusiastic advocate when it comes to Free Software, GNU, and Touhou (real). He has helped greatly in the making of this document by providing screenshots and has objected Revolt's mod abuse on his Revolt bio by linking to this document, consequently preparing for a leave to Matrix:
"On my way to punish people for not breaking the AUP."
Kate
Kate is a notorious member of Revolt who actively contributed to its growth, notably by making a C# Library for Revolt under the name of "RevSharp," and a Revolt bot based on the Discord version under the name of "Xenia" written with that same library. On August 11th, 2023, Kate had enough and wrote this article on the bot's site, ditching Revolt behind and unfortunately turning the focus of development on the Discord bot:
"Due to some unfortunate circumstances with Revolt Staff, I am ceasing all major development of Xenia for Revolt and my RevSharp Library. I'm saddened that the main contributors have to be this immature about personal situations that shouldn't be treated in this unprofessional manner. It was a shame that it had to end this way, mostly due to; immature team members, and the founder unwillingly giving others power or responsibility which is hindering the platform quite a lot, that's why push notifications aren’t a thing, and haven’t been for a long time, which isn't helping Revolt's growth at all. Signing out, Kate."
Qyint
Qyint is, from my understanding, a group of weird German "anarchists" who made a Revolt server. On their community field, they wrote a quick draft called "On Revolt" which dealt with some issues that Revolt suffers from, and are trying to self-host their own invite-only Revolt instance by the name of "Revolution":
"To the Revolt team; please, drop your social-chauvinism and your hypocrisy. Learn to accept the fact that you're not always right. I have seen many Internet communities break apart because their moderators did not follow their own guidelines. Please redirect your focus towards enhancing actual privacy instead of "nice to have" but ultimately useless features, and you should think about the implications all of these things have on your project. They might seem like small things on their own, but together they shine a bad light on Revolt. This not only makes people want to stay away from this platform, but it makes the moderation team seem incompetent too. This is not how you grow a community."
Anonymous I
Anonymous I is yet another owner of a server on Discover. Information about this user was hidden to prevent moderation actions against the user, as he still uses Revolt to this day. On September 2023, he says this on a Revolt DM:
"They banned my accounts for being a Muslim too. It's a joke when we say 'Islam is cringe', but not when we say 'LGBT is cringe'. This is unacceptable now. They break their own rules, give false reasons, and then put the blame on us. I wish we could somehow make them pay."
Anonymous II
Anonymous II is a Revolt user that wrote this review on Trustpilot, under the pseudonym of "Generic Goon" on October 7th, 2023. I have my own theories but infomation about this user is unknown:
"Terrible platform. Banning people from the entire platform for no good reason. Switching back to Discord."
About
This document was originally written (and rewritten, lots of times) by MeD (@ççç#6618/@rebolt#2160) as an objection to this platform's toxicity and arbitrary abuse of power. For further inquiries about this document (or if you want to provide more information), I'm all ears:
- Email:
meskuku@cumallover.me - Discord (bad):
@meskuku
Special thanks go to the Imgur Image Uploader for the easy uploads.