Non-Monetized Together #svalien



You can also view this article at

One of the biggest blows to the battle for social justice is that all the “-ism” and “-phobic” words have become insults. You can’t have a serious discussion about racism, sexism, classism, or homophobia anymore because so many people will feel personally attacked if anybody suggests to them ways they could work towards a fairer society. These used to be movements focused on equity and transformative conflict, yet they are now often used to spread moral superiority and petty conflict.

It’s important to instead discuss inequity as what it truly is, a social issue caused when people express viewpoints that accidentally contain logical gaps which overlook human rights. As a socially conscious provider of information, I can’t be sparking public fear by accusing all these statements of having malicious intent. Instead, I will have to acknowledge the possibility that the person may have simply forgotten to consider what their viewpoint means for other demographic groups.

In this article, I will demonstrate how I approach the topic of inequality. I will do this by presenting an example where the discrimination is easy to miss if you aren’t paying close attention. I will explain how it’s discriminatory, speaking for the benefit of the people who may fall for it and the people who are targeted by it. I will describe these examples as logical fallacies, not as rage bait.

I’ll discuss the comments on this r/worstof thread shaming a person who asked r/TrueChristian how to explain Christian reasoning against same-sex relationships to a Christian coworker who was already in one. I can see how at first glance, the comments can seem like fair criticism directed to someone behaving petty, unnecessary, and judgemental. So while I’ll assume the r/worstof commenters had good intentions, they failed to recognize an important piece of context, which resulted in their comments actually being discriminatory against Christians. (By the way, attacks against people for their faith do not have an “-ism” or “-phobic” word associated with them, at least not to my knowledge, but as long as they attack the people and not the religion, they can be placed in the same category).

What the commenters missed out on was the fact that Christians, like anyone else, have the responsibility to love and respect people they disagree with. The r/TrueChristian user never actually said anything judgemental, but since they view same-sex relationships as a sin, the commenters jumped to the accusation that the Christian was filled with resentment for this person, despite the fact that the Christian even says, “I’ll be praying and keep treating her the best I was already treating: with love and kindness.” Maybe they could have been a kind, supportive, empathetic friend with their coworker. But by that point, the commenters dismissed any such possibilities on the grounds of their religious views.

Some commenters also assumed that these comments would hurt their friendship. These users have forgotten that respectfully sharing advice is a common attribute of relationships among all people, Christians included. Now, it’s fine to disagree with Christian advice or to even be offended by the advice itself, and if a respectful Christian encounters that response from someone, they will know not to bring it up to that person anymore. The difference is that the r/worstof commenters aren’t personally involved in the Christian’s situation, so the commenters are saying that they don’t have to know the coworker to know that the Christian’s suggestions would poison the relationship. By assuming that nobody would take Christian advice well, the perhaps unintentional effect of their comments is that Christians should not share advice with anybody, even if they’re respectful about it, which is a double standard because that’s what everybody else does.

Now I’m not trying to get anybody outraged by a “Christian hate panic” or whatever — this is only one Reddit post after all. I’m instead here to show an example of where inequity can come from, how it can easily go unspotted, and what you can do to prevent it from happening. Christians such as I believe that intolerance against Christians is inevitable and that it will never go away completely. Instead of creating rage bait, we are supposed to consider these obstacles to be like puzzles to navigate. How we handle these puzzles will reveal our level of faith.


What doesn’t solve the problem is when you insult people. This is the problem when words that should be used to describe unfairness become insults. It doesn’t people to the knowledge they need to treat people equitably. Instead, people believe that when they are called racist or homophobic or ableist or whatever, then the other person must hate them, and that they must respond not by considering the impact of their words, but by repairing their bruised ego.

Every time inequality is viewed in this way, the opportunity for resolution goes out the window, adding up to a staggering amount of lost potential over the years. Millions of missed opportunities. That’s the problem right there.

And Internet discussions are our big ticket to solving it.

Now you can give it a try in the comment section below. Feel free to use this new method of describing examples of discrimination.

#Inequity #SocialJustice #Religion #Reddit #ConflictResolution


You can also read this article at

In response to the news that r/decadeologyanarchy will go private once it reaches 500 members, I want to mention that if anybody wants to make a public post in the style of that subreddit, they can use Nonmonetized Together to do so.

Decadeology is a subject I’ve been fascinated by for years. It’s a term used to refer to Internet analysis of the evolution of society, technology, politics, and pop culture throughout the years. Where decadeology differs from general historical analysis is that a decadeologist usually limits their focus to decades they’ve lived through, basing their analysis on their own personal perceptions. Another difference is that people sometimes use decadeology to predict the future.

As you can see, decadeology isn’t a very academic method of analysis, but it was never intended to be. It’s just a fun way to explore different people’s ways of perceiving the world.

What a lot of people don’t realize is that up until a few months ago, decadeology used to be more geared towards hair-splitting. You would often see people grouping certain eras with super-specific cut-offs, often down to a year’s season. Or they would analyse really small shifts in society. Now, this wasn’t exclusively the case. Decadeology has always made room for broader analysis, but hypercategorization was a common feature of decadeology.

But lately, decadeology has gained a much wider audience, which has caused the hair-splitting to be pushed to the wayside in favour of more mainstream-focused discussions. Though, I enjoyed reading the in-depth posts that used to be popular. I liked them because they were more detailed and made the community less repetitive. A few people agree with me, and they congregate on r/decadeology’s sister subreddit, r/decadeologyanarchy, which is dedicated to preserving decadeology’s tradition of making hyperspecific posts.

Since I don’t have a Reddit account, I was disappointed to hear that r/decadeologyanarchy said they would go private at a certain point. One of the reasons I read Reddit is because of its convenience — you can see a lot of discussion without signing in. But I remembered that I run a non-paywalled platform that welcomes alternative and overlooked content — the one you are reading right now. Why don’t I designate Nonmonetized Together as a place where people can publicly make decadeology anarchy posts?

This does not mean that Nonmonetized Together will become a publication focused on decadeology anarchy. I will be regularly writing new articles on other subjects just like I always have. If you liked what I’ve been posting previously, you’ll also probably like what I will continue to post on the future. I’m just saying, anybody who wants to have a public discussion on the topic of decadeology anarchy can use this platform to do so.

Nonmonetized Together is available both on Medium and on a federated platform called Make sure to read Nonmonetized Together’s “about” page to get an understanding of what the community stands for, how it works, how to behave, etc. I have other articles that go further in depth on the things discussed on that “about” page. While it’s important to read the “about” page, these other articles aren’t really necessary to read, but they can help you understand this online environment better. Many of them are featured near the bottom of the “about” page on Medium and

Nevertheless, I’m not expecting everybody to understand everything about this publication right away. If you make a Nonmonetized Together post that suggests you don’t quite understand something about it, I’ll respond to the post and let you know.

If you feel overwhelmed with all this information, you can go here to find the articles I’ve posted to Medium, sorted by topic. Please note that the list “Issues that Nonmonetized Together can help solve” is comprised up of other people’s articles; all the other lists contain my own articles.

If you want to be added as a writer to Nonmonetized Together, make a Medium account and send me a private message or comment saying you want to be added. Then you will be able to post to the publication.


#Invitation #Writers #Reddit #WriteAs #Decadeology

Possessed Photography/Unsplash

When I first heard about the Reddit drama surrounding Aaron Sims’s attempt to run for Congress, something immediately seemed off to me. Could the anonymous pro-Sims Reddit account OkGene5382 be secretly run by Sims? That seems like quite the assumption.

So I did some research on this rumour and found that it is mostly being kept alive by the delusions and abuse tactics of a user named Throw-A-Weigh-69. Even if you disagree with me and believe that Aaron Sims uses false social media accounts, there are other issues going on here that aren’t justified by that. You will hear about them all in this post.

Since Sims doesn’t appear to be interested in engaging these rumours, I thought I would make a post warning the Internet about the issue. I can’t blame him for not caring about them, though. If he wants to show he’s a serious politician, he needs to show that he can understand the difference between reality and urban legend, and not getting too wrapped up in the urban legend.

I will begin by outlining the incidents that led to this campaign (in the backstory section), discuss the campaign itself, and then explains why this matters. The backstory isn’t that messed up, especially compared to the campaign, so you’ll have to wait until the campaign section of this article before we get to the really bad stuff.


Brett Jordan/Unsplash

Here’s what went down. Throw-A-Weigh-69 notices the OkGene5382 account and gets suspicious so he sends a direct message to the account to see if Sims was behind it all along. Here’s the link to the discussion, but I will warn you that it’ll take ages for you to read and is mostly vulgar nonsense. Also, both parties consented to having this private conversation shared, with Throw-A-Weigh-69 openly sharing it in his comment right here, and OkGene5382’s consent coming in the form of … well, I’m not gonna spoil it for you just yet.

So you’re probably wondering what happens in the discussion. OkGene5382 says that she’s Sims’s friend but acts very paranoid and neurotic at the slightest provocation throughout the discussion. She calls Throw-A-Weigh-69 a stalker for doing a lot of research on Sims, and then calling him a homophobe and a rapist and threatening to report him to the police (Sims is openly gay, by the way).

She also believes Throw-A-Weigh-69 to be making up false stories and mentions at one point she needs to keep tabs on anything negative said about him to protect Sims against assassins. We know OkGene5382 consented to the chat screenshots being made public because in the Imgur link above, she says she wanted to release the chat to the public as a way to call out Throw-A-Weigh-69.

“We can simply expose all of this on reddit and then people will be lining up to tells us your name. We have these messages and your profile” — OkGene5382, 8:41–8:42 a.m, June 21, 2021

This type of behaviour from Sims’s friend would obviously be unacceptable if it came from a politician, so it is very irresponsible for Throw-A-Weigh-69 to accuse OkGene5382 of being Sims.

During the discussion with Sims’s friend, Throw-A-Weigh-69 presents eight reasons as to why he believes Sims is behind the account. It’s great that Throw-A-Weigh-69 is asking questions and being skeptical, but all but one of these arguments are either addressed by OkGene5382 or are easily explainable. However, none of this is enough for Throw-A-Weigh-69 to change his mind.

For example, he asks OkGene5382 why she just not block him if she is so paranoid of him. She responded by saying that she needs to collect evidence of stalking and slander so she can send it to the cops and the public. Even though it’s poor evidence, it seems to make sense to Sims’s friend.

He also is suspicious that the account’s secondary name is an anagram of the name Aaron Sims, yet Ok_Gene-5382 explains that Sims gave her the account and that it might be an old account.

Maria Teneva/Unsplash

Some other points that Throw-A-Weigh-69 brings up are not satisfied by OkGene5382, but can be explained by critical thinking, especially this next one. When OkGene5382 suggests that Throw-A-Weigh-69 take up the matter personally with Sims on his Facebook account, he says that only Sims would care about someone refusing to bring something up with him, despite it being very clear that Sims’s friend just wanted to be left alone.

Additionally, two of Throw-A-Weigh-69’s points can be described with one explanation. The friend being on Sims’s campaign would explain why she doesn’t post about anything else, and also explains why her posts are so exaggerated in support of Sims.

As for why Sims couldn’t just log into the OkGene5382 account and speak up for himself, Throw-A-Weigh-69 has shown that he would not trust that account anyways.

This next one is kinda weird. Throw-A-Weigh-69 asks OkGene5382 why she would suggest he contact Sims directly if she thinks that Throw-A-Weigh-69 is a homophobic rapist and stalker. She answers that Throw-A-Weigh-69’s dedication suggests he has a personal problem with him, and that Sims would be able to handle it better. She adds that it is not fair to talk about someone behind their back like Throw-A-Weigh-69 is doing. This may be a really weak justification, but it’s not like it’s the only example of that which came from Sims’s friend during the DM conversation.

That’s seven points addressed, which leaves one final unaddressed argument from Throw-A-Weigh-69. At one point, OkGene5382 asks him for which county he is from so she can report him to the police. We don’t know why this is necessary, and neither does Throw-A-Weigh-69. But this is his only point that’s left standing by the end of the article, and yet he is more convinced than ever of his suspicions.

There is one other thing I haven’t mentioned yet that will be relevant for later. At one point, Throw-A-Weigh-69 jokingly asks OkGene5382 for a picture of Sims’s genitals. This greatly upsets Sims’s friend, as she insists that Throw-A-Weigh-69, a straight man, would use the pictures to damage his campaign.

This may at first appear to be another example of OkGene5382’s hysteria, as the request could have been easily ignored. However, she gets upset about those comments and then Throw-A-Weigh-69 . . . well, he starts to get very persistent with this request, reaching the point where it becomes creepy and a form of harassment.

Mikael Seegen/Unsplash

If you have any additional evidence that OkGene5382 is in fact Aaron, feel free to present them in the comments section. But before you do, you will need to consider these points:

1. How would Sims even have the time to entertain OkGene5382? I’m not sure if you clicked on the Imgur link, but that discussion is loooooooong.

2. During the chat, OkGene5382 mentions that Aaron would react completely different to how OkGene5382 is acting, saying “Aaron probably wouldn’t even care about [Throw-A-Weigh-69]” and that “he would probably be cool with [Throw-A-Weigh-69].” These statements are then supported by Sims’s behaviour when Throw-A-Weigh-69 interacts with Sims’s official account as part of the misinformation campaign.

3. Sims’s friend even says she can send a picture of her boobs to prove that she is not Sims, but this is immediately dismissed by Throw-A-Weigh-69 because he doesn’t think a woman would do this.

4. Throughout all of Throw-A-Weigh-69’s posts on the topic, they act completely certain that OkGene5382 is Sims. I understand that it is still a subjective opinion to disagree with me and think that Sims is likely behind the account, even if it is a weak argument. I don’t want to use my ideas and blog posts to accumulate more power for myself, so whatever subjective ideas you have about this scenario, I encourage them. But because of all the evidence I presented against Throw-A-Weight’s campaign, there is objectively a subjective argument to be made that Sims is not behind OkGene5382. And Throw-A-Weigh-69 is completely oblivious to it. This means that it’s flat-out wrong to be as confident as Throw-A-Weigh-69 is, especially considering what happens next.


So Throw-A-Weigh-69 starts his campaign posting all over r/Reno, and it really fooled a lot of people, despite it coming from a crazy person who is intent on ruining Sims’s life. For example, they recount that when they asked for those explicit pictures, OkGene5382 “[pulled] a complete 180 to [say] I should try contacting Aaron directly myself.”

Throw-A-Weigh-69 is completely unaware that they, not OkGene5382 pulled the complete 180 by asking for those pictures. Yet he somehow believes his social intelligence is high enough to know every woman and to conclude that none of them would offer to send a breast photo when in this situation. It’s not surprising that OkGene5382 would be taken back by someone asking for nudes in what was previously a very serious conversation, but in the same comment, Throw-A-Weigh-69 claims that “it’s completely ridiculous that he thinks we’re that dumb” to understand that Sims’s friend would starting feel more uncomfortable around them in that situation.

Taras Chemus/Unsplash

Here’s the thread where Throw-A-Weigh-69 interacts with Sims’s official Reddit account. You’ll have to scroll down to say hi to Throw-A-Weigh-69, but we can see that Sims presents himself as very composed, no-nonsense, and calm, so there’s great evidence right there that he is not behind the OkGene5382 account. He does accuse Throw-A-Weigh-69 of “stalking” his account, but it is not difficult to imagine that he is taking those words verbatim from his friend.

But despite Sims presenting a lot of evidence against the conspiracy campaign, Throw-A-Weigh-69 buckles down on his claim using the only possible method when exhausted of all options: domination tactics. Because of this, I would suggest avoiding contacting the Throw-A-Weigh-69 account. I am usually all for creating solutions through open online discussion, but this Reddit user has showed that they are completely incapable of considering other viewpoints.

Sims’s official Reddit account replied to Throw-A-Weigh-69 saying he “would be happy to answer any policy questions you have but making up nonsense on every post I share is rather weird.” Throw-A-Weigh-69 insists that he “was asking YOU for nudes.” This is an example of Throw-A-Weigh-69’s irresponsible confidence that OkGene5382 is Aaron. You see, if it’s not Aaron, then that means Throw-A-Weigh-69 would be deceiving Sims into consent!

Throw-A-Weigh-69 then states his belief that Sims may have wanted to use his official Facebook account to “get lucky” and score some nudes, as opposed to the Reddit throwaway that Throw-A-Weigh-69 believes is run by Aaron.

Throw-A-Weigh-69 also attempts to force Sims to admit to this potentially career-destroying misinformation. He threatens that if he doesn’t do so, then Sims is “lying about impersonating someone” and that he is denying that he baselessly called Throw-A-Weigh-69 a rapist. He continues to claim that not giving in to his deception will damage a lot of people and will cause Sims to lose in court.

Sims lets Throw-A-Weigh-69 know that “this is a very inappropriate thing to say to a political candidate”, but he responds “don’t tell me what is and isn’t inappropriate to ask you.” Another example of Throw-A-Weigh-69’s force tactics is when he tells Aaron that “no one is going to believe you made an account and gave it to your friend.” Not only is that a way of dominating Aaron but also dominates anyone who tries to protect him.

Sims does his best and reminds Throw-A-Weigh-69 that he answered his questions for him, yet the thread still ends with Throw-A-Weigh-69 moaning that those answers weren’t the ones he wanted.

Why does this matter?

Imagine being in a relationship with someone who treats you as poorly as Throw-A-Weigh-69 is treating Sims in this example. Trying to force you to lie to them because they don’t want to hear the truth, being resistant to the slightest criticism, closing you off from people who can make you feel better.

Jurien Huggins/Unsplash

The campaign has been posting as recently as 3 months ago as of September 1, 2022, so I wanted to make this post and let people know not to trust Throw-A-Weigh-69.

This whole fiasco also demonstrates the out-of-control destructive nature of domination tactics, even when they presented with strong opposition. Throw-A-Weigh-69’s attacks towards Sims always had more upvotes than Sims’s responses, so we can see that fairness does not always hold back ignorance.

Clearly, we can do better at exercising justice, so we have to search for new ways to do so. I created Non-Monetized Together partially with the intention to discover them in a variety of scenarios. It’s simple — I present the details of a situation, helping the readers (that means you) find inspiration. Then you can add your ideas to my posts by responding to them.

Not only is this article a chance to debunk the campaign, but it allows us to address the circumstances that caused it to happen in the first place. This is a space where solutions can originate from the greater public and be taken seriously.

Please don’t be ashamed of what you can add to the conversation. Here, anyone can be an innovator.

This article was originally published to Medium on September 4, 2022 (

#Misconception #Reddit #FakeNews #AaronSims #OnlineDefamation


#Sociology #Internet #Atheism #Reddit #Acceptance

This article was originally published to Medium on August 14, 2022. (

Back in 2013, Reddit user Aalewis posted this to the atheism subreddit, going viral, prompting ridicule, and becoming a meme:

“Just to be clear, I’m not a professional ‘quote maker’. I’m just an atheist teenager who greatly values his intelligence and scientific fact over any silly fiction book written 3,500 years ago. This being said, I am open to any and all criticism.

‘In this moment, I am euphoric. Not because of any phony god’s blessing. But because, I am enlightened by my intelligence.’” — Aalewis (source:

I will admit this quote certainly isn’t perfect. It reads like a teenager trying too hard to sound adult. As well as having punctuation errors, what does Aalewis even mean by “professional quote maker?” Yet they aren’t actually saying anything wrong for an atheist. I’m religious myself, and even I find it hard to interpret this post as meaning anything other than “atheism and human knowledge have been so useful for me that I have achieved a state of fulfillment equivalent to what spirituality promises to offer.” Tell me how you can be an atheist without agreeing with this.

Well, let’s see what others have to say. I’ll start with responses from the original thread, which is now only viewable on the Internet Archive. (source:

Image from Brett Jordan/Unsplash

“Hey, Aalewis.

If I’m right, you’re probably feeling pretty damn awful right now. If I were you then for the next few years you might cringe at night at the thought of having once posted this.

It’s one of the inevitable mistakes of that phase between youth and maturity. Every single person who posted in this thread has them too; I’ve got five I could name right now. There’s that one quote, “If I could do my life over, I would make the same mistakes, only sooner”; to that I say, bollocks to that. These kinds of things just suck like a black hole. But at the very least, we’ve all had them at some point.

I’ll point out the immediate things I want to get across. For a start, atheism doesn’t mean belittling theists or going out of your way to humiliate or disprove them. It means just not believing in divinity of any form. Neither does atheism immediately equal intelligence.

Secondly, it’s all well and good to be a smart bloke but without a healthy does of wisdom and humility you’re not going to be someone anybody could be happy to talk to.” — Priderage

Ridiculous. Priderage started off putting the blame on Aalewis for other people making fun of them, but then started promoting respect and humility, as if Aalewis wasn’t already doing so in the first place! Aalewis didn’t even mention theists in their post, let alone belittle them. Plus, they were humble — they just mentioned they were open to criticism. Also, atheism equals intelligence the same way that theism equals intelligence. Everybody has an intelligence, save for the comatose, the brain-dead, and the newborn.

Priderage’s response continues for a while but basically the entire gist of their comment is contained in the excerpt above (check the link for yourself to see their full comment). So no, their comment really does mean what it looks like it means. But what’s even crazier is that the comments were practically worshipping Priderage for making such a deep and meaningful response.

“But I am an atheist forum, I’m just gushing over a user who called someone out for expressing their atheism in a normal way!” — r/atheism

I really should at least compliment Priderage on the sympathetic nature of their reply, but the way it was paired with a message of mockery makes me question their true intentions.

Priderage may not be aware of the subconscious messages they communicated: making a tribute to atheism is an “inevitable mistake,” openly disagreeing with theism equals mocking it, some atheists lack intelligence, being content with earthly knowledge is not humble, and publicly supporting atheism means “you’re not going to be someone anybody could be happy to talk to.” The popularity of Priderage’s response really speaks to how fragile religious structures were in 2013 as well as how uncomfortable people were towards pro-atheist comments, even among atheists.

Or does it?

ammar sabaa/Unsplash

Could it be possible that I misread their response? Totally. Remember, I created this blog with the intention of writing not from a position of authority, but as an equal to my readers. I’m just one guy.

But if that’s so, then Priderage didn’t bother to consider the possibility that Aalewis’s comment may have just been an innocent shout-out to atheism. This shows that they nonetheless assumed the worst in people. As you will see, this is a pattern that got repeated through many of the other comments. If one of these commenters considered that maybe not everyone online is a jerk, this story could have gone very differently.

This next response is an example of a greater problem with the Internet that is so ubiquitous and unaddressed that I’m surprised that I haven’t written an article about it yet.

“Wow, that is so pretentious, poorly written and self indulgent.

I can just imagine how “deep” OP probably thought that was. He probably spent at least a little bit of time crafting that “quote” into what he thought was a concise and introspective nugget of genius. Now he deletes the post running away with his tail between his legs.” — ****ty-analogy

You should keep track of whenever you see someone online complaining that someone else thinks they are so smart. Nine times out of ten, they are talking about someone who never even hinted about such a thing. It’s a cop-out people use whenever they don’t have any actual arguments, yet I don’t see people point this issue out.

This case was no different. That’s ****ty-analogy’s entire comment right there, so you can see that they didn’t actually have anything to support their claim, and it’s at 208 points.

Karim MANJRA/Unsplash

XenoRenseller posted a response that backed up the conclusions I made earlier about what Priderage’s subconscious messages meant to society. It reads, “[Aalewis] has to attack the image of god to help justify his stance; he’s definitely not comfortable.” But when your definition of “attack” is wide enough to apply to Aalewis’s comment, you’re putting huge limitations on how you expect “comfortable” atheists to behave. So, XenoRenseller was strongly opposing freedom of atheist speech.

Same with Zlatanista, who responded with “[i]f someone asked me to provide one quote that summed up r/atheism, this would be it. It literally has everything: arrogance, naivety and bizarrely misplaced egotism.” This is especially ironic because by putting down an entire subreddit, Zlatanista was displaying the same traits that they were baselessly accusing Aalewis of.

Many other users in the thread accused Aalewis of being egotistical or insulting. They include DrSexNugget, shodanx, HarlanEllisonIsGod, DefenestratorOfSouls, HeresWhyYouSuck, and attaxx. And this is just going off the comments that have enough upvotes to be visible in the archived version. None of the points they made were valid.

In the midst of all of this outrage, I’ve found a comment on a different thread, except this one has the potential to guide us to a more positive future (thank you, double-happiness, for sharing it with us) (source: It shows two copy-pasted comments, one of which appears to be an Aalewis comment that appeared in the original thread, but did not receive enough upvotes to appear in the linked archive version. This doesn’t prove that the comment is legit, but if it is (and it likely is), it confirms my suspicions about Aalewis’s intentions.

“[deleted] -232 points 1 day ago

At no point did I say I was “special”. I don’t think myself better than anyone because of my atheism. I did not insult anyone by saying I don’t feel euphoria at a phony blessing.”

Then, if this is real, not only did people make quick negative assumptions about Aalewis, but when Aalewis explained that the mob was wrong, they got downvoted. Not only does this mean Internet atheists were insecure about being open about their lack of faith, but it shows that they were not willing to learn from Aalewis when they challenged everyone else’s insecurities. If this doesn’t point to the authoritarian capabilities of groupthink, I don’t know what does.

But that was almost 10 years ago.

And also 11 months ago. (

Johnny Cohen/Unsplash

I’ve been trying to make this obvious, but in case you haven’t noticed, the purpose of this post (and all my posts on Non-Monetized Together) isn’t to unleash frustration or to create drama with others. It’s to look back at an unfortunate incident and ask, “what went wrong?” If we are more honest about our worldviews, which include religion, we can have more substantial discussions and learn from each other more easily. How do we make that our reality?

It would require theists to develop some thicker skin so they avoid mislabelling opposing ideas as attacks. It would require atheists to go into more detail about their beliefs so others can understand their positive intentions. We all must challenge ourselves to work towards a resolution when chatting with strangers online. The future of our humanity lies in these interactions.

Resilience, openness, and solutions — these are also three of the goals that Non-Monetized Together is working to achieve. I know it’s cliché, but the impact of these virtues extend far beyond yourself. By connecting with each other and believing in our goals, we can be a part of something incredibly powerful.

Something more than just an unremarkable quote from an unidentified Redditor.