Facebook

SATAN! SATAN! SATAN!, or the Brief, Terrible Existence of ReaganBook

|

edalisse

Janet Porter, president of the "pro-life, pro-family" advocacy group Faith2Action, launched a social media site "for patriots" on Tuesday. It is was called ReaganBook. It's down as of yesterday, and hopefully it won't be back.

The Gipper's red, white, blue, and cowboy-hat wearing mug adorns the now-inactive front page, which has a notice promising to rid the site "obscenity, pornography, and those intent on the destruction of life, liberty, and the family."

Wait, what's this about porn?

Yes, it seems like it was launched with little consideration of … anything. It ran slowly and messaging was near-impossible. Significantly, for a site that wanted to be a sanction for conservatives, no effort was made to keep out the riffraff. Users adopted names like "Zombie Reagan," "Ayn Randy," "SATAN! SATAN! SATAN!," and "Dick Cheney." Fan pages emerged for "Cut Dicks for Christ" as did events like "Iran-Contra Block Party and Weapons Trade-Off." The Verge's Colin Lecher, who was poked by Satan, documented the chaos:

Someone with a Captain America avatar invites people to talk about guns; Margaret Thatcher leaves more than 700 comments on an innocuous status. There is an eagle crying, several photos of Jesus. … A photo of a monkey in a bubble bath is posted, and no one seems sure what side this person is on. Everyone is confused and angry with everyone else.

Screencap

He notes perhaps the biggest oversight, that unlike "Facebook — where you're limited to seeing the status of your friends — ReaganBook allows you to see every status update worldwide in a single homepage stream."

The fragmentation of media is a good thing, but this was a foolhardy endeavor. Half-baked, it really has nothing to offer that conservative Facebook fan pages and Twitter accounts don't already offer. And, anyway, serious political dialogue (insofar as that exists on the Internet) seems better suited to easily-moderated forums (i.e. Reddit) than social media sites (when was the last time a Facebook political debate on your wall didn't turn into a shitshow?).

Porter issued a frantic statement, "MY SINCERE APOLOGIES FOR THE VILE CONTENT. THIS WILL BE REMEDIED IN A MATTER OF MINUTES," but has since calmed and requests that ReaganBook users "please be patient" while she makes changes to the site. I'd say that for the sake of her own sanity, she just abandon the experiment. But that doesn't seem likely. One of her last posts before anaesthetizing the beast was that "the fact that so many leftists have invested so much time in the site, it provides confirmation that we're on the right track."

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

48 responses to “SATAN! SATAN! SATAN!, or the Brief, Terrible Existence of ReaganBook

  1. …”the fact that so many leftists have invested so much time in the site, it provides confirmation that we’re on the right track.”

    Um, no my lovely socon Warrior, it means that your site is so absurd, it immediately attracted all the Marys across the

    1. Actually, I think it may have just attracted all of the H&R commenters.

    2. Um, no my lovely socon Warrior, it means that your site is so absurd, it immediately attracted all the Marys across the…world?

      We fight them there so we won’t have to fight them here!

  2. …”the fact that so many leftists have invested so much time in the site, it provides confirmation that we’re on the right track.”

    Um, no my lovely socon Warrior, it means that your site is so absurd, it immediately attracted all the Marys across the

    1. across the universe.

      Fuck, I need a beer.

      1. Hmm, at first I thought you had been snatched by some crazy who was polite enough to hit ‘submit’ before he dragged your body away.

  3. It’s down as of yesterday, and hopefully it won’t be back.

    err why even give a shit?

    Matt, Nick, these millennial you hired sure aren’t very tolerant.

    1. Why wouldn’t you want it back? It sounds like a great source of hilarity.

    2. better suited to easily-moderated forums (i.e. Reddit)

      They are also kind of dumb.

      1. They are also kind of dumb.

        Um, why? Reddit is quite easy to moderate. Some communities choose to be really heavy about it, some really light, some in-between.

        1. Reddit consistently cuts links to Reason.com and its founders/owner is a renown anti-libertarian.

          1. Which has nothing to do with how easy Reddit’s format is to moderate.

            1. But does kind of undermine the point about Reddit being a good forum for political discussion.

              1. Not really. Reddit has thousands of sub-forums, each with different moderation staff.

                1. So anti-libertarian overlords with balkanized boards each with their own army of fanatical censors frothing at the mouth to keep differing opinions away…

                  Sounds like a blast.

                  On the off chance you would not happen to be a moderation staff member of one these sub-forums would you?

                  1. Sounds like a blast.

                    No one’s trying to convince you to participate. We’re just pointing out that you’re wrong.

                    On the off chance you would not happen to be a moderation staff member of one these sub-forums would you?

                    No. I’m capable of correcting people on matters in which I have no stake.

    3. Because she is pro-life and pro-family. Evidently the two worst things you can be.

    4. Yeah, pretty much this. It’s also kind of telling that a tiny little circle-jerk site like this gets raided immediately. You don’t see even the most wacky religious right types shitposting on, say, Democratic Underground or Kos all day. If you don’t share the values and outlook of the type of people who want to register a ReaganBook account, the easiest thing to do is not go there. The opposite of love isn’t hate, it’s indifference.

      1. This reflects a very basic difference in left- and right-wing notions of politeness, which may have something to do with how the left keep winning.

        The difference is: if lefties set up a forum just for themselves (like the Daily Kos), righties take the hint and stay away. We respect others’ property as we would have them respect our own.

        But if righties set one up for themselves, well, this story happens.

        I hope the Reagan site manages to purge their site of these vandals and keep it purged. Because if their forums can’t be kept safe, none of ours can be safe either.

  4. It ran slowly and messaging was near-impossible. Significantly, for a site that wanted to be a sanction for conservatives, no effort was made to keep out the riffraff. Users adopted names like “Zombie Reagan,” “Ayn Randy,” “SATAN! SATAN! SATAN!,” and “Dick Cheney.” Fan pages emerged for “Cut Dicks for Christ” as did events like “Iran-Contra Block Party and Weapons Trade-Off.”

    That actually sounds kind of awesome.

    1. Sounds like a cross between posting during the Independents and HampersandR prior to registration.

      1. I wonder if the “War on Canada” thread from 2003ish is still going?

        Also were you around when a hack was found that allowed images to be posted into comments?

        1. Best comment thread ever:

          https://reason.com/blog/2002/11…..da#comment

          though i think some comments may have been lost over the years.

          469 comments seems kind of lite.

          1. Hah! I’d just dug this up, but I wasn’t sure.

            sage|10.27.10 @ 5:32PM|#

            DRINK!

            Some things appear not to’ve changed much.

          2. It would appear that brevity was not a commenter priority back then.

          3. Wow. I did not realize the level of international hatred that existed between the US and CA bat in the old days of 2003.

            So, who was the Nelson Madellaish hero who stepped up and healed the rift, turning H&R into the lovefest that it is today?

          4. Holy shit.

            I’d hate to read my first comments. They were typical “I just became a libertarian and now I’m going to ask some really stupid and embarrassing questions.” I got what I deserved.

        2. I wish the H&R search thingy allowed you to search comments. I’m curious to find out what my first comment here was.

          1. You can do a site search on Google:
            site:reason.com etc etc

            1. The oldest I can find on google is one from July 2004, but Google’s historical results start getting wonky before 2005, so I don’t know if that’s actually the oldest, or just the oldest one in the index.

          2. Who knows whether it’s your first post, but if this is any indication…

            1. This site used to be ideological and independent. Now it’s pretty much garden variety Republican partisanship masquerading as independence. A way for hipsters to pretend they’re not the Rush Limbaugh/Sean Hannity crowd while behaving exactly like them.

              HA!

  5. for a site that wanted to be a sanction for conservatives

    Huh?

    1. I think he meant “sanctuary”

  6. This is hilarious. Juvenile, but hilarious.

  7. As Reagan taught us

    This has to be a fake. Even the dumbest Socons don’t worship Reagan. Right? …Right?

    1. Well, how many other Socon heroes have their own statues in Budapest?

      http://www.panoramio.com/photo/56266251

      It’s kind of weird.

      1. Damn, I was just in Budapest two weeks ago. I wish I would have known about this.

  8. In the screen shot of the site I am pretty sure that is a picture of a vagina in the friends list.

    So Reason just posted a picture of a Vagina in its blog.

    That happened.

    ….

    ..

    This has to be a rule maker for the Reason drinking game.

    so Drink.

    1. What do you have against vagina?

      WAR ON WIMMINZ!!!

    2. Sure looks like a snatch.

    3. Yup. Vagina. I’ve dealt with these things before.

  9. But did they do comment threading?

    1. Did they have an edit button?

  10. There is an eagle crying, several photos of Jesus. ? A photo of a monkey in a bubble bath is posted, and no one seems sure what side this person is on.

    At this point, I actually laughed out loud.

  11. Folks on the very distant fringe are offered up as representative samples of conservatism. I see Reason has taken a page from the progressive playbook. Next up, shock (Shock!) that there might be conservatives in flyover country.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.