• Actual conspiracies exist.

• We ferret them out.

• No bullshit.

How do we define an actual conspiracy?

A plan developed in secret between two or more people that is either unlawful or harmful that has been discovered and investigated by a reliable third party organisation.

They can be criminal, military, business, political or simply immoral.

Make your submissions interesting.

Here's our philosophy in a nutshell.

All conspiracies can be investigated with the scientific method.

Link post template:

• [YEAR OF CONSPIRACY] NEWS ORGANIZATION reports on CONSPIRACY SUMMARY

• Submitters have to have both read and summarized in their own words or with quotes all the key aspects of the conspiracy in the title. No headline copying or vague submissions.

• Link posts can only contain references to established third party news organizations which include liberal amounts of third party evidence that can be publicly corroborated.

• Any banned media sources will be killed.

If the actual conspiracy is from a while back, prepend the year, e.g. [1984], to your submission.

No fringe, unsupported and highly speculative conspiracy theorist sources will be allowed here.

Why is the organization so important?

It's because readers must clearly know who is reporting on something, because that is just as important as what they are reporting. We don't have infinite time, so use reputable sources.

Text post template:

• Hypothesis: What's the conspiracy? Be specific.

• Players/Incentives: List all relevant players with their incentives. Be specific.

• Estimated likelihood: X% chance of reality matching hypothesis.

• Third party evidence/Arguments: References supporting the hypothesis. Be specific.

Then the community verifies what you think using extreme scepticism + empiricism + science. This is a bastardized version of peer review.

The default position is that the "conspiracy does not exist".

After tearing your references to shreds, if the hypothesis still stands to probabilistic reason, the conspiracy is upgraded to "plausible".

Unless third party evidence (court documents, investigative pieces by reliable news organizations, etc.) arrives to explicitly support the theory it will remain "plausible", after which it can be listed as "confirmed".

Theories that are debunked will only periodically be allowed back in the sub.

DISALLOWED COMMENTS

The following comments are unconducive to proper discussion and will be removed. Repeat offenders will be banned.

• /r/conspiracy style cynicism, up to and including claims that the mainstream media is burying the story in question. Don't go there.

• Racism, sexism, homophobia, and the like. We do not tolerate these comments in the least. Expect them to be removed and you to be mocked and banned with extreme prejudice.

• Non-factual accusations of being paid to comment (the shill gambit).

These are our favourite razors:

Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity

• Hanlon's razor

When faced with competing hypotheses, select the one that makes the fewest assumptions.

• Occam's razor

What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

• Hitchens's razor

Here are some of our best submissions:

The Conspiratorial-Industrial Complex: Many organizations throughout the world today attempt to attain power by attracting and exploiting gullible people through the invention of false conspiracies, whilst they themselves conspire to fleece their adherents

...

[META] ICIJ teaches us how they investigated transnational multi-company illegal human tissue trading networks using over 1 million documents and thousands of cross connections based on hard data and verifiable documentation: This is the golden standard on how to investigate an actual conspiracy

...

Why we hate conspiracy theorists

Related Subreddits

• /r/skeptic
• /r/panichistory
• /r/Nazihunting
• /r/privacy
• /r/security
• /r/blackhat
• /r/Intelligence
• /r/Wikileaks
• /r/enoughlibertarianspam
• /r/isrconspiracyracist
• /r/WooWoo