There’s also the communal living, the workplace polyamory along with the prominence of the consensual non-consensual kink, the tithing of the bulk of your earnings and the extreme goals-justify-the-means moralising, the emphasis on psychedelics and prescription amphetamines, and so on and so forth.

Meaning, while calling them a cult incubator is actually really insightful and well put, I have a feeling that the closer you get to TESCREAL epicenters like the SFB the more explicitly culty things start to get.

and then posting walls of text about them not merely burying the lede but quite fully conspiring to eliminate the evidence and all witnesses in the same go, as a starting condition

The particular way they invoke Bayes’ theorem is fascinating. They don’t seem to ever actually use it in any sort of rigorous way, it’s merely used as a way to codify their own biases. It’s an alibi for putting a precise percentage point on your vibes. It’s kind of beautiful in a really stupid sort of way.

RationalWiki really hits that sweetspot where everybody hates it and you know that means it’s doing something right:

From Prolewiki:

RationalWiki is an online encyclopedia created in 2007. Although it was created to debunk Conservapedia and Christian fundamentalism,[1] it is also very liberal and promotes anti-communist propaganda. It spreads imperialist lies and about socialist states including the USSR[2] and Korea[3] while uncritically promoting narratives from the CIA and U.S. State Department.

From Conservapedia:

RationalWiki.org is largely a pro-SJW atheists website.

[ . . . ]

RationalWikians have become very angry and have displayed such behavior as using profanity and angrily typing in all cap letters when their ideas are questioned by others and/or concern trolls (see: Atheism and intolerance and Atheism and anger and Atheism and dogmatism and Atheism and profanity).[33]

From WikiSpooks (with RationalWiki’s invitation for anyone to collaborate highlighted with an emotionally vulnerable red box for emphasis):

Although inviting readers to “register and engage in constructive dialogue”, RationalWiki appears not to welcome essays critical of RationalWiki[3] or of certain official narratives. For example, it is dismissive of the Journal of 9/11 Studies, terming it, as of 2017, it a “peer- crank-reviewed, online, open source pseudojournal”.[4]

And a little bonus:

“Can I have Google discount my rationalwiki entry, has errors posted out of spite 10 years ago”

https://support.google.com/websearch/thread/106033064/can-i-have-google-discount-my-rationalwiki-entry-has-errors-posted-out-of-spite-10-years-ago?hl=en

My site questions Darwinism but that’s become quite mainstream. But my rationalwiki page has over 20 references to me being a creationist, and is tagged “pseudoscience.” Untrue

Happend quite a few times with the “skeptic” yt people in the yt’er to alt right funnel/pipeline from a decade ago. (A few of these people have really lost the plot now

I would love a separate thread on this, more generally a “late 2000s/early 2010s skeptic ytbuers, where are they now”?. The only example (sorta*) I have is thunderf00t, whose yt career track is: anti-christianity, anti-anita sarkeesian, and now anti musk.

*he is not alt right, at least by any mainstream definition of alt-right, afaict.