So it's not reasonable to think that comments made by mods or endorsed contributors might reflect a truer understanding of TRP? If mods/contributors make a post on TRP that is highly upvoted, it is representative of the community. If not, that view is not supported by the community. Many red pillers have vehemently disagreed with you there. They say that they are noobs who don't really understand it and we should only listen to the mods and endorsed contributors.
By definition, a post that is upvoted by the community is supported by the community. I'm not sure how more straightforward I can be. Sure you can say ModeratorX is often looked up to and 99% of his posts are supported. But why use "the identity of a certain poster" as a measure of how well supported a comment is and not a far more better measure that's readily available? And that measure is upvotes. Of course leaders in every community will say things that aren't supported by the rest.
I do not know how much more clear I can be on this topic.
Also, your counterargument isn't 100% logical.
"RPers say that [noobs] don't really understand" True
"They say that they are noobs who don't really understand it and we should only listen to the mods and endorsed contributors." They probably say should listen more to endoresed contributors but let's go along with this
But with this, you are trying to claim that everything a moderator says is what RP thinks. Now here, it does not logically follow that 100% of what moderators/contributors say is what is supported by the community. Just because RP says to listen to only mods, does not mean everything those mods say is golden. IE: Yes you should mainly listen to them, but no RPers aren't saying they are infaliable. And here the natural question to ask is "well, what statements by the mods are supported by the RP community?" I would answer: "well if only there was a voting system in place that showed how much the community agrees with a statement. Oh wait. Back to upvotes"
I addressed this in my post. Did you see it? If you've been on PPD for a while, you will know that in order for a post to get -60 downvotes, it has to be a post that both sides disagree with to the point where even members on the poster's side are downvoting or not voting on. I mean the highest voted comment/post rarely even breaks 30.
I saw your comment but disagree, especially since the post was initially quite highly upvoted. It seems more likely that blue pillers downvoted it and then linking it had a bit of a brigading effect by drawing attention to it. I think it was also mentioned in SRD.
Here we can argue whether or not this huge negative was due to: 1) RPers abstaining from voting (ie: not agreeing) 2) RPers downvoting (ie: not agreeing strongly 3) brigading
I think it would likely be a combination of the above. But even giving you the benefit of the doubt, why, again, does BP rely on these comments to form their opinion on RP? You cannot clearly say that this statement is supported by the greater TRP group, so why use it as an affirmation of that said group?
Someone new to TRP who doesn't apply TRP principles obviously doesn't represent TRP. How is TRP responsible in any way if they're not even applying TRP principles? It's like if someone joined Christianity and then killed someone who was Jewish, because he thought that's was what Christianity preached. It's not Christianity's fault that this idiot thought Christianity was about killing people of other faiths.
They are responsible for a couple of reasons: 1) I see no evidence that they aren't applying the tenets correctly, 2) TRP has a responsibility to curb bad behavior and misunderstanding given how horribly wrong someone could "misinterpret" their views but their general position is to let them "vent". 3) they are still being upvoted, allowed to participate in the community, aren't corrected, and are explicitly told by mods and endorsed contributors that they are doing the right thing. So if a Christianity sub had an upvoted (even if only slightly) new member who talked about killing people of other faiths, and this behavior was implicitly (by not banning, correcting, etc) and explicitly (by respected members) endorsed by the sub, then absolutely I would blame the beliefs of that community.
1) If you read the TRP principles, you would see that they aren't applying the tenets properly. Usually a quick look at the comments will tell you that: there usually are people telling him, no that's not what RP is.
2) & 3) Lol dude this is Reddit, and more broadly, the internet. You can't make any online organization responsible for the micro-actions of their community members, especially if they joined a week ago.
But let's go on with your demand. Are RPers told off when they do the wrong thing? Often, yes. In the posts I listed (from TRP) the comments which corrected the OP had a higher number of upvotes than even the post itself. So, yes the TRP does moderate the users to some extent.
Furthermore, TRP can't retroactively correct an action from the user who wrongly applied a principle from TRP. What do I mean? Look at the post linked above concerning the shithead user who was discussing forcing the girl to have sex. TRP never tells its users to force a woman to have sex, but he believed that TRP did (the top comment called him out on it btw). There is no way TRP could go back in time and make him change his actions. Yet, on TBP this post was linked as how TRP actively supports rape. Despite TRP not agreeing with his actions, you are asking TRP to do the impossible: To go back in time and explain to the user that he had improperly understood TRP.
TL;DR, While I would say that TRP has many negative attributes including pseudoscience and misognistic views, it is intellectually wrong to purposefully mischaracterize a group based on strawmen. I could (legitimately) disagree with some key aspects throughout people who follow Islam, such as their opposition to freedom of speech (in portraying their holy figure). However, if I used the example of suicide bombers to characterize all of Islam, that would be intellectually dishonest.
All I am saying is: it is okay to critique TRP, but it is wrong to misconstrue these posts that are not representative of the community, as core tenets common to all of TRP.
TBP should definitely use examples, but examples that are clearly supported by the TRP community as a whole.