You are deleting legitimate posts from goats because you want to shape a shared part of the voat community into your own personal hug-box.
What you are doing on v/Chicago can in no way be compared to how v/niggers functions. Even black people are allowed, and encouraged, to post on v/niggers. The last time a black person posted on v/niggers, he got 68 upvoats and over 100 mostly supportive comments -- https://voat.co/v/Niggers/1258204
The only valid reason to delete a post or comment is spam or harassment, and to a lesser degree, derailing the discussion -- a legit crime story in v/Chicago is not spam, not harassment and not derailing the discussion. Your heavy-handed, clumsy modding is the only thing that is stopping the discussion on v/Chicago; you remove other user's posts and then you made the situation even worse by banning the whole community from v/Chicago, and then disabling downvoats.
So when I make a rule at /v/niggers that you don't like, are you going to encourage ProtectVoat to brigade /v/niggers? Are you going to try to dox me like you're doing to CJJ above?
CJJ is on point about this. He decided to add a rule to make his sub better (as he believes). Instead of respecting his decision you're posting here to start up a vigilante party to attack him. I have implemented a strict set of rules because I feel it is what is best for my sub and voat. He is doing the same thing.
Maybe you are offering a false or flawed comparison:
v/niggers can't be compared to v/Chicago because by default v/niggers is aimed specifically at hating blacks; the very name of the subverse is a pejorative specifically intended for the denigration of blacks, and the obvious intent of the v/niggers subverse requires clear and consistent mod rules to keep the subverse on track. On the other hand, v/Chicago is a broad, recognizable, name-brand for a subverse representing a major city -- it is not called v/GoodChicagoNews or v/UpliftingChicagoAnecdotes -- and goats who want to post about Chicago should not be censored.
Furthermore, the v/Chicago mod is not an active voater. He drops into voat once per month to maintain control over v/Chicago; he is squatting on it in case voat really takes off, in which case, he can bring his reddit cancer over here.
What he did today was he came into v/Chicago, announced that the subverse was now a good news-only safe-space, then methodically deleted weeks and months of upvoated posts and community discussion because things that were being legitimately discussed last week, last month, now clashed with his ideology. In comparison, it would be like if you, as the top mod of v/niggers, decided tomorrow that vniggers would only allow good news about upstanding black people, and then deleted every post in the subverse and destroyed all the existing discussions.
view the rest of the comments →
CANCEL-CAT-FACTS ago
You are deleting legitimate posts from goats because you want to shape a shared part of the voat community into your own personal hug-box.
What you are doing on v/Chicago can in no way be compared to how v/niggers functions. Even black people are allowed, and encouraged, to post on v/niggers. The last time a black person posted on v/niggers, he got 68 upvoats and over 100 mostly supportive comments -- https://voat.co/v/Niggers/1258204
The only valid reason to delete a post or comment is spam or harassment, and to a lesser degree, derailing the discussion -- a legit crime story in v/Chicago is not spam, not harassment and not derailing the discussion. Your heavy-handed, clumsy modding is the only thing that is stopping the discussion on v/Chicago; you remove other user's posts and then you made the situation even worse by banning the whole community from v/Chicago, and then disabling downvoats.
Thanks.
WhiteSoIMustBeRacist ago
So when I make a rule at /v/niggers that you don't like, are you going to encourage ProtectVoat to brigade /v/niggers? Are you going to try to dox me like you're doing to CJJ above?
CJJ is on point about this. He decided to add a rule to make his sub better (as he believes). Instead of respecting his decision you're posting here to start up a vigilante party to attack him. I have implemented a strict set of rules because I feel it is what is best for my sub and voat. He is doing the same thing.
CANCEL-CAT-FACTS ago
Maybe you are offering a false or flawed comparison:
v/niggers can't be compared to v/Chicago because by default v/niggers is aimed specifically at hating blacks; the very name of the subverse is a pejorative specifically intended for the denigration of blacks, and the obvious intent of the v/niggers subverse requires clear and consistent mod rules to keep the subverse on track. On the other hand, v/Chicago is a broad, recognizable, name-brand for a subverse representing a major city -- it is not called v/GoodChicagoNews or v/UpliftingChicagoAnecdotes -- and goats who want to post about Chicago should not be censored.
Furthermore, the v/Chicago mod is not an active voater. He drops into voat once per month to maintain control over v/Chicago; he is squatting on it in case voat really takes off, in which case, he can bring his reddit cancer over here.
What he did today was he came into v/Chicago, announced that the subverse was now a good news-only safe-space, then methodically deleted weeks and months of upvoated posts and community discussion because things that were being legitimately discussed last week, last month, now clashed with his ideology. In comparison, it would be like if you, as the top mod of v/niggers, decided tomorrow that vniggers would only allow good news about upstanding black people, and then deleted every post in the subverse and destroyed all the existing discussions.
Thanks.
WhiteSoIMustBeRacist ago
No, thank you.
Good bye.