Hi guys!
I was having a discussion with resident shill @kevdude in PMs about free speech on Voat and thought it was worth asking all of you to join. So here goes!
It's 2015: SJW time
Some of you might remember when Voat was in alpha, back in 2015. The SJWs moved in as Ellen Gong Phat Pao was doing the dirty work on Reddit and people were migrating over here. As you know, SJWs always follow to censor the free exchange of ideas. A little cunt in particular by the name of 'she' was quickly raking in mod positions. AskVoat - the most active verse at the time - was being censored left and right.
SJWs are like parasites: if you have something valuable, they'll try to suck the blood out of it
At the time, the culture here was still mirroring Reddit. At the same time, Voat was set to be the next big thing. We made PV to run the SJWs out of town by making sure they wouldn't have a quiet moment until free speech was guaranteed here. We won a lot of short-term battles then, and the likes of 'she' are nowhere to be found as verse owners.
I stopped believing in higher ideals. I think you have to fight fire with fire napalm
What ultimately made me leave PV was a strong disagreement between myself and another moderator on one side and @kevdude and @crensch on the other. I've later understood I'd run into the same problem over and over again:
I don't believe in free speech unless the playing field is level. I now believe you have to fight the SJWs (and other parasites who want to control other people's lives) by beating them with their own weapons first. Then, when everyone sees the value of free exchange of ideas, you can have that.
Voat is not a level playing field. And it's losing, big time
The current rules of the site (still) allow for shills and brigaders to push agendas into common spaces. Meanwhile, it seems what was ultimately a free speech place made itself irrelevant by allowing drama to take over where the SJWs left off. Voat is much less relevant today than it was in 2015.
If ProtectVoat is really here to protect Voat, we should set a new direction
We started this discussion before the recent blackout. It highlighted its necessity, though. If there is to be a Voat that does something other than provide a place to yell kikeniggerfaggot in (with no clout beyond our own reach whatsoever), I think it's time for major change. As of 2018, I would personally think a place like PV should support and fight for something else. Because the game is rigged anyway.
- I don't believe whatever drama group (including this one) should set the rules for niche subverses.
- I believe verse owners should have the right to moderate as they see fit, as long as there's at least five-ten non-moderated general interest verses.
- I believe Protect Voat should actively fight to have a full-time admin overseeing that the site isn't manipulated.
- I believe Nazis and SJWs are two sides of the same coin (people who want to control others' lives) and should be treated alike
- I think Voat could do so much more to advance universal ideas of freedom - at all levels from universities to global institutions - if verses were allowed to run with frameworks set by verse owners.
view the rest of the comments →
Crensch ago
I pretty much 100% agree here. Even with the Court of Voat opinion, upvote brigades with alts renders any user-based decision toothless.
heygeorge ago
Hear me out for a moment if you will:
Remember how Putt has been working on a voting algorithm? Remember how he said we need it, yet users have been bitching that they've never asked for it?
Consider:
The Voat-voting algorithm (and its 'anti-manipulation' code) is designed to fight Voat's alt problem without users having to publicly acknowledge it.
Crensch ago
Considered that. Not sure how it'd help with anything beyond determining who mods what subverse, but then again, I never figured out much about it on the preview site.
heygeorge ago
Beyond mods, the 'outcomes' could be all sorts of things; whatever Putt/the users envision. Such as: Ban/unban a domain (globally) ban/unban a user (globally)...
I wonder if there could be an 'anti-sockpuppets' setting for subverses to use to keep alts from stifling discussion.
Crensch ago
Maybe disallowing votes from low-effort accounts?
heygeorge ago
What do you mean by this? Care to clarify? There are different rule sets available on choosing who can vote based on their activity in a sub.
See the alt bastards who also replied (specifically to this comment and note how many upvotes are on the profiles.
Crensch ago
Some of what I saw required certain CCP/SCP in the subverse in question in order to vote - maybe a vote to stop low ccp/scp accounts from voting on stuff in that subverse would be possible?
heygeorge ago
Yes, that is possible. And the level can be set as well.
Kevdoge ago
His code breaks on tor and vpn alts. Its not detectable by the system and alts will just lay their 20 votes on any system sub vote because that's where they farmed their shit homie. It's like people avoid that obvious thing over and over. Why do you avoid that over and over?
heygeorge ago
Have you seen the code? How do you know this? You do not. If the code is that simplistic, why would it be taking so long to develop and test?
Crunsch ago
I don't need to know the code to see that when I used tor to manip the votes on preview in a small way he never noticed. All of my votes were marked valid. Unless he has some CIA level shit downloaded to our PC's he isn't stopping any alt manipulation by tor or vpn.
heygeorge ago
You mean to say Putts is not stopping your vote manipulation. Why would you purposefully tank the site?
Crunsch ago
Because he asked everyone to try to tank his preview site and voting system? That's what the site was for you ninny.
heygeorge ago
I am referring to the main site. But please, deflect while hiding behind alts! Works every time...
Both of the profiles you replied to me with have a remarkably large number of upvotes for the very short time they have been in existence.
Mickgoestojail ago
These are trolls, George. Look at the names. If what they say is true and they are saying it loud then perhaps they reported it on the preview site? ~~~
@Kevdoge @Crunsch? Did you report it?
Crunsch ago
I would like to state for the record that GayHeorge is a soggy biscuit type of guy.
Kevdoge ago
Of course we did. No one knows what HeyGeorge shits out because the voting system was never on the main site. He takes too many drugs.
heygeorge ago
No shit they are 'troll accounts' (though obviously a single troll). :D
I have not seen a report like the trolls are suggesting, although I may have missed it. All bug reports were supposed to go on the main site.
Mickgoestojail ago
It's all up in the air really.