You are viewing a single comment's thread.

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

What do you mean by this? Care to clarify?

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

stop low ccp/scp accounts from voting on stuff in that subverse would be possible?

Yes, that is possible. And the level can be set as well.