I have read all the exchanges you guys have had with kevdude.
I know you feel also frustrated because of srayzie's departure and that this whole thing has a bad taste in your mouths because you feel there wasn't any justice to your eyes being served.
You know where I stand on what regards to the harassment suffered by both srayzie and shizy. And I do back up my words with facts. But you also kinow that Voat's essence can't be compromised for convenience here.
The trolls will always appear. Shills will always appear. You know that censoring them or trying to censor them will not be your best tool against them. But showing that they are mistaken in their actions and opinions by being bigger than them in your actions.
Neither kevdude nor I attacked srayzie. We didn't kick her when she was down. I know from my part that I pleaded with her in pms to set the record straight regarding the ban that Trigglypuff suffered. Why? Because I knew in my heart that what she did wasn't doxxing. And even she stated the following:
I didn’t ask Putt to ban her. I pinged him and Cynabuns publicly. Whatever decisions they made was up to them. They didn’t ask me what I wanted, I have no say in this.
So let's first start by saying things how they are - doxxing implied that someone went out of their way to get information, personal data on a certain user data and published it in detriment of that user's and/or her close ones safety. However you can't consider doxxing when images that are on public domain and that were accessible through her personal social media, that she herself linked to voat, apparently in more than one occasion (I say more because I only know of one 6 months ago to which I have proof of it and I showed in private messages to PeaceSeeker, Puttitout, Crensch, MadWorld, kevdude, Cynabuns and herself).
At least 2 of those pictures posted on the subverse made against her were available at the time of the post she did 6 months ago because I saw them. Now you may want to put my word in doubt there, but you know that I tend to back it up. I found the proof then in that case that gives reasonable doubt for Trigglypuff to not have made any doxxing.
Even @Cynabuns agreed with me at the beginning when I said to him that if a ban should be in place for Trigglypuff for postings images that were of public domain doxxing then a ban should also be considered for @antiliberalsociety for all the posts that he has made against TexasVet for the same reason. His reply to that was and i quote:
IIRC TexasVet linked himself here on Voat and antiliberalsociety (and others??) just kept repeating whereas I don't believe that sraysie linked herself. To me this seems like a big difference.
But she did and I offered the proof of this. Had srayzie not linked her personal social media, not even once, then it would have been a different matter. But in this case it was exactly the same situation.
Once again, I know that this seems awful to you both but we have to be objective here. We can't compromise Voat's standard for Free Speech just because we like the user that is being attacked here. We can't do that because then that will create a conflict of interest that can easily bring down what we all have built. I won't support that ever and I will stand always to defend Voat from such thing.
I do agree with kevdude stating that the trolls and shills get the power that one give them. But I also agree with you both that something needs to be done in what regards to deal with future harasment and stalking. But it has to follow a due process. We are better than the mainstream media. Though we seek transparency, we know that certain denunciations must be kept in private and handled through a consensus of users whose objectivity is not compromised to insure a fair and just result.
This is why we need to make a difference here between the two situations:
harassment/stalking situations and doxxing situations need to be dealt with in a private way with archived evidence that allows an exhaustive analysis from a chosen group of users whose objectivity will not be compromised. Those terms need to be properly defined within the boundaries of their legal definition. The reason why this needs to be dealt in private is because it concerns the safety of all parties implicated, both accused and accusers.
Denunciations of power moding must be dealt with publicly with clear evidence of the matter because after all they are exerting their power to other users without justification whatsoever. So I do agree on the defense that kevdude is doing here because right now the one breaking Voat*s global rules is @Crensch.
Obviously all this is too superficial but I know is a start for what you guys want for we want the same thing. We want a fair and just process that insures the protection of Voat's essence and integrity as much as it's users.
Shizy you said that you now want to focus on the "enablers". If kevdude is an enabler, then you can consider me one too. And you know that is not the case. Right now what you are doing is letting your anger take control of your actions much as Crensch is doing. I know you both are better than that but I also know where you are coming from with all this anger and frustration.
Vindicator you brought up the use of alts to brigade as part of breaking Voat's global rules. What if I tell you that evidence was brought forward by Rotteuxx of both srayzie and shizy using their alts to gang up on him? Wouldn't that also be considered breaking the rules? The evidence was brought publicly and that is more than enough to show that their actions and objectivity were compromised.
I don't look to justify what zyklon_b and his fellows did. I am pissed at the faggot myself but I will not apply guilty by association to anyone. For everyone had their own personal reasons why they acted how they acted. But right now we need to heal and we need to restore Voat's name.
I give you all my word that I will always back you up when it is deserved as I would do with any user that had a just cause to fight for. Many can be witness of such words. I don't put them out there lightly and through all this I did give my support to both srayzie and shizy and also called them out for their use of alts.
One can't use the tools of the enemy to fight against it. We need to be better. We need to give the extra mile as the Word of God states. We can't expect our enemies to behave like us but we must certainly not behave like them either. This is a teaching that our Lord Jesus Christ gave to his apostles. And it is one that we ought to remember now.
I am asking, pleading, begging you - let's stop this nonsense and let's start the healing process and work together to strengthen Voat and be the envy of the sites that look to destroy us. Let's be true to ourselves.
view the rest of the comments →
sguevar ago
@Vindicator, @Shizy
I have read all the exchanges you guys have had with kevdude.
I know you feel also frustrated because of srayzie's departure and that this whole thing has a bad taste in your mouths because you feel there wasn't any justice to your eyes being served.
You know where I stand on what regards to the harassment suffered by both srayzie and shizy. And I do back up my words with facts. But you also kinow that Voat's essence can't be compromised for convenience here.
The trolls will always appear. Shills will always appear. You know that censoring them or trying to censor them will not be your best tool against them. But showing that they are mistaken in their actions and opinions by being bigger than them in your actions.
Neither kevdude nor I attacked srayzie. We didn't kick her when she was down. I know from my part that I pleaded with her in pms to set the record straight regarding the ban that Trigglypuff suffered. Why? Because I knew in my heart that what she did wasn't doxxing. And even she stated the following:
So let's first start by saying things how they are - doxxing implied that someone went out of their way to get information, personal data on a certain user data and published it in detriment of that user's and/or her close ones safety. However you can't consider doxxing when images that are on public domain and that were accessible through her personal social media, that she herself linked to voat, apparently in more than one occasion (I say more because I only know of one 6 months ago to which I have proof of it and I showed in private messages to PeaceSeeker, Puttitout, Crensch, MadWorld, kevdude, Cynabuns and herself).
At least 2 of those pictures posted on the subverse made against her were available at the time of the post she did 6 months ago because I saw them. Now you may want to put my word in doubt there, but you know that I tend to back it up. I found the proof then in that case that gives reasonable doubt for Trigglypuff to not have made any doxxing.
Even @Cynabuns agreed with me at the beginning when I said to him that if a ban should be in place for Trigglypuff for postings images that were of public domain doxxing then a ban should also be considered for @antiliberalsociety for all the posts that he has made against TexasVet for the same reason. His reply to that was and i quote:
But she did and I offered the proof of this. Had srayzie not linked her personal social media, not even once, then it would have been a different matter. But in this case it was exactly the same situation.
Once again, I know that this seems awful to you both but we have to be objective here. We can't compromise Voat's standard for Free Speech just because we like the user that is being attacked here. We can't do that because then that will create a conflict of interest that can easily bring down what we all have built. I won't support that ever and I will stand always to defend Voat from such thing.
I do agree with kevdude stating that the trolls and shills get the power that one give them. But I also agree with you both that something needs to be done in what regards to deal with future harasment and stalking. But it has to follow a due process. We are better than the mainstream media. Though we seek transparency, we know that certain denunciations must be kept in private and handled through a consensus of users whose objectivity is not compromised to insure a fair and just result.
This is why we need to make a difference here between the two situations:
harassment/stalking situations and doxxing situations need to be dealt with in a private way with archived evidence that allows an exhaustive analysis from a chosen group of users whose objectivity will not be compromised. Those terms need to be properly defined within the boundaries of their legal definition. The reason why this needs to be dealt in private is because it concerns the safety of all parties implicated, both accused and accusers.
Denunciations of power moding must be dealt with publicly with clear evidence of the matter because after all they are exerting their power to other users without justification whatsoever. So I do agree on the defense that kevdude is doing here because right now the one breaking Voat*s global rules is @Crensch.
Obviously all this is too superficial but I know is a start for what you guys want for we want the same thing. We want a fair and just process that insures the protection of Voat's essence and integrity as much as it's users.
Shizy you said that you now want to focus on the "enablers". If kevdude is an enabler, then you can consider me one too. And you know that is not the case. Right now what you are doing is letting your anger take control of your actions much as Crensch is doing. I know you both are better than that but I also know where you are coming from with all this anger and frustration.
Vindicator you brought up the use of alts to brigade as part of breaking Voat's global rules. What if I tell you that evidence was brought forward by Rotteuxx of both srayzie and shizy using their alts to gang up on him? Wouldn't that also be considered breaking the rules? The evidence was brought publicly and that is more than enough to show that their actions and objectivity were compromised.
I don't look to justify what zyklon_b and his fellows did. I am pissed at the faggot myself but I will not apply guilty by association to anyone. For everyone had their own personal reasons why they acted how they acted. But right now we need to heal and we need to restore Voat's name.
I give you all my word that I will always back you up when it is deserved as I would do with any user that had a just cause to fight for. Many can be witness of such words. I don't put them out there lightly and through all this I did give my support to both srayzie and shizy and also called them out for their use of alts.
One can't use the tools of the enemy to fight against it. We need to be better. We need to give the extra mile as the Word of God states. We can't expect our enemies to behave like us but we must certainly not behave like them either. This is a teaching that our Lord Jesus Christ gave to his apostles. And it is one that we ought to remember now.
I am asking, pleading, begging you - let's stop this nonsense and let's start the healing process and work together to strengthen Voat and be the envy of the sites that look to destroy us. Let's be true to ourselves.