I see...so my pointing out the inconsistency between you claiming you can't raise Voatwide awareness about a proven shill because you "don't have the CSS for that" and you sending me CSS for that very same shill...
...is "us all" treating you like a shill.
☑️ Vindicator claim illegit because "they"
☑️ Vindicator paranoid about shills, dismiss
Is there a name for these tactics in debate? I never had the opportunity to be in that club because I had to work after school.
This is a conversation about fairness, consistency, the well-being of Voat, the real effects of nice-sounding policies, and the fact that shills are using free speech to suppress free speech because goats who claim to defend it do things that allow them to operate with impunity.
I just gave you an example. You claimed I was treating you like a shill.
This is a conversation about fairness, consistency, the well-being of Voat, the real effects of nice-sounding policies, and the fact that shills are using free speech to suppress free speech because goats who claim to defend it do things that allow them to operate with impunity.
I can only address this that you are saying. Have @kevdude or any of the ones that (and pardon the redundant wording but you brought it up) defended free speech that apparently enabled those that use free speech to censor free speech - shown any reluctant behavior to work on something that can accommodate Voat's voids to prevent that the shit show that we went through a few days back doesn't happen again?
Care to show me where any of us have ever express our happiness with the current state of affairs?
Care to show where any of us that stood by srayzie are happy with her departure that only created more problems than solutions here?
Hi sguevar. Sorry I have not replied to all the threads where this is being discussed today. I am trying to keep up with a lot of different conversations here. I understand that a lot of people counseled srayzie to ignore the attacks and show no weakness and she did not do that. I've watched this happen numerous times in the years I've been on Voat. We had several different v/pizzagate mods doxed and driven off the platform long before anyone knew who srayzie was. We had several triggered into cancerous behavior and chased out with pitchforks.
I have worked hard to always uphold Voat's ideals and protect free speech; you will not find a single instance of me unfairly banning a user or censoring comments. I have faithfully administered the subverse submission rules as best I can to prevent disinfo pushing, consensus cracking, concern trolling, forum sliding and other forms of free speech suppression. However, you will find me being accused of murdering a board member, having a doxing bounty put on my head, and being accused of hacking a user -- all as punishment for removing posts that didn't provide linked support for their claims and/or establish relevance to the abuse of kids by elite globalist pedos.
I've documented and exposed a number of serious tumors, with linked evidence of their fuckery. Nothing was done about them. The three mentioned above all still roam unencumbered on Voat; in fact two of them are shitting up this very thread.
I think this whole latest shitshow, including Putt's contribution, was one giant fucking fiasco that demonstrated that without clearly articulated rules, individual accountability for behaviors -- and the transparency necessary for it, and real consequences for shitty behavior, Voat will never really protect each user's free speech. The shitheads are simply too good at using free speech to suppress free speech.
I don't know the answer. All I know is that mods are still being targeted and broken and still dropping like flies. From where I stand, the only protection from this currently is to do what srayzie did and join a gang, and then make sure you don't say or do anything to piss them off.
Have @kevdude or any ... shown any reluctant behavior to work on something that can accommodate Voat's voids to prevent that the shit show that we went through a few days back doesn't happen again?
Yes. I made a small concrete suggestion to @Kevdude to apply a username flair to a proven malicious user -- the one thing that actually worked in v/pizzagate. Kev claimed he was being attacked.
I am aware of the previous situations you went through specially the last one of the user maliciously stating that you hacked him.
I actually backed you up there after reading all the matter.
However regarding this:
Yes. I made a small concrete suggestion to @Kevdude to apply a username flair to a proven malicious user -- the one thing that actually worked in v/pizzagate. Kev claimed he was being attacked.
He stated that for comments he is unable to put that flair. He can however tag posts and that is why he stated that when the user in question makes a post he would tag the post.
Now I am not saying that there isn't something to work at here at Voat and he has shown more than enough willingness to do so but right now what is going on on v/GA is basically showing that from the mod team there, there will be no open dialogue on the matter. Even now starting for what it appears a series of "hit pieces" on @kevdude on which the first, and I quote, appetizer was nothing more than a compendium of conjectures and accusations to attack the character of kevdude.
Firstly I don't think he needs help defending himself because I believe he is more than capable in doing so but I stated before that if I had to stand in the middle to minimize the damage to Voat i would do it. Why? Because what is going here is simply not productive.
Are you telling me here that PG didn't get the help you needed from kevdude back then? What about from the fact that he was there to temporarily set the rule set for the verse to work as it is now and you are saying with this that he will not help further to Voat in general? I mean come on, right now the GA mod team is even implying that we helped ran srayzie out because we enabled the ones that use free speech to censor free speech.
What you are saying here is an oxymoron for one simple reason, the Mod in this case for example was never trumped on being able to express herself. And the fact that the false narrative continues, because it is a false narrative, that she got doxxed by Triggly, expressed by the GA mod team is simply disingenuous to say the least because she had linked personal information to Voat herself. To which I showed proof to kevdude, Crensch. MadWorld, Puttitout, Cynabuns and srayzie herself AFTER I had pleaded with her in private to set the record straight multiple times. To which she refused to because of her personal grudge against Triggly:
The matter here is that she had created this problem for herself long before Triggly even harassed her with her post. And I want to make myself clear. I am not justifying what Triggly did, but I will not condone a ban under unjust pretences much as I dont condone the banhammer that GA is currently engaging on.
I have worked hard to always uphold Voat's ideals and protect free speech; you will not find a single instance of me unfairly banning a user or censoring comments. I have faithfully administered the subverse submission rules as best I can to prevent disinfo pushing, consensus cracking, concern trolling, forum sliding and other forms of free speech suppression. However, you will find me being accused of murdering a board member, having a doxing bounty put on my head, and being accused of hacking a user -- all as punishment for removing posts that didn't provide linked support for their claims and/or establish relevance to the abuse of kids by elite globalist pedos.
How do you feel when you see all the effort that you have done yourself with the help of @Crensch in the past being trumped by what he has engaged on now with @Shizy and @MolochHunter?
Are you happy with the current state of affairs?
Do you see this as the only solution, seriously? No dialogue? No communication and no ability to work in filling the voids Voat currently has? Are you for real here?
view the rest of the comments →
Vindicator ago
I see...so my pointing out the inconsistency between you claiming you can't raise Voatwide awareness about a proven shill because you "don't have the CSS for that" and you sending me CSS for that very same shill...
...is "us all" treating you like a shill.
☑️ Vindicator claim illegit because "they" ☑️ Vindicator paranoid about shills, dismiss
Is there a name for these tactics in debate? I never had the opportunity to be in that club because I had to work after school.
This is a conversation about fairness, consistency, the well-being of Voat, the real effects of nice-sounding policies, and the fact that shills are using free speech to suppress free speech because goats who claim to defend it do things that allow them to operate with impunity.
I just gave you an example. You claimed I was treating you like a shill.
sguevar ago
I can only address this that you are saying. Have @kevdude or any of the ones that (and pardon the redundant wording but you brought it up) defended free speech that apparently enabled those that use free speech to censor free speech - shown any reluctant behavior to work on something that can accommodate Voat's voids to prevent that the shit show that we went through a few days back doesn't happen again?
Care to show me where any of us have ever express our happiness with the current state of affairs?
Care to show where any of us that stood by srayzie are happy with her departure that only created more problems than solutions here?
Please do explain.
Vindicator ago
Hi sguevar. Sorry I have not replied to all the threads where this is being discussed today. I am trying to keep up with a lot of different conversations here. I understand that a lot of people counseled srayzie to ignore the attacks and show no weakness and she did not do that. I've watched this happen numerous times in the years I've been on Voat. We had several different v/pizzagate mods doxed and driven off the platform long before anyone knew who srayzie was. We had several triggered into cancerous behavior and chased out with pitchforks.
I have worked hard to always uphold Voat's ideals and protect free speech; you will not find a single instance of me unfairly banning a user or censoring comments. I have faithfully administered the subverse submission rules as best I can to prevent disinfo pushing, consensus cracking, concern trolling, forum sliding and other forms of free speech suppression. However, you will find me being accused of murdering a board member, having a doxing bounty put on my head, and being accused of hacking a user -- all as punishment for removing posts that didn't provide linked support for their claims and/or establish relevance to the abuse of kids by elite globalist pedos.
I've documented and exposed a number of serious tumors, with linked evidence of their fuckery. Nothing was done about them. The three mentioned above all still roam unencumbered on Voat; in fact two of them are shitting up this very thread.
I think this whole latest shitshow, including Putt's contribution, was one giant fucking fiasco that demonstrated that without clearly articulated rules, individual accountability for behaviors -- and the transparency necessary for it, and real consequences for shitty behavior, Voat will never really protect each user's free speech. The shitheads are simply too good at using free speech to suppress free speech.
I don't know the answer. All I know is that mods are still being targeted and broken and still dropping like flies. From where I stand, the only protection from this currently is to do what srayzie did and join a gang, and then make sure you don't say or do anything to piss them off.
Yes. I made a small concrete suggestion to @Kevdude to apply a username flair to a proven malicious user -- the one thing that actually worked in v/pizzagate. Kev claimed he was being attacked.
sguevar ago
I am aware of the previous situations you went through specially the last one of the user maliciously stating that you hacked him.
I actually backed you up there after reading all the matter.
However regarding this:
He stated that for comments he is unable to put that flair. He can however tag posts and that is why he stated that when the user in question makes a post he would tag the post.
Now I am not saying that there isn't something to work at here at Voat and he has shown more than enough willingness to do so but right now what is going on on v/GA is basically showing that from the mod team there, there will be no open dialogue on the matter. Even now starting for what it appears a series of "hit pieces" on @kevdude on which the first, and I quote, appetizer was nothing more than a compendium of conjectures and accusations to attack the character of kevdude.
Firstly I don't think he needs help defending himself because I believe he is more than capable in doing so but I stated before that if I had to stand in the middle to minimize the damage to Voat i would do it. Why? Because what is going here is simply not productive.
Are you telling me here that PG didn't get the help you needed from kevdude back then? What about from the fact that he was there to temporarily set the rule set for the verse to work as it is now and you are saying with this that he will not help further to Voat in general? I mean come on, right now the GA mod team is even implying that we helped ran srayzie out because we enabled the ones that use free speech to censor free speech.
What you are saying here is an oxymoron for one simple reason, the Mod in this case for example was never trumped on being able to express herself. And the fact that the false narrative continues, because it is a false narrative, that she got doxxed by Triggly, expressed by the GA mod team is simply disingenuous to say the least because she had linked personal information to Voat herself. To which I showed proof to kevdude, Crensch. MadWorld, Puttitout, Cynabuns and srayzie herself AFTER I had pleaded with her in private to set the record straight multiple times. To which she refused to because of her personal grudge against Triggly:
https://imgur.com/a/CZOF07v
The matter here is that she had created this problem for herself long before Triggly even harassed her with her post. And I want to make myself clear. I am not justifying what Triggly did, but I will not condone a ban under unjust pretences much as I dont condone the banhammer that GA is currently engaging on.
How do you feel when you see all the effort that you have done yourself with the help of @Crensch in the past being trumped by what he has engaged on now with @Shizy and @MolochHunter?
Are you happy with the current state of affairs?
Do you see this as the only solution, seriously? No dialogue? No communication and no ability to work in filling the voids Voat currently has? Are you for real here?