@ExpertShitposter writes:
Zyklon has been sperging out with pings and threats against kids. Everyone called him out on his shit. However, anyone can block him.
Why look at that! He's right! Honestly, I cannot argue with this. Well done!
Crensch has engaged in reddit style moderation with pre-emptive bans based on association. No one can stop his bans.
Well, let's see how this pans out in a nice little Voat graphic:
|
Can be blocked |
| Zyklon_b |
✅ |
| Crensch |
✅ |
REEEE U CAN BLOCK ZYKLON REEEEE -> You can block Crensch and GA, too.
Or crensch heavy handed banning behavior makes it normal for everyone to ban anyone in defense against "shills".
All you lazy fucks had to do was turn on your weakest link with the fervor you turn on mods that don't toe the line you draw for them. But he wasn't your weakest link, was he? He was an art project - like the "art" students in the towers before (((9-11))).
Keep in mind, when 2020 comes around, r/the_donald will probably finally get banned from reddit for real this time, and we will potentially become minorities compared to fresh reddit refugees. And this time they won't have a home to run back to, and won't be BTFO'd as easily as last time.
They won't be BTFO'd at all. I'll create a subverse for them and run roughshod all over anyone still stuck in the bubble of (((free speech))) as you know it.
Most people agree that both of them are wrong, but who is a bigger threat to voat?
Do everyone here a favor and define this "voat" that I'm a threat to. I'd love to have that discussion soon.
@Trigglypuff writes:
Goats used to pride themselves on having thick skins.
But also wrote:
That’s when it got personal tbh.
Where's that thick skin? You took the revealing of a PM you ADMITTED made you sound like a loon, and plastered images she's previously removed from her other accounts all over a custom-built subverse. YOU think you have room to talk about thick skin? Or about women being emotional? Or how there are NO women on the internet?
It made you sound like a loon? Yeah, it did. So much so that I had the kind of cognitive dissonance you get when an AXIOM of your life is brought into question by something so solid you cannot dismiss it.
YOU did that. I don't even know how someone can manage to look so much like a goddamned shill/liar even when they are and are low-IQ. It was mind-boggling. It tripped nearly every red flag my mind could be bothered to muster through the state of shock it was in.
Even your re-reading of it got you to that conclusion; and now the (((emotional woman))) of voat has to go around talking shit about other women to feel better about herself.
We were fucking iconoclasts.
We were... in our bubble of internal logic. Now I am, outside of your bubble of logic.
All I see now is faggotry over beliefs
Beliefs like:
Hence Crensch is more dangerous to free speech
That's a belief, is it not?
What about this one:
q is definitely a Jewish lie
... which has been used to excuse any number of attacks on Q people, who have, to their credit, laughed with you almost invariably, to the point of referring to themselves as "qtards" now and then?
Consistency.
view the rest of the comments →
sguevar ago
Since you have asked me so many things today. Let me rephrase the question I did to you earlier.
Are you willing to have the conversation to be able to create a new "letter of the law" as @Sandhog put it so we can accommodate the tools we need to fight against future harassment, so we can provide the tools to mods to defend themselves or are you just willing to create hit pieces that will disrupt the community further to proof how powerful you are?
Please man, we can't have the dialogue without you. Not because of we desperatly need you but you are an important part of Voat and you currently manage 2 subs that are quite big. Not having your insight wouldn't be faire to your two subs. This is why I am saying we need you. Not at PV perse, I know you don't want to be back there. But for the sake of Voat.
Crensch ago
Why don't you all put together something, and I'll decide if I want to destroy it or not?
What are you going to do about it? They don't seem to be having any issues so far.
Yeah, you do. I'm tearing you all apart, piece by piece, and I will continue to do so until I am satisfied.
sguevar ago
Fair enough you can consult it then if you want, I honestly wanted you to be a more active party so it accomodates your subs also. But one last attempt, why don't you consult it with them? Don't you think they would find it beneficiary if their owner participates in this conversation. Just a thought.
My interest is that your subscribers don't become the type that is daddy mod do this or that and that they know they have to actively engage on the sub. Is not just about making posts or commenting but also to spot the shills and to downvote their unproductive comments and denounce the posts that break the rules. Right now many are complaining about the shitposters this and that to which your solution was to ban hammer left and right and you know that is not the right call.
Me personally? Not really, for as I said I have nothing to hide. As I have said many times, he that doesn't owe nothing, doesn't fear anything. I don't know about the others but your actions are sure putting in check Voat man.
This is why I am trying, the hardest I can to ask you to please stop with this approach and lets start working together. In the end my interest is that most of Voat if not all of it's current users vote on the new "letter of the law" for the sake of the future ones and the platform itself.
Vindicator ago
That is a pretty damn elitist thing to say, sguevar. Are you saying I am not welcome to participate in my own right as the moderator of v/pizzagate who knows the subscribers far better than Crensch ever will? I have to be represented by a titled member of the Voat Elite?
kestrel9 ago
That's what came to my mind too.