This submission was linked from this v/ProtectVoat comment by @Blapta.

^{Posted automatically (#38926) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here.}

What a total faggot.

This submission was linked from this v/gaming comment by @Project2501.

^{Posted automatically (#33000) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here.}

It does not seem as malicious as some other users.

My gut reaction agrees with the ban. However, my reasoning tells me that banning something for being distasteful is being prissy. It was gross, but not illegal, off-topic or against the rules. You can set up a rule if you want, but he'd have to be unbanned and given a chance.

I disagree with this thread!!!!! Oh it was Aged? Fuck that pedo. -TheodoreKent

Why don't you grow a backbone and pick a side you flip flopping faggot

I don't see how you do it while being consistent.

You should be banned for using Noid incorrectly.

The Noid is an advertising character for Domino's Pizza created in the 1980s. Clad in a red, skin-tight, rabbit-eared body suit with a black N inscribed in a white circle, the Noid was a physical manifestation of all the challenges inherent in getting a pizza delivered in 30 minutes or less.

I can’t believe we are discussing this. Is the content illegal? No, then no ban. Do you remember how it started on Reddit? They didn’t start banning anything right of Pelosi. They started by banning “that guy.” You know. The one that everybody hates. No one protested banning the pedos. It was “to protect the children”. Now look where they are. Reddit used to be free. Now it’s a censored shithole. Do I like what Aged is posting? No. That’s not the point. Actually, that is the point. The whole point of freedom is that it’s not freedom if everybody doesn’t have it. Doesn’t matter if I like what he’s saying. He is free to say it. I don’t have to click the link. If you can’t understand that, fuck off back to Reddit.

Illegal Ban.

That is absolutely spam...Now...if he dropped one of those every hour instead of every few minutes that would be different.

I just wanted to say look at his submission history!!! Also he shared 21,000 links and not one of them was CP??😂 Yeah fucking right!!

He's been spamming loli shit and jailbait crap from the start, i just blocked all his subs.

The pedo's account isn't banned though is it, just from posting his drek in v/Gaming i assume.

You should not have banned him.

This shitty question is going to get drowned out by all 800+ posts already in the thread but let's answer the raw part of Putt's question.

What is Spam?

Specifically, is 5-8 submissions per day (to a single sub) spam? Does that become spam when you are north of 40 submissions in a week and pushing 50 or more?

If that is spam there might be some people who submit to v/conspiracy, v/news, v/politics and others who may very well be on that chopping block, I'm not saying positive or negative either way I think we are getting drowned in shit tier brainlet posting and low effort "soft spammers", as I would define them although Aged is certainly the lowest effort poster among them and the only one posting crappy smut.

I'm going to be presumptive and just say what I would do in this situation were I in Putt's shoes, unban the cunt, make a new rule that reads:

No Low effort Ecchi/Porn content

Have a definition somewhere linked on what this rule means:

Low effort porn or ecchi would include non-original content: Drawing/painting/digital art, screenshots, photoshop, Cosplay, etc. moderation can declare such content low effort so long as it doesn't contain broader commentary relevant to gaming as a hobby, culture, or this subverse.

If there are any cracks in this new rule I'm suggesting I doubt anybody could really do anything bad with them and if they can that is what downvoats are for in the first place. If Aged Violates the new rules even once ban him again.

I think most of us understand the mess here is the loose definition of "spam" being wrangled to ban the universally unwanted u/aged because a more specific rule went unmade, this seems to have happened because of a long time campaign to bug the shit out of Putt by people who are frankly as shit as Aged. My concern isn't that Putt made a bad call, he didn't, he made a careless call out of what looks to be exasperation and burnout from a bunch of zealous pearl-clutchers who want to ban things they don't like. Right now they are coming for something most of us don't like but how long before they start asking for more and more after proving their tactic of running the admin ragged gives them results they want? I and many others have been targeted in the past by one of the main individuals involved in this whole episode and if this isn't what is going on it sure does look like it considering Aged got banned right after these folks publicly requested he be banned even though he was in violation of no rules.

This whole shitstorm is largely semantic and revolves around the idea of a slippery slope down to censorship, as Putt said himself in reference to Dissenter's shadowbanning of posts with certain banned words:

if you claim to be in a fight for Free Speech then why sacrifice the only principle you hold in the first place?

I'm not saying Putt is a hypocrite or that he has bad intentions here, I'm saying he set a precedent and example that could be used to ban and censor users in the future, especially if the wrong people get admin or site mod, because they can reference our lord Putt"s actions in their own rulings to justify untold future cuntery, Even though Putt just off the cuff banned this fag because he was tired of hearing about him shitting up a System sub. This is Important no matter how trifling it seems today because precedents are set by admins and tomorrow people could be requesting bans on prolific posters of low quality/low effort content that is generally well received (because many users just see agreeable headlines and upvoat; echo-chamber shit but all the people talking are mumblng tardlets). You think a pedo getting banned started drama? Imagine what comes from banning the top submitters in some of the most popular subs on the site for spamming low effort low researched crap that get's upvoated mostly because they write good titles that people want to upvoat, The sites image would be irreparably hurt, that's why organic resolution is key or giving the users the tools they need in the rules to preserves a subs integrity.

My goal with this post as a former forum admin myself is to take as much work and stress off Putt's plate as we can, If you are begging admins or mods for user bans non stop because their content offends you yet hasn't broken any rules you are a part of the problem here and you are making the admin's job more difficult than it needs to be, the correct method to "clean up" v/gaming was not by petition to have him banned it was via suggestion to make a rule which would exclude the sort of inane tangentially related smut he trash posts; essentially an agreed expansion on what it means to be "off topic". The maxims by which I and my admin team operated were: the fewer rules, the better the system (elegant rules design being paramount to minimal rules), the fewer the rules less work for us.

My suggestion is that if users are pressuring mods and admins to hand out bans to users who haven't broken sub or site rules those users should instead be banned, at least from reporting/atting/pinging and similarly so if they are constantly demanding new rules to catch their quarry and see them banned for them, I don't know that this is what has been going on but It's what I've been seeing and the vibe I've been getting.

Most of this post may be moot if voat collectively agrees that what aged was doing for months on end was "spam" and is willing to accept the consequences of this definition of "spam" and if it does I suspect we will see long-term ramifications some good, some bad but mostly just making a butt-load more work for putt.

its okay dude thats why we love you. youre willing and you're always reflecting about your actions. cant ask for more

You give up your posting privilege when you post inappropriate links. Perhaps the moderator was pm'ed countless times on the perps behavior. If so then the censorship desicion was justified and the free speech issue was invalid. The poster could of started a thread Cuffing the carrot, or Let's play the skin flute together. But who knows the problem kid is gone, and rightly so. If anyone has a issue with Gaming they can unsubscribe and block the channel another problem solved. Don't like the end decision? You can always quit VOAT too. Spit out the black pill Goats if you have any in your mouth.

Your lack of a pair and a brain cell tells me you the nigger that will dox us all. Grow up nancy boy.

Fascism for the win!

The only ones defending Aged fantasize about fucking children. Thanks puttitout for removing this degenerate.

Stop being such a premadona faggot. This place is doomed if you don't grow a pair.

How reddit.

hey puttitout

ive lost more ccp that you made in this post.... thats right you support them

im just curious if your gauging at looking to look at at

i have have been taking a hits needle going to be next then is wall be alts yhe voat you want

Sorry Putt... but this is wrong. It goes against everything that the goats have been touting since I moved over here from that other site. Fuck him for being a pedo, but fuck you for banning him.

He didn't actually break any rules, people just didn't like his posts and thought they were low effort. You know what I think is low effort? Anything involving religion, and they sure to seem to have a lot of people spamming that stuff in certain subs... could you please ban them all?

Also, I'm a (((tranniggerfaggot))) who thinks every post to v/traditional wives is low effort. Being a woman is easy, so all of those posts take no effort and because the whole sub is just posts about that, it's spam... please ban them all too.

Also. My feelings got hurt when you banned u/aged and you banning him was pretty low effort, and all of the posts over the last two days have been spam... so please ban yourself.

I dont actually think those things, but do you see where I'm going yet? You're opening the door for ANYTHING to be deemed low effort / spam. As much as u/aged is not wanted around here. He didn't break any rules and you are now setting a precedent for the future, and I disagree.

I fly relatively low on the radar around these parts and I'm not a huge contributor of OC stuff, so it's not like it really matters... but I am sitting back and waiting to see what happens here... if the ban sticks, I have to leave. I can't sit here for almost 4 years talking about how free speech is awesome and how we support it, only to have the owner of the site come in and ban someone who didn't even break a rule.

Please do the right thing here Putt. We will all be watching.

Voat is a system for content aggregation. All systems are subject to entropy.

The fact that we encountering this small bit of entropy this far into Voat's life cycle is a pretty good indication of it's potential for longevity.

If you maintain the ban or not, I'm still going to use and enjoy Voat knowing I can expect to see content I wouldn't on censor-happy Reddit.

Sooooo.... did anyone ask him to stop posting the not quite on topic stuff?

Bless you put for taking action, this pedophile was spamming /v/ non-stop and when asked to STOP posting low effort porn

he just continued to spam porn like some dirty jew on cripple chan, thank you for keeping /v/ tidy and porn free.

have a blessed day.

You did the right thing. Pathological Leniency has it's price to pay down the road and sometimes it's best to nip the bud early.

My issue is the low participation, if the user makes constant submissions and few actual discussions then there is a clear agenda at play...it's called subversion.

Here's my idea: ban the user for five days when he posts three spam posts to v/gaming. It will reduce the spam and will cultivate better behavior in posting while at the same time being non-Draconian in your power.

If he continues posting spam, then it'll be a non stop ban of five days.

hes a spammy cunt but its within the rules.

dont turn into reddit and start banning for minor shit.

This could all be avoided if CCP and SCP were awarded on a per-sub basis. That would prevent him from shitting up subs where the content wasn't welcome.

(;

Good riddance to bad rubbish... Way to go, Putt.

Dude you sound retarded.

Oh fuck, I haven't seen you in ages. Damn.

This is why I a for a ruling class I stand behind whatever the fuck you want to do with your site until I don't. Thanks for all you have done for us.

Maybe there could be considerations to implement features which would allow users to block particular users posts and not just their reponses? This may prevent banning of users by allowing others to "ignore" posts while allowing others to view them.

This could be a slippery slope if not monitored since users could become ignored by a sub on purpose and start to post riskier content.

I wouldn't endorse shadow banning since I believe thats a form of psychological punishment equivalent to putting someone in a padded isolation cell.

This is one of the times that I rely on the community feedback since I'm not a regular of that sub. I haven't seen one post talking about how they liked the content posted, but saw numerous complaints.

Does the free speech of one person allow them to terrorize/ruin the experience of others? Would we ban someone from /v/bikini for constantly posting fat girls in bikinis? (In this case, I would...Look at the girls posted currently!)

ITT: People supposedly against censorship have no argument other than "me no like legal pedo content so you must censor it!"

It sounds like we're going to need a Voat 2 before long.

Posting sexualized pictures or drawing of little girls should be ban worthy.

Lol (i). Since the posts are falling outside the definition of c.p. material it seems to me like the solution should come from the sub users as much as possible. The downvoating isn’t very intense so I would prefer to see some sort of polling of the other sub users before posting restrictions or a ben.

I wonder if an appeal could be made to u/Aged to bundle the content in some sort of album format as a gesture of good faith to address the spam issue. The response might help to clarify his stance.

You've done nothing wrong. The willingness to take decisive action is a worthy quality in a leader, but only if one is willing to explain one's actions and abide the consequences of them. I tip my hat. PM me and I'll send you a goat flag.

downvoats moderate spam perfectly adequately, you'll be up to your ears in needless work if you try to prevent people from being retarded and annoying on the internet. I don't want pedos on the site but I can tell them that myself

The dead rabbi on a stick was a pedovore sandnigger.

The pigs rape kids.

Fake and gay.

Kinda weak @puttitout, very reddit like behavior. You gave in to the whiny babies making alot of noise instead of standing up for freedom like you should have.

The first amendment is the FIRST because it's the most important. And it's there to protect freedom of expression you and I don't approve of. It's not there to protect whats popular.

BURN THE WITCH!

there's already a voting system to deal with spam. I'm against top management censorship.

I was talking about chilly but I lack all information on this particular situation. I will take an executive summary though.

Had he been warned for that specific offense? If he had, then I think that’s okay. Sure people around here just don’t like him in general, but that shouldn’t really affect how he is dealt with. If he was banned without warning, then I don’t agree. I don’t have an issue with people being banned from subs for being off topic. The problem is if there was no attempt to fix it another way.

This submission was linked from this v/OneTruePutt submission by @PeaceSeeker.

^{Posted automatically (#29049) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here.}

Fuck that guy.

Hey @PuttItOut give us his IP address.

Important questions:

• Should there be an expected type of content for a sub of a given name, regardless of custom sub rules? (E.g. user creates "v/funnny" and posts disturbing content for shock value)

• Have we done our due dilligence to communicate what the expected content per sub is? (E.g. gore posts in v/funny and v/aww)

• If a user's submissions are unpopular, but within the scope of the rules, should we implement conditional restrictions? (E.g. below content point threshold, limited to one submission within that sub per day).

We already have a system in place to limit new accounts from posting too much content (to prevent potential spamming, etc) based on overall points on the site. It wouldn't be a drastic change to introduce suppressing sub submissions based on accumulated downvoats in that sub. This would save you the headache of ban discussions and apply a transparent, consistent, systematic solution without having to review transgressions case by case.

Thank me later.

Ban the mutherfucker but allow people to turn off the ban filter.

Ie 1. Tell the person they've been banned 2. They can still post, but filtered out from all posts 3. At anytime a user can turn "ban" filter off to see "banned" content.

It depends on context often. Back when that happened, and I don't know accurately when, I was either working a full time job, working on keeping Voat online, or writing code. I hope you can somehow relate to this.

I have no idea what happened in that situation other than a good mod being crucified for having a standard (which is what I assume took place).

I side with Putt. Nothing should be removed. Nothing.

Very interesting how people suddenly become ok with censorship once it's someone we don't like.

The facts are what he was doing wasn't breaking the /v/gaming rules, the rules need to be enforced equally, not special rules for special people.

i have lost over 100 ccp ccp yet you do donting

can you exxxialing this tis me

i i would also like to know why you allow faggototets to dongot voat me me

Who was it and did they remove the posts?

Everyone learn: avoid the noid.

I think he should stay banned, but you shouldn't do this to anyone else again.

Ideas ..someone probably already made them but luckily for me I don’t gotta read 550 comments/suggestions.. spam etc equals strikes one warning then banned.(you’ve probably given multiple warnings already tho).posting nsfw without the label= strike,3 strikes your out.annoying accts.??ie.you know who .nothing we’re all guilty occasionally.all that said.this is you and I believe atko and cynabuns baby.ultimateley I trust the decisions made by you.god bless.

You can't ban someone if they didn't break the rules.

If you really hate the content you should at the very most amend a rule banning it and then ban him for future violations of the rule.

Anything more than this is an arbitrary ban based on feelings.

@puttitout

If you’re going to ban him for posting the same shit over and over, ban tallest skil too. You’re setting precidents here. Spamming thread comments and spamming pictures are different? Explain this to me.

I think there is a definite culture to Voat, and the attempt to change the culture in a non-grassroots method, but as a bot (team?) that spams garbage for the sack of making Voat appear like garbage, is path that could be dangerous. I think you made the right call for that particular user and their attempt to subvert the culture of Voat by pretending to be apart of the culture by following the rules to the bare minimum. Making themselves an outlier in the function of this platform.

In the old days, in the town square, if a person like the user in question appeared, and annoyed the town, the town's people would have taken justice into their own hands. On Voat, that power is limited. I think one of the things the "Block user" button could do, or a separate button, is to submit a reputation message from Voat users that the specific user is "deemed worthy of a negative reputation. If the majority of active users have given a bad reputation, and the admin also sees a problem requiring admin action, then intervening action should be used.

Oh shit, it was @Aged? Fucks sake, Putt, I'll give you a little rub and tug for that one.

I'm just a lurker so my opinion doesn't count for much but here it is.

If he didn't violate any rules then he shouldn't be banned. I'm not defending his behavior but it was behavior set within the accepted rules of the sub.

That means it's a problem with the subs rules (or lack thereof). So rewrite or add rules to the sub to stop what he was doing.

As soon as you start banning people just because you don't like them, you've become reddit.

"Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster... for when you gaze long into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."

I don't really think porn falls under free speech, it's in a category of it's own. It doesn't express anything other than sex and is an annoying distraction anywhere outside of places that are dedicated towards it.

The noid didn't post nude content (as far as I know), but he straddled the line as close as possible with his soft-porn posts. He was intentionally, consistently flamebaiting with barely on-topic image-posts... and still I think we should let it be. He would have given up soon enough, as Goats always gave him the downvotes and insults he deserves.

But now it's done. Don't apologize or back down. This particular degenerate got the boot. This is a free speech site, not "porn anywhere".

Pretty disappointed with some of the comments in this thread. Half the comments are satiated from the lynching, and the other half see it as unjust due to @Aged being banned because of the vagueness of the spam rule, in which he violated the spirit of, but not the letter of. The rule needs to be tightened and given precise guidelines easily discoverable by anyone using the site, more than a mere statement that such a rule exists. This post ought to be considered relevant to the upcoming sitewide changes for how moderators and rules will be chosen, too. Users and mods may differ on what spam constitutes, causing rifts that Voat should take preventative measures now to avoid. Here's my personal take on clarifying the spam rule.

Behavior of how a user becomes considered a spammer:

• Unsolicited PMs

• Repeatedly posting unrelated/off-topic/link-farmed content

• Posts containing link redirects as a method to circumvent domain block or disguise the link source

• Linking to content directly harmful to users (e.g. malware, phishing, pop-ups)

• Programming bots to harm and/or break Voat, including ones intended to promote

If Aged didn't violate the letter of the second term, then he should be unbanned. If, for some miraculous reason, the second term wasn't already part of the guidelines, he should be unbanned. Nobody should ever be punished by a rule ex post facto. But any spam afterwards would be fair game. If one considers the loli posts of video game characters @Aged repeatedly posted in /v/gaming as not spam, then you must choose begrudging acceptance or invoke a new rule handling rule 34 posts, artwork, or even extending to low effort content. This could be a full restriction, a daily limit, or downvotes like it was. But that should be up to the users and the future moderators to decide together.

A strong no ban. Nasty stupid shit but needs to be allowed to happen as long as the creep sticks to the same rules as everyone else. Cool to bring subjects like this up, that makes you stronger, not weaker.

The people I have blocked generally don't contribute anything to my Voat experience. At least in threads, they are already minimized so I don't even have to bother knowing their content is low quality bait/trolling/shitposting. For the board postings, I guess I don't care if the guy is banned or not. I just don't want to see what I consider his low quality, 'devoid of any discussion' threads constantly while I am browsing for threads that I might care about.

Gaymers

TRUFE! I was that little boy!

maybe putt is trying to normalize censorship.

anyways we need a decentralized platform

I think this question can be boiled down very simply:

If he wasn't posting specifically loli crap, would he have gotten banned?

If yes, then ok.

If not, then we are voluntarily drawing a line in the sand. How does that differ from those who ban over the JQ? Or do we pretend that there are people who don't find the nazis completely abhorrent and the epitome of evil?

Someone asked for my opinion on another thread I described what I understood the situation but my opinion can be summed up to to this:

"There are times when spamming gets out of hand and should be taken care of, and there are times when it's free speech. Much like the difference between a peaceful protest and a riot."

I feel it would be interesting and history worthy if a bunch of users would peacefully protest by posting objectionable material on the basis he was banned for on the sub for a day.

The irony is this is king of what spilt of r games from r gaming. Gaming filled up with memes and(obscure Japanese game Porn in this case), is a separate sub was created for real discussion.

He's a sick fuck, but he didn't break any site rules.
I'd see him hang before I banned him.

Damn it. I look away for four hours and miss the good stuff. Oh well.

Heygeorge was/is an annoying cunt. I won't miss them.

If our using the Block User feature actually worked to shrink the Submissions from a blocked user so that if we personally, as users, feel that a user is taking up too much of the top of the page, then no banning would be necessary for users who choose to post extremely frequently on certain pages. But as things currently stand, only Comments are shrunk to a link if the User is blocked, but Submissions aren't.

Are you the one who called out Lord Steven Christ’s Concave earth.....? You don’t have to answer that BUT I’ll say I was really getting annoyed with that bs post and whoever called it out I was like yeah that’s annoying! However others posted that you have to allow it because of freedom of speech and I have to agree. If all the shills are here then I guess weird posts get a shot. Just want you to know I read a lot of weird crap but I wouldn’t waste my time on Lord Steven.

Hey Ceasar, all you need do is ask the crowd for a thumbs up or down to decide whether we castrate him or make him champion.

If you'd get off your ass and implement the promised tools, we'd take care of this Puttler.

My thing is, why did you personally bring down the hammer? Seems like usually you let this kind of stuff become an issue before you get involved.

the irony of having "FUCK CENSORSHIP" on the side of this post

to fight the troll

Whoa there, nigger. I dindu nuthin. Nuthin.

I've been a Voater for a few years now. I never thought I'd see a post like this. Congrats on beginning your slow transformation into reddit.

This site manages to be somehow worse than reddit in terms of censorship. I can't submit a post until I get enough popular comments? I get this "spam" accusation a lot on reddit, and it seems to me to be an excuse to get rid of stuff you don't agree with. But at least I can submit posts on reddit, despite having a negative comment score. Not to say that I like or recommend reddit. It's just comical because this site is meant to be a copy of reddit that is more welcoming to offensive ideas.

Well for starters, would be a nice option to block user posts as wells as comments from the user and an individual toggle for both types of block

Some users i dont mind the comments but create stupid posts and spam a subverse i dont want to block and vice versa

I mean, if he's just spamming and devaluing the sub why not downvote him and block him?

Sitewide rule, no pron in default subs. Case closed. Easy.

before i go, i'm just going to remind you of your top comment ever.

I've had enough of this!

This is the second time this particular sub has been hijacked with malicious intention.

Voat will not stand for this behavior, even if it is against a sub that is a thorn around Voat's head and literally hurts our public image. We debated letting this sub die out to help Voat's image, but it is against our principles to allow for this to happen. Hence we've acted.

I've purged all mods on this sub.

i really had higher expectations for you.

We've had some violins and fiddle playing.

And the guitar, in the current form, came into Europe by way of the Moors bringing it into Spain. Plucked stringed instruments (chordophones) have a longer history, going back to at least the Etruscans and Persians. Even the Greeks got in on it, though they used a turtle shell for their resonating chamber.

See? You just learned something new!

Hi putt , I’m at work so don’t have a ton of time to weigh in.ive got some ideas but I don’t agree w/ banhammer on @aged (yes I dislike that particular acct.) I also dislike other accts.but I’m sure some of these fags dislike my acct. too. Different strokes for different folks.actually I mainly agree w/ Buddha’s sentiments in the meantime.

VOAT has a BLOCK button for those who don't like certain users .

I fucking hate loli

loli makes much of the material in 4chan.org/v and 8ch.net/v (also in /g and probably some other boards i do not visit)

I am in the middle as well .

User was banned only from v/gaming so i guess he can post his favourite material in other subs .

I would argue video game art would have to be from a game, not the shit Aged was posting. If it is a character from a game and nothing else about the game, it shouldn't go in v/gaming.

Rule No.1 - Ban aged.

Create a "Goat Pen" where you can put bad behaving goats.

They're not banned right away but put inside the pen of shame, where they have the possibility to redeem themselves by posting good content/comments.

They get marked with a badge of shame like "In the goat pen for being baaahaaahhd".

Add some restrictions to the account so that it hurts to be in there. (Voating privileges removed, restricted amount of posts/comments per day).

And all the other goats (not just an admin or mod) have the ability to voat someone in the pen out for good (ban) if things don't get better (maybe add a new button "kick this misfit out of the herd").

Personally I would love to see him getting banned right away, but this is a slippery slope and will become a precedent for the future. So as long as he technically didn't violate any rule it would be wrong to ban him just because we don't like him.

Can you point to an Aged post that was on Gaming that was NSFW and not flaired as NSFW? Considering that is the main premise of your reason to ban him.

It's the best thread on voat!

I admit my bias.

People didn't believe me when I said I was a shill for the Guitar Cabal and that we are taking over Voat. Soon, our plan will be finished!

this is a noid hahaha

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noid

Why not make a sub verse based CCP limitation for commenting. The kind of thing where obviously consistent low quality posts cause them to not be able to make comments there for certain periods of time that increase as they continue to make low effort bulshit posts?

That user knows what he is doing. That users like him know what they are doing.

AAAaahahahaha Aged the pedophile peace of shit bened. BAM RIGHT ING THE KISSER! Rock on putt. That fag is a fag. Also, you finally kicked off that sphincter-face mod kaydence or whatever his name is. He was a reddit plant. Kill all mods.

On a more serious note, i don't think aged was trying to harm the place with his devoid of substance posts, all his posts are like that. Its ether pedo porn, or non-porn but fully devoid of substance. This is because he is a lost and deformed human, fully destroyed by his addiction to degeneracy that his simply has no meaningful thoughts in his head. Not that there was much in that head to begin with since he is a Brazil nigger.

Also, @Womb_Raider is a domestic terrorist. He fears the SBBH. @kevdude

It's your site, you can do what you want with it, but I've got to say it: you opened a major can of worms with this, and it won't take much for it to become reddit. When that happens, I (and those like me who value freedom) are gone.

The problem with disgusting creatures like u/Aged is that they will toe the line with spam. They will do everything they can to not breach that line, just so they can farm SCP. SCP is seemingly useless at the moment. It does nothing for you as far as your ability to do anything here on the website. What it does do, however, is in the viewers mind it cements some sort of legitimacy. "Oh this guy has a lot of points, I'm going to pay more attention to them!". It's an asshole move.

The bigger question we have to ask, were his posts intended to generate discussion on the games those characters came from? Was that his purpose? Did he ever try once? I think getting these answered can tell us all we need to know about intent. The last time u/Aged made a comment in v/gaming was two months ago. Before that? It was another month. That month has a few comments, then it's another couple of months before comments are made.

As far as I can see it, u/Aged has done less than the bare minimum to not make his posts look like spam. There has been extremely minimal engagement from him on the posts he was making to that subverse. I've seen other obvious accounts enacting in similar ways at least take the effort to make comments in their posts and other posts in the subverses they subscribe too. They put forth the effort - they still might be spamming in a "shill" type of sense, but they are at least putting forth more effort to create value as far as discussions are concerned.

I even went as far back as page 19 of his submission history as I had no clue what date range that would give me for his submissions. 27 days ago the community was downvoating his submissions into the negatives on that subverse. No discussions were being had by Aged.

I think this is justified as marking it as spam.

What I don't like is some loose definition of what you consider to be spam, so that's something you need to sure up. I've seen plenty of decent ideas in the comments about SCP restrictions in subverses, which can help with issues like that. Especially since you seem to be on top of the vote manipulation thing.

I’m not sure that Puttsy is being flattering in the introduction. Yet, I’m going to take it as flattery, because I am a valuable member who contributes to the Voat community! I am also on good terms with local and national treasure, @thebuddha. I am sure he feels this is a relevant fact.

I have something like eight accounts. I don't know their passwords, and they're all logged in on different machines.

But I'm not sure how my participation/lurking status changes any of the facts: Putt banned someone for breaking no rules. This is the same logic Reddit used in the fappening (when I moved here) by saying that /r/fatpeoplehate was spamming hate and spawning harassment... literal rules they created only to justify their ban for breaking no rules.

Putt is trying to use the spam rule to justify his only leg he's standing on. The fact that he has to make a sticky post to justify his actions tells me that "spam" don't quite fit the bill (again, I haven't seen these questionable points).

"Bending" rules to fit an agenda is just as bed as creating new rules to fit on agenda.

@Womb_Raider sounds (and apparently looks, according to @kevdude) a lot like he, no surprise, supports pederasty.

Check the user name if you don’t believe!

Is it a surprise his associate who slithers out of the woodwork goes by @freshmeat?

If you consider that spam when its on one sub and marked as NSFW and not pages of flood, but the spammers that flood /all/new across multiple subs with just mindless text are not? This is my first FUCK YOU @PuttItOut .

You should have just done subverse transfers and lets mods deal with it.

An obvious sock?

This looks like the tip of a steep cliff. We need to have unanimous decisions for things like these, people obviously obstructing Voats goals and what it stands for should just be burned without question or some debate. There shouldn't have to be some set of rules, as soon as there is people endlessly debate them. If we don't stand as one the doors open to a stream of tards arguing technicalities. As Voat grows the ideology will thin, and the only way to prevent that is aggressive attack to clearly useless people

Tell him to shut up and get in the oven.

imo admin needs to deal with preventing bots from voting, i.e. checking that IPs are physical and not from luminatio or other similar shit. Then real people decide where it goes, if they want voat to become communists so be it, that's called freedom. But that's where subs come in.

If you had just implemented the ability to block a user so you don't see their submissions at all this wouldn't ever have become a problem. You've now been wrong twice about how to handle this "issue."

Spam is awful, we shouldn't allow it. This noid seems to have been purposefully trying to be useless. In this case, it seems like the right move. Add value, goats!

First, the user seems to post pedo shit, that should be a no brainer. Now, for other cases, you could implement an invisible spam score (like China's social score). If you are Noid the score goes up, if you reach a certain level you are banned, if you do nothing then the score goes slowly down until zero. Writing the algorithm would be tricky though

Can we implement a system where if your posts get downvoated below a threshold you are blocked from new submissions for X amount of days

I haven't looked at the moderator logs. I don't know which user you're talking about. I haven't looked at the content this user was "spamming." I don't know how much/little participation was happening on these "spam posts."

I don't really care. You're crossing a line that I'm not too happy with, @PuttItOut, and let me explain:

I like to play a game of what I personally call "table flip" with politically/emotionally charged issues. It's difficult to explain the rules, so let's use an example to get you started:

Let's take the incident where four black people in Chicago held a disabled white man at knifepoint, kidnapped him, beat him, and made him drink out of a toilet all while livestreaming it on Facebook and yelling "Fuck Trump, and fuck WHITEY!!!" The police didn't "think" it was considered a hate crime. They moved toward pressing hate crime charges only after MUCH public scrutiny.

So, let's flip the tables: Four white men kidnap a disabled black girl, at knifepoint, beat/stab her and make her drink out of a toilet while yelling "Fuck NIGGERS and FUCK OBAMA!" Do you think the Chicago police would be afraid to call that a hate crime?

If you think their reaction would be different, with the tables flipped, then they're racist assholes.

Now, let's take what you've done:

As I stated before, I don't know the details, so flipping the tables should be easy...

A user with low CCP is posting pro-Jewish articles to /v/whatever. This breaks no rules, and is downvoated into never being on the front page. Nobody like this user's content, and believes their "contributions" are "spam" and nothing they post contributes to /v/whatever in any meaningful way.

Would you ban this user?

If your answer is yes, then you have lost control of your seat of power.

If your answer is no, then you are a hypocritical asshole.

I have lost respect for you, Putt. You were better than this. You have started the slippery-slope of banning that user for their posts in /v/whatever because you don't like their content, not for breaking any rules... and that's censorship.

I hope you are talking about @aged. It's the only real spamming piece of shit there.

How does it feel to be in the crosshairs, @aged?

If we don’t want this as a community can’t we just make a rule about it? I think it’s pretty clear it’s largely not wanted.

You bend your knee to the village idiots virtually every time. At this point I can't even tell if you can tell which users are or are not SBBH.

I've always defined spam (on-line term) as:

1. Repeated posting of the same thing by the same person.

2. Low effort bullshit posts designed to annoy or harass.

This is not a democracy. Rule this website like it’s a small nation state in Eastern Europe and destroy all enemies. Would Saddam Hussein have asked the people to vote on whether he should kill someone he didn’t like?

Direct admim intervention rarely turns out well. Dont fuck with the ecosystem.

@PuttItOut Love what you do here. Right call, IMHO.

In my opinion, freedom of association is equally as important as freedom of speech. And, true freedom of association includes the freedom of disassociation. A community isn't free if they they don't have the right to say "No, we don't want your trash here."

Suggested feature to fix this in the future:

Make a site wide rule / script that auto bans a user form a specific sub ... **IF ** they have >10 submissions to the sub AND they have a > 3:1 down / up voat ratio for those submissions. This would allow the community to self regulate anything the specific community considers non value added. (Spam / off topic / degenerate crap / etc.)

... And, it would allow you to be hands off. ;)

(Trigger limits may not be right ... my numbers are just guesses without digging into the analytics.)

Cheers.

Don't ban whoever it is, just let us downvoat him into oblivion if we so choose.

he's gone mad with power

I'm generally in favor that moderation (downvotes) should do the job, not outright banning. The UI should make it possible that people that want to look through the weeds can find unpopular crap, but it should generally not flood the sub with garbage. On that note, you could just limit how often you are allowed to post. If your stuff gets regularly dowvoted, the frequency should be continually reduced.

It's fine if you make a rule to ban all loli but it's a bad idea to ban legal "speech" simply because you find it disgusting (which it is). Slippery slope my dearest.

your talking with shit alts

If I have an issue with a person posting shit I don't like, I block him/her ...

Problem solved.

I don't know why the community is so up in arms.

He was posting stuff that was technically on-topic for the sub.

You are in the right for banning that guy. He posts absolutely degenerate shit. Enough of voat agrees with you. Lets not make it habit though :)

As much as we all disagree with Aged, I really don't think he should be banned.

We've all been subjected to technicalities of the rules, and slight degradation until the point that brought us all here.

The non participation is an issue, but I think it should be solved differently.

Maybe make a submission require a comment attached, that way these non participating users can still be downvoated to do dents into their ccp

Aged is a piece of shit.

I'm not sure spam is the right word for what they're doing in v/gaming, depending on how much and how often they post this stuff; but it's not really on topic either.

1. Submissions must be related to gaming.

What you're encouraged to post: Games! We should talk about games more than anything! New releases, old favorites, Speed Runs, Let's Play's, development news, what we love, what we hate and so on and so forth.

Try to post things that create discussion. We want people to feel engaged and feel their voices are heard, rather than to be a place of disposable content.

If you're not sure, ask!

OK, you could stretch and say provocative pictures are vaguely gaming related if they're based off game characters; but clearly posting sexualized imagery without discussion isn't what this sub is meant for. Considering this is repeated and deliberate behavior to post unwanted content I'd be OK ruling this as violation of rule 1. Considering they do it repetitively... I don't really mind it being called spam either.

/u/Aged needed to go.

Press F to gas the Pedophiles.

So how do you like the banhammer on yourself? Are you going to contest it for yourself? Wait it out? Or ignore it? Please don't ignore it.

https://voat.co/v/whatever/3104679

...on this topic, spam is thoughtless repetitive junk. Just because I like certain catalog in my mailbox doesn't make it not junk mail.

Mods are fags. Get over yourself you fucking asshole. We don't need your moderation.

He deserved it! You did well, Putt. He wasn't posting in good faith and we all know that.

That has been something I have seen with this situation people flipping their opinion based on finding out who it was doing the posting even if they had no issue with the actions described when no name was attached. I can't and won't speak to his posts in other suns but then again that isn't where he was banned only from gaming so I have to look at his actions as limited to that scope. Was it a site ban those actions would be part of it. But that was not the case here.

you got drunk with power

ban actual trolls and shills not guys that just post valid stuff

Congratulations, now all you have to do is label anyone you don't like a Nazi- I mean pedophile and you can ban them.

I agree and disagree with you @puttitout: not truly because of what you have done but mostly because of how you did it. First, I don't think that guy did something that deserves a ban from an admin without the input of the community. He is a fucking loli pedo for sure "1968 submissions to loli" and "1910 submissions to lolicon" so I absolutely hate him and want him to hang. He's also kind of a spammer according to the following math: "This user has so far shared a total of 21146 links" and "Member for: 3.2 years" so that is around 21146 / (365*2) = 19.3 hyperlinks per day.

He also hates most of us. Excerpts of his comments: "Ah, fuck you MAGAphobia. Your stupid racism..." and "FUCK your redpill at mid-night and stick down the nearest VHS copy of the Matrix down your AAAAAAANUS. I have no time for your neo-nazi talk."

To summarize: this dude seems to be some r3dditpedo leftist spammer fag and might deserve a ban from some subs or even a ban from Voat. Nevertheless, you did not talk publicly (with a sticky note) about everything I said before the ban. You should have made a sticky note and tell us about your resolution then maybe let the goats decide with a survey?

A strong leader communicates well with his loyal brothers and I think you're getting backlash because you did not communicate beforehand and banned him from v/gaming without input from your community. Most goats won't look into u/aged history and find what I found (lazy goats) so you should have showed us his filthy habit of posting almost exclusively nsfw and pedo (loli). The only exception might be his posts on "v/gametrailers" but I did not check if he was posting pedo or nsfw shit there.

My opinion: a ban from v/gaming for sure if he ever posted some loli shit there. A public warning for posting NSFW content without the appropriate tag several times (2-3) on any sub followed by a ban (announced beforehand publicly with a sticky) if he keeps doing it after the warning. Some restriction to his posting and commenting ability maybe to prevent the "spam" but did he truly spam? Discussions + comments = 1932. If we divide it by the number of days he's been on voat: 1932 / (365*3) = 1.7 it's almost 2 per day so I don't think it's spam.

Let's think about his motives: 1. He's an attention seeker and what we're doing works very well for him (downvoats are negative attention and he got lots of it). 2. He could be a law enforcement white hat agent trying to trap some dumbasses pedo lurking here. 3. He's a shareblue shill seeking to break Voat by posting illegal shit (yes loli is illegal in some countries) or ugly stuff where ppl don't want and don't expect to see it so they'll think Voat is full of trash. If it's 1, then let's vote for a ban. If it's 2, the only "solution" is to ban borderline pedo subs If it's 3, we need to change the spamming rules (let's have a survey and vote?) then warning for few offenses and finally ban after public announcement.

fuck....most of my submissions aren't that great. am i next #concernfagpost

Well boss you kinda pulled a Reddit here.

If you had each sub set to a limit at which there was a point value within that subverse you can’t submit from say negative ccp for that specific sub it would have been better than say pulling a spez, but hey still you site?

Sounds like a typical spammer tactic. Keep the ban. I bet I'd have banned him in your space. Spammers need to experience great pain.

I never think you would ban someone without reason. Fuck 'em! Keep up the good work!

I misread your term for him as "groid" - thought MAD THAD's coming back guns blazin'!

Absolutely the right thing to do @PuttItOut. It's trolling...nothing more. Trolls need to be dealt with and Putt doesn't need to answer to anyone.

High time

So now we have Putts vs. The Goats

More like Putt vs a fucking retard named Laurentius_the_pyro. I suggested a rule to take care of that fuckstain in the other thread, perhaps intitute that and be done with this.

The problem here is that you v/gaming fagots did not downvoat the submissions.

If the submissions are not downvoated all to fucking hell and back, then my guess is that the community either is not bothered, or likes it.

We have a system in place already, it is that little upvoat/downvoat button next to the post. if the users are not downvoating it, then it is not an issue.

Now one caveat to that, is if there is some voat manipulation going on. If one of those posts suddenly gets a lot of weird upvoats, then it is time to take a closer look at whatever made that post.

Cool. So as long as the content is "'technically' on topic" you can spam shit to your hearts content.
Spam isn't spam until someone spams it. Spam is an act regardless of the content.
You're all a bunch of faggoats.

@PuttItOut What if you had some kind of suspension or applied restrictions to limit someones ability to post/interact in a kind of probation period. So as you wouldn't have to outright ban people... like this fucking idiot who file dumps his cartoon porn in subverses not dedicated to such content (you know, spamming).

Ban the boomers at QRV for spam

Glad he got banned. And no I don't think it sets a dangerous precedent.

I've already made my thoughts pretty clear on this, and I urge you to rethink it.

Shitty and low effort doesn't make it spam, it just makes it annoying. It's way too subjective.

I'd absolutely support a rule against this in that sub, but the user's shitty attention whoring isn't really spam.

Yes, I'm defending a pedo. Someday the speech you come for may be mine.

@GhostSkin wuz here wink wink wink MY EARS ARE SO WET RIGHT NOW ♡♡♡♡♡♡

I dont like the ban idea...

So a couple of technical ideas:

1. Can you limit how ofter an user can create a post on a sub when he has a low score on that sub?

2. Can you prevent that post from users with low score on that sub appears on trending for that sub?

I think the above approach, while technical, could be used automatically for this and any other user that has a similar behavior. It doesn't ban him and it saves our time until he start posting relevant shit.

you knee jek put

you are listing to too many peoplr... but not the right ones

but it be alright, ill let you to accept your mistake, we all do it

or i will contiue to after that atlts

in case you notices i've lover 100ccp overnight...

https://youtu.be/7j8vUbMmOwM

So literally, what do you want from us?

Figure out how to deal with such people? Really? You want us to write the rules for the site? What's it going to be, majority (mob) rule?

While acknowledging this is your site (and that "Angel Investor"--that we've not heard anything further about, oddly enough), pretty sure you hold the final say on how to deal with these people. You want to ban them, because it fucks the level of content? Your choice. People don't like it, they can leave.

Does this mean you get to ban anyone you like? Again, your site. But if you do, enough of us will leave. Last thing we want is another fucked up Reddit. Look, there's plenty of subs that suck the kike cock here. You allow them to stay. Something to think about.

So now I can be banned for posting on-topic if people don't like me? How's that not a slippery slope to Reddit's decay? People have had the block function for ages now. If you keep seeing his posts, you want to see them. If you then proceed to complain about them, you just feel guilty about it.

Spam should be defined in terms of economic incentive and conflict of interest. If someone, group, or company makes a profit, generates income for themselves or other, or manipulates voat's free service/user gullibility for economic gain- then that individual or group should be shut down from normal posting. They should pay for advertising on voat. The location of advertising should be restricted to specific locations designated for advertising. They should be required to post a detailed conflict of interest statement on the same page.

Conflicts of interest are okay, as long as the conflict of interest is explicitly posted, easily accessible to all users, easy to understand who the individual or group is, and how they are affiliated with thing, company, political organization they are advertising.

A thousand years from now, when learned men of letters find themselves in a court of law arguing as to whether or not spam is actually spam, one of these men will cite the precedent set on this very day, the Putt Precedent, and he will say "think about the children."

Just unban him. Aged did nothing wrong.

Don't give in to loud minorities. The rules are fine as they are.

..........the only damn friend you have and I always will be 7.1. (Just don't ever do this to me please, I would feel very hurt)

I want to say @heygeorge, this is one is for you! Couldn't have done it without you buddy.

Lol! I am fairly certain to have had little impact on this. You make me laugh on a regular basis, and there’s nary (at least rarely) a day that goes by where I don’t use your great site.

This is a persnickety situation. Aged is definitely a troll who was deliberately hurting the subverse. But I’m left wondering about this vs the v/aww spamming situation. And I wonder if anyone had tried asking him diplomatically, via PM, to stop. That’s all I have so far.

I think a good solution to the noids is to let people select who they can follow to hide spam content (and possibly boost content) for them

I know his posts were not illegal so to say, but I for one am glad it's gone. Would be happy to see a site wide removal of such "cartoons", no argument from me on that.

Don't even think about banning me from /v/science though.. :)

ban @OtisT for being a neonazi nigger faggot now

Its okay to ban pedo spam.

Since ISPs started blocking Coat we are stronger.

Youre a tranny

So basically you named this guy after a Domino's Pizza mascot from the 1980's so you could ban him? Nice.

Only one problem… the content was 'technically' on topic (a stretch but for sake of argument I concede).

How was it technically on topic? Were the borderline loli characters also characters in games?

Personally I believe the user infringed in rule 1 because his content wasn't related to gaming.

People here tend to conflate fanart and artwork with gaming and it is not the case. As a gamer I don't mind the ban and I do find the continuous low value posts as spam as so do the majority of the v/gaming community. But if this is too much of hasal to handle I would suggest an easy getaway:

Make a poll on the v/gaming suberse asking whether your decision to ban u/Aged stand or not. If the majority agrees to it, then that should be it. This doesn't take away the user from posting his low value content on the lolicon subverses if he so want to.

downvote and move on, if the sub is empty don't blame the """spammer"""

In Putt we trust!

If the content was "technically" on topic, and it was just low value, low effort shitfuckery, then unban him, let him post his shit, and let him be downvoated into oblivion.

I don't know who it was but I assume it's the person that just posts pictures of NSFW game art?

If you have to do anything, maybe make a rule that requires a certain amount of SCP to submit links/discussions in default subs. If they have negative SCP, they can't post, and have to post things of value elsewhere.

Everything I don't like is spam.

I figured it out guys, good job.

For that situation the possible downvoats should be sufficient, assuming it was poetry and not just word salad. Low effort was a qualifier, what you're describing would not be.

Poetry, even bad, doesn't carry the general ugliness of pedo content.

Thanks for posting your thoughts and reasoning.

A Noid (according to me) is a person that regularly submits content that is low value, low effort, typically downvoted, and has low participation. Often times on purpose.

I don't like this. I like the rest. I don't like this. The site's system allows for complete abuse of this. Were it replaced with "typically objectively incorrect," I'd be on board.

This is our very own Christchurch.

Do NOTHING!

One guy making a rucus to get a reaction out of everyone, don't give it to him, let voats immune system tackle the issue.

Everyone just settle down and watch a cute puppy video..

As stupid as it sounds because this is all about a guy posting pictures, I keep thinking about the Cloudflare / Daily Stormer thing. In both cases the head of something banned someone even though they broke no rules because they don't like them. It's a big jump from booting someone from a sub to booting someone from the internet, but the comparison has some merit.

I keep telling myself I don't give a shit about his ban, but it does irk me some. I do think it's amazing that this has become a big discussion, shows how much we love this place and what it means.

Call me crazy (you won't be the first) but this is not a difficult problem.

Mods cannot censor anybody, because they only control their own subverse. Users can PM others, they can easily create their own subverses with their own rules, and they can post in other existing subverses. Mod bans are not censorship.

Admin bans, on the other hand, are censorship. Users cannot escape them elsewhere on the site.

I appreciate that this distinction is controversial here, but mods only have the power we give them. When there are three different gaming subverses, the one that people prefer will be the one to prosper. No one mod controls anything of any value, they can only offer what people want, or not.

Add to this a cultural preference, on this site, for mods to use a light hand, and to tolerate noise and disruption for the sake of more open expression. Wonderful. But the mods still get to choose where to draw the line when the time comes.

We lose ourselves here when we say to the mods, no, don't ban any postings unless they are clearly spam or clearly against some other rule. That does not scale. Any small group of people can shit all over a subverse and kill it. Others can suppress speech very effectively by simply screaming incessantly.

It's OK for subverses to be distinct communities with their own cultures and their own rules. That's part of what free speech is, too.

Hmm... Personally, I'm alright with this. I understand the implications it has for both sides, but down the road I don't want to see post or comments that are just "eh nigga luk at dis sht rite heer" and it's just a picture of the new Xbox on v/gaming, and all the comments are "First." "Upgoat meh." "OMEGALOL YEW GAWT DE NU XBAUX HAHARHAHAR!".

Voat, as it stands, is one of the best communities not ONLY because it attracts free speech, but because it attracts all types of minds that are either really fucking intelligent, hilarious (@NosebergSkekelman), or just a good read sometimes.

If the user you banned was just spamming pure nonsense, and you believed it was, in all seriousness this is your site and your lovechild... Well, i this case I agree that a ban is probably the right way to go. Ideally, the guy would learn his lesson and perhaps the ban could be lifted, but people are shitheads sometimes. Some more than others (CIA fag is shittier than Joe Schmoe.).

I trust that you won't make dropping the hammer a habit, and I'll hold you to it. We all will, as you can see. But speaking strictly within the terms of this incident, I believe you were right in doing so.

Have good one mein Führe- I mean, Putt.

I think Voat’s immune response deters lots of spammers and usually promotes high-quality posts.

Many subverses have experienced spam and still do. The community actively filters out many bots, shills, and spammers, but it’s impossible to weed those out by algorithm. So in extreme cases individual judgement it is, and that’s a heavy burden on you, Putt.

It’s tough to draw a line, or even to narrow the grey area of spam/not spam, and there never will be a single answer.

I guess I can’t help make a decision, Putt, but I do browse /v/new regularly to weed out a little junk. Perhaps if more people do that, it helps.

Putt, goats lock horns all the time. If we all agreed with everything all the time, we would be a useless hivemind. We're not a hivemind here. You were in the right. If I was to post low effort shit in a single sub and get banned from there, I wouldn't complain. I did something that was against the rules. They were aware of what they were doing when they were doing it.

If someone posted a single drawing of a character I doubt anyone would care. Even if it was hentai, it would just get downvoted. But to continue to post the content over and over when it was clearly pissing people off is being unreasonable especially on a system sub.

@heygeorge did this. Im on to you dude.

If low effort shit posts get you banned I might as well bail now.

v/gaming ban log:

Aged Rule Violation: Spam; Description: Spams borderline lolicon for attention PuttItOut 17 hours ago

https://voat.co/v/gaming/about/log/banned

Good move, I'd say.

Voat has an immune system like no other. This problem will right itself.

Honestly, I don't blame you for banning him. While one could argue that obscure pornographic videogames are still technically games, hentai involving those are pornography and not games. It's like arguing that scorpions are arachnids, so rule 34 of scorpions should be allowed to a spider subverse.

Filling a standard subreddit with nsfw pictures is borderline spam anyways, especially when there's plenty of other subverses it's better suited for.

IMO low-effort crap is what the voting-system is meant to deal with; not a good reason for a ban in my opinion. They'll throttle themselves eventually when SCP goes into the negative. And if I may be allowed a "slippery slope" argument, this could be seen as.. well, a slippery slope. Who gets to decide what's quality content? How low must the quality be to warrant a ban? And how much is too much?