First off I want to say @heygeorge, this is one is for you! Couldn't have done it without you buddy.
Secondly I want to say I both absolutely love and hate you Voat. Equally. Sometimes at the same exact time, but other times some more than the other. Other times the exact opposite. It just depends. ;)
Yesterday I banned controversial user from v/gaming for being what I now have termed a 'Noid'. 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 banned this user from v/gaming for Spam.
Only one problem… the content was 'technically' on topic (a stretch but for sake of argument I concede). And guess what Voat did? What do you think Voat did? Yeah, that's right, Voat called me out on it. This is the part I hate.
So now we have Putts vs. The Goats and I'm not budging. Headbutts are heard throughout the kingdom. What rule do you cite? Spam? That isn't exactly right! What is spam, what isn't spam? Who says this is spam or that is spam? Spam this, spam that. Spam it all! I'm going back to browse v/all.
But through the smoke, Steam arose and how they enacted a rule to fight the troll. The problem now is this, everyone's a potential misfit.
And this made me love Voat, because it's a legitimate concern, the very merits worthy of wise discern. If I say that's spam, many decades from now what will the definition of spam be then? Think about your children and their children's children. What kind of Voat do you want them to envision? A Voat where much is spam, because that may happen if my stance stands.
So, here we are at the crossroads yet again. There's arguments on both sides, where to begin?
Edit:
I'm thinking now...
view the rest of the comments →
VicariousJambi ago
Since I had to look it up myself
https://voat.co/v/gaming/about/log/banned
https://voat.co/u/Aged
This guys just spams loli shit. We need more gas.
CameraCode ago
Oh man this is such a tough one. I looked through his submissions, and all of them to v/gaming seem to be of a character from a game, and are generally just a woman in a bikini or revealing clothing, not as bad as the ones he posts to v/lolicon.
https://voat.co/v/gaming/3102879
https://voat.co/v/gaming/3102839
https://voat.co/v/gaming/3102528
https://voat.co/v/gaming/3100784
They were all tagged as nsfw and as far as I can tell he didn't break anything rules of the sub besides potentially spam. I think it comes down to intent. Did he mean to devalue the site by posting low quality content, or did he just want to share pictures that he enjoys? Personally he doesn't seem malevolent like some other users. But he could also be a bot because he just posts a lot of submissions and hardly ever comments, which is certainly grounds for a ban.
Perhaps we need more defined rules like what exactly spam is, what a bot is, etc. Maybe users can vote on an acceptable definition.
BlackManOnVoat ago
basically, Letter of the law vs. the spirit of the law.
I think it's important to take both into account. Of course the "spirit" of the law can change over time, but that's the rub, you need to discuss things like this at times, and yes putt got called out but that's fine. every once in a while we'll need to have discussions like this especially with the ever-shifting overton window.
These things develop and evolve overtime, and free speech allows that to happen.
But yes, I agree that it seems like a bot, and how ban worthy that is or not needs to be discussed.
Mylon ago
Doesn't seem worthy of a ban. Unless maybe he was farming CCP for vote manipulation.
But if it's only a ban from /v/gaming, then it's no big deal. I come to voat for content curation and demanding higher quality submissions from "default" subs is fine.
BlackManOnVoat ago
I could get behind that, but those rules probably should be more clearly stated so that people won't need to bitch at putt at every ban.
Fermentaion ago
shitt ... altalllt
worthlesshope ago
Decent point. I still visit /r/anime on reddit and maybe 30% of the posts are "fanart". It gets a bit annoying. Sure some of them are nice, but if I wanted to see fanart I'd be part of a fanart sub.
If the guy has no post history of contributing to the sub besides posting game girls in skimpy outfits. Then a ban won't affect him much. But if he contributed and also posted the images then probably the rules should be more specific on the sub instead and he should be specifically warned where that kind of content belongs.
But I also dislike when rules are made because people abuse them. I've noticed flaws in doing things that way. My original opinion on this type of rule is not a clarification but only try to act when things get out of hand. Look the other way sometimes because the person could have good reason to do things that way. Still sounds good to me.
So in this case I say let him do as he pleases till it actually gets out of hand. Let him steal that apple, he might be starving, just warn him every day and hope he feels bad about it to stop when he stops feeling hungry.
fusir ago
Even if he had meant to devalue the site that's not a bannable offense. What is shitposting? We can't ban people for our belief that we can know people's intent. We can ban them for what they do, against some clearly stated rules. If we don't like what someone does we can always change a rule.
Those who would sacrifice voat for some temporary moment of not being offended deserve neither.
AmaleksHairyAss ago
Maybe it should be.
VicariousJambi ago
It's spam. Are you all a bunch of fucking retards? Spam is when an entity continually makes posts the community obviously doesn't want, purposefully, to be disruptive.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spamming
ImPhilippe ago
Please do not use wikipedia as a source for anything.
VicariousJambi ago
What's wrong with the definition?
Deathperception ago
Q predicted this.
Fermentaion ago
shit alt....
WhitePaladin ago
fuck off idealistic faggot
kneo24 ago
The guy is a pedophile.
AmaleksHairyAss ago
That is completely irrelevant to whether he should be banned you book licking faggot
kneo24 ago
I never implied he should be banned because of that. I just find statements that known pedo's aren't malevolent to be bullshit.
RageAgainstTheAmish ago
Wow what an absolute fucking degenerate piece of shit faggot motherfuker
worthlesshope ago
Are you Australia? Since when has animated drawings been considered pedophilia? What's next banning everyone who has A cup breasts because they don't look adult enough for you?
Are you sure you belong here? Are you sure you don't lean left?
kneo24 ago
No, I'm not a country. Why would you ask such a ridiculous question?
How are drawings of girls that are clearly underaged not indicative of pedophilia?
I never even remotely indicated as much.
If you're going to accuse someone of something, the least you could do is not argue like those you're trying to rally against. (I don't care if you try to cry, "no u" at me. You have no leg to stand on here.) You just literally tried to use some shit tier logic to say that Aged isn't a pedophile. The same Aged who admits to wanting to fuck underaged girls.
Schreiber ago
How are drawn gun and drawn dead enemies in call of duty not indicative of a serial killer?
kneo24 ago
I'll tell you what I told the other retard, intent matters here. It's amazing how everyone is simply ignoring the intent. The guy admits to liking underaged girls.
At the same time, this guy is also sharing pornographic drawings of obviously young girls.
If you refuse to connect the dots, the only thing that can save you is a bullet to your skull.
worthlesshope ago
http://archive.fo/111a5 (Australian Government Censor Confirms Small Breast Ban…Sort Of)
i_scream_trucks ago
As an Aussie, cartoons of children being fucked can fuck right off.
kneo24 ago
That actually doesn't address anything I wrote.
worthlesshope ago
You just wrote "he's a pedophile" and you responded to my post by pretty much saying "I don't understand what you're saying" So I gave you the relevant background information behind what I was saying.
So I'll explain further to make sure we're on the same foot. First thing we have to agree that sexualized drawings depicting what appear to be minors is not pedophilia. If we don't agree on that point then that is where the argument starts.
The next argument is that banning content that you personally don't like or agree with is the same exact type of censorship Reddit does and why many people left Reddit for this website. If you start banning content you personally don't like it sets a precedent towards your future mods banning content they don't personally like, or allowing content they personally like. Which turns the site into another Reddit-type shit hole. I realize you're not a mod nor have any power, but you are a citizen of voat and you post against a specific type of content, just like how the left protests and whines against specific type of acts and content such as white nationalism.
My original sharp/provoking joke can be explained using the above sentences. In words a little less jokish: Do you enjoy harsh censorship? When will it be enough censorship? Do you realize that the places you dislike have the same exact censorship rules currently? Or are you sure the reason you're voat as a protest against such censorship? Are you sure you wont be more comfortable in places that support such censorship instead of trying to turn this place that also censors such things?
kneo24 ago
You're assuming I want him censored because he's a pedophile. I don't want him censored for that, I feel the ban was justified for his spamming. In the 2 years that you've been here, with all of the bitching that has happened about Aged over that time, you somehow have completely missed any and all of his comments about wanting to fuck underaged girls. Maybe you should spend less time on Reddit.
Intent absolutely matters here. If someone who claims to be a pedo is clearly posting drawings of underaged people engaged in sexual acts consistently as a legal loop hole to spread what they claim they do, well, it's pedophilia - even if it's legal.
With that said, Aged has clearly been spamming v/gaming for a while now. For at least a month now his posts have been consistently downvoted into the negatives and he makes no comments to even create discussion.
worthlesshope ago
I looked at his post history and I wouldn't call his posts spam, like the top of this thread also mentions. There are actually several details about the situation in this thread. I don't see any spamming regardless, none of which seem to be loli either. You seem to be going off of what you're hearing about him and not what the facts are. Which again is much how the left acts.
You and others are acting out of personal grudge simply because he likes loli. Please realize you're acting irrationally and emotionally because he is a person you don't like. Please also realize your behavior is what makes places like Reddit.
kneo24 ago
Then you have a different definition of spam.
You're under the impression that I'm conflating the two things. Let me be clear, I'm not.
Now you're projecting.
How am I acting out of a personal grudge?
I'm doing no such thing.
And now you're defending obvious spam. This is exactly the problem. You would rather someone shit up v/[insertsubhere]/new with content the community of that subverse doesn't want on a daily or semi daily basis with multiple posts because "reasons". At some point it becomes spam as it's clear the community doesn't want that content there.
v/whitebeauty saw the same shit for a while, but the posts in question stopped.
v/aww saw the same shit for a while, but the posts in question stopped.
I don't recall those lasting for a month, but I could be wrong and quite frankly if they did, @PuttItOut should ban those users from those subs (at least from v/aww) for spam.
If you want to make a case for there to be no system subs, or for Putt to handle system subs differently, that's a different argument to make.
worthlesshope ago
Your original post was condemning him for being a pedophile. Why are you changing your argument now? Now you seem to be advocating "but he spammed!" When we were talking about if he was a pedophile or not. You've also ignored much of my original arguments/statements despite how easy I tried to make it for you. This argument is about censorship not spam.
You're obviously biased against the guy despite what rules he did or did not break. As I said your attitude is everything that is wrong with the left. You search for wrong doings you defend that you were justified because "Look he did something bad here!" all because you dislike the guy for posting lolis. This is exactly like the Trump witch hunt.
The guy participates in the sub with normal posts so he should have been told to not post fan art. In the sub, the fan art he posted in gaming is not objectionable either they are all adult and all clothed I can see sexier clothing on the street. I even looked at all of his /v/gaming posts. He should have been officially warned if what he was doing was not in spirit of the sub. But it's obviously a witch hunt because he likes loli.
I'll repeat myself again. Please realize your behavior is what makes places like reddit.
kneo24 ago
I haven't changed my argument at all. I was replying to a comment that someone thinks they don't seem malevolent. Pedos are always malevolent. It's in their very nature. I would hope you agree with that.
Because you seem to believe I am conflating his banning for pedophilia, which I am not. You enjoy ignoring this part.
Your original statements don't hold much merit. My god, they're along the lines of, "You're a country!" How serious do you expect me to take you there? Secondly, spammers ruin platforms. You can disagree all day long what he was doing wasn't spam (it was), but then you need to advocate for every other spammer to be unbanned sitewide. Let's see how long Voat lasts if ever such a thing happened.
It's funny, he actually did do something bad here. He spammed. Again, for at least a month his posts were consistently downvoated into the negatives. The community made it clear the content was not welcome there.
So how many other users do you see roaming around, posting content others don't want to see, where the person in question never engages in any discussion? At some point, you gotta call a spade a spade. Other outside factors aren't relevant.
Your comment has no bearing on this situation.
worthlesshope ago
Ugh I'll just say it out right instead of trying to be nice and try to help you understand. But you're a freaking idiot. You can't understand simple metaphors. You switch your argument around when it pleases you, you can't stay consistent on anything you say. You don't understand words you quote my post a lot but you're not even reading them or comprehending them.
I seriously do not understand how someone can be this stupid. No matter how far I try to dumb it down. It just gives me a headache trying to have you understand my words. There is no point in continuing this conversation since you're not even trying. You even refuse to do simple research where you can look up /u/aged post history. Then completely ignore anything I say when I do the research for you.
I'm literally feeding you the answers and you're still getting everything wrong. Just UGH.
kneo24 ago
Nice wall of text to project everywhere.
The_Ghost ago
Apparently, pedophilia is allowed on Voat as long as it’s legal since there are quite a few Loli subs that have been around for years.
AmaleksHairyAss ago
Pedophilia should be allowed on Voat. But not CP. And he didn't post CP
foltaisaprovenshill ago
It's degenerate as fuck but you can't rape a drawing so meh
shrink ago
Or he's a dedicated shitposter determined to get exactly the kind of reaction out of users he's getting, by choosing what he thinks would most easily offend them, without technically being outside the bounds of the rules. There's as much a chance he's a pedo as he is a troll, trolling you to get a rise out of offending your sensibilities, which appears to be working.
theoldones ago
nope.
he's a pedo.
he's been caught posting real childrens photos.
Artofchoke ago
They don't care. They are willing to die on the hill of protecting pedophilia.
antiliberalsociety ago
Says the guy strangling women...
Artofchoke ago
I'm female. I'm into adult stuff. Like porn, at times. The issue here is ADULT.
antiliberalsociety ago
Lie ^
Artofchoke ago
Okay, honey.
shrink ago
For the sake of argument, we'll assume he is. That linked thread isn't CP, that's a completely legal picture. It's obviously suggestive, and the most probable reason for posting it would be because it's suggestive and therefore arousing to someone, but the issue at hand is banning someone. What do they get banned for? Not that thread to which you linked. Not that image. Not for the loli stuff, which wasn't posted to the gaming subverse at all. The only ban that makes any sense is a ban for spamming, but everyone knows that isn't the real problem everybody has with the guy.
"He should be banned for being a pedo" doesn't work, because you're banning someone based on who you think they are, rather than the content they posted, which doesn't include CP anywhere. People need to be banned for breaking the rules, using a consistent system that applies to everyone, which is quite clearly NOT happening here. If I'm a murderer, should I be banned? If I say I'm a murderer and I post gore to a gore subverse, which is entirely legal, I should be removed? Banning needs to be done based on actions, not based on the identity of the person posting. That's just a few steps removed from "Nazis are completely unacceptable and deserve their bans." That's why this topic is so controversial and you keep getting downvoted in this thread, because people associate Voat with free speech and see this as the start of a slippery slope.
I've said a great deal more about this and at this point there's nothing you can say that hasn't been said to me by someone else and countered in one of my other posts. You want him gone because he's a pedophile and because he posts loli images; that's a hypocritical double standard couched in emotion, we can't allow that, otherwise this place is no better than reddit. You either get banned for breaking the rules or you don't get banned at all.
Schreiber ago
Honestly, most of these people were just going:
"I don't like him/his post and therefore he should be banned."
shrink ago
Yeah. I've repeated myself half a billion times at this point. It really does boil down to that, and any reasonable justifications are an afterthought.
I understand their viewpoint, I completely get where they're coming from. But there's only two options here:
1) you ban someone based on subjective emotion from an impression of the things that person posts, which are allowed and not breaking any rules, and you don't care that it's hypocritical or a double standard because the content is so offensive that hypocrisy doesn't matter to you
2) you defend the offensive user because even though you don't like the shit he posts or what he does, he hasn't broken any rules, and you understand that "he should be banned because I don't like his content" is a really bad precedent for shit
i_scream_trucks ago
Or he's just a pedophile
Artofchoke ago
We've been here a long time. We know this guy. They either don't know or don't care.
Dortex ago
https://youtu.be/OawrlVoQqSs
Itty-bitty_Tity-trap ago
I saw that kids knees, filthy degenerate shit.
Dortex ago
I'd do a Sharia compliant one for you, but my computer caught fire months ago.
kneo24 ago
If you're going to troll that extensively with pedophilia, you deserve to be called a pedo even if you aren't one.
I use the same mindset with people who act like shills or a jew. At some point there's no effective difference.
In this case, I think it's pretty clear it's spam. Even people who "shitpost" and "troll" make comments in their own submissions more regularly than he does.
shrink ago
And personally I agree with you. I think he's someone who intentionally tries to stay just inside the rules while stirring up shit as much as possible, given what little I know about it (only started looking into this today). That's not the major problem though, which is the banning of someone sitewide despite not breaking any rules. It's inconsistent and hypocritical, we can't just ban someone for something that doesn't break rules, even if everybody knows what the score is. That's a foot in the door for reddit tier info control, because at that point the rules don't matter and you're making executive decisions that affect someone based on subjective rationalization.
kneo24 ago
Well, he wasn't banned sitewide. Just from the subverse of v/gaming.
shrink ago
Are you sure? I thought Putt banned him from the site. Most of my info is secondhand so idk, all I know is Putt banned him. Given what I've seen though, he didn't break any of the gaming verse's rules, but got banned anyway.
think- ago
No. You can always check the ban log for sitewide bans on the front page, as linked by @kneo24 above.
kneo24 ago
You can check the ban logs yourself or actually read what Putt wrote.
Site ban log
v/gaming ban log
VicariousJambi ago
Has this guy ever made one on topic post? Obviously the community doesn't like his content. They have judged it as spam and constantly down vote it. He hasn't changed. Banning him makes it so the users don't have to downvote him every single time.
Now the users don't have to deal with his bullshit anymore and he can still post his shit in the appropriate subs.
worthlesshope ago
Yes he made several but latest was 2 months ago. Just look at his comment history. Every single post of his got downvoted no matter what he said I assume because he likes loli. So people just auto downvote him whenever they see him.
Anyone wise enough would then stop commenting if they'd just continue to get downvoted by the angry mob of voat. You can even see people just replying to him on his NORMAL posts saying "fuck you go away. We don't want you here."
cthulian_axioms ago
The tribe has spoken.
Decidueye ago
Most of his fan art in /v/gaming stayed above zero points, so it's inconclusive.
CameraCode ago
The subverse apparently has no sub rules just voat ones. https://voat.co/v/Voat/about/rules
I'm totally fine with them deciding that his posts are off topic, but like I said they were of video game characters and marked as nsfw. I'm also not calling for him to be unbanned, but this is a good instance of the need for some sub rules, like "gaming art is off topic, and banable" or "nsfw gaming art is bannable".
If the mods are unactive and don't want to take care of the sub, they should be replaced. Putt shouldn't have to do this.
worthlesshope ago
I looked all of his /v/gaming posts I can't believe I'm putting in the effort. But none of his posts marked NSFW were actually NSFW at worst it's tights and bikinis or underwear. He keeps his porn posting to the porn subs. They are all adult too none of it was loli.
Schreiber ago
Pretty much. You can see the same few voaters who hates on lolicon and want to see them banned.
Not much difference on how their nazi ass got banned from reddit, twitter, etc in the first place. It's funny how they want to ban others for having different opinion while whining when their "conservative" opinion gets shut down in reddit and shit.
CameraCode ago
Thank you for your service \‾ (
-)This whole conversation has gotten out of control. If we want to debate whether or not loli content should be allowed at all on Voat, then let's make the conversation about that. But it's not. We're only talking about him getting banned from v/gaming, and as you have shown he followed all the rules and stayed on topic. Some people can't have a conversation about this without getting emotional.
VicariousJambi ago
Spam is a sub rule.
And Putt stepped in because this is a system sub.
And I agree we need more mods. He would have been banned ages ago.
Schreiber ago
Oh yea? That gabara spammed aww, don't see him banned.
What a fucking bullshit.
CameraCode ago
I know, I am simply making the point that there clearly is need for a more descriptive rule of spam and what qualifies as spam if some goats are divided on this. I know it's not just me. Perhaps he would have changed his behavior if the rule was defined better. He doesn't post to subs like v/pics, so it seems he really did think the posts were on topic. There will likely be more issues similar to this unless more rules are made or are better defined.
VicariousJambi ago
You can't make rules about every little thing. Better to leave it ambiguous and have a good mod you can trust tbh. Spirit of the law vs the letter and all that.
If there was a proper mod he probably should have been warned, then banned if he didn't stop.
I think banning this guy in this case is alright. Any normal, sane, person would have stopped posting after the community backlash. It's not like he was trying to be an honest member of the subverse. Just spamming.
jewish_nigger_faggot ago
Impossible. I'm never going to trust a stranger on the internet.