There has been an increasing number of content that is bordering or crossing the lines concerning making "threats." So much so that we have been formally contacted regarding some content. We are better than this.
I'm not a lawyer, and you're not a lawyer, and it isn't Voat's place to defend illegal content. We don't have a staff to review content and don't have a team of lawyers dedicated to deciding what is and isn't lawful. I'm not also into endlessly debating what is and isn't legal as subjects like this often devolve into when everyone at the party is an "internet expert."
We have to deal with this issue and if content is in the grey area, we are going to remove it upon request. We also have to cooperate with law enforcement, I hope everyone fully understands that we are not attempting to operate outside of the law. Voat's purpose is to provide a collusion and censorship free place for discussion, not taking on a government.
It's easy to avoid this entire area: Word content maturely, avoid implicit and explicit language concerning the involvement of violence and the content won't be in question. Simple, so very simple.
After this post there will most likely be "users" testing this line and hoping we remove their content in order to claim censorship on Voat. This is just how things like this work. Don't fall for this Voat. It would be simply incredible if we just worked together on this instead of the typical shit storm posts like this usually generate.
As a reminder: Voat is for your personal, lawful use. See it here: https://voat.co/help/useragreement
That's all. Thanks for reading. Carry on.
Edit:
ProTip: I decided to post this before anything legal would prevent me from doing so. I have a feeling I know where this is going to lead.
I've also updated the canary to reflect this as well (this may be the last time that little guy gets an update, we will just have to wait and see).
view the rest of the comments →
DOTR_for_ZOG ago
Pretty reasonable request. Hate speech is made up BS, but the 1st ammendment (for US Goats) doesn't cover incitement to violence.
That being said, reference my user name for my feelings on which group is clearly agitating for the destruction of free speech.....
bareknuckles ago
Pretty reasonable request. Gun violence is made up BS, but the 2nd amendment (for US Goats) doesn't cover scary looking assault rifles.
DOTR_for_ZOG ago
Hmmmm... Seems a bit off to me.
HostileTakeover ago
Unless you guys have laws that make the medium responsible for any incitement,I wouldn't break a sweat.Plenty of leftist subs on Reddit call for violence against the Right and get off Scot-free.
DOTR_for_ZOG ago
The only thing that matters in 3rd world countries is who holds the power, not the laws. The US, and most of Europe, is now a 3rd world country simply by the fact that rule of law doesn't exist anymore.
Sheetz ago
Got some double think going on there
fuckingmockies ago
No, he's correct.
DOTR_for_ZOG ago
Feeling offended doesn't equate to having your life threatened.
'Rev' Al Sharpton has incited violence. Tucker Carlson engages in facts or 'hate speech' you Antifa types.
Demonsweat2 ago
Al has incited violence at every protest nigger town he left in ashes, while eating chicken at the Black House 53 times.
DOTR_for_ZOG ago
Al Sharpton's continued career and lack of prosecution shows where the balance of power lies.
Our existing laws in Europe and the US are not being enforced and certain groups, (((one in particular))), continues to degrade our government and legal system.
bushka ago
Giving Al Sharpton a platform demeans black people. The let him persist to continue the lie that blacks are persecuted victims.
Itty-bitty_Tity-trap ago
Speech is useless for those that know you won't fight back
DOTR_for_ZOG ago
Great example of the caved heads that won't fight back is the QRV cancer.