We have had 0 (zero) gag orders, National Security requests, FISA orders, injunctions, super-injunctions, publication bans, nor any free-speech prohibiting sanction against us, nor against Voat, nor against any signed-in user of Voat, nor against any guest user of Voat.
Please refer to the Last edit time for the most recent effective date of this notice.
view the rest of the comments →
calliecat ago
If you omit the long middle part, the true meaning of this canary is clear: "we have HAD 0 (zero).... to the date of the last posting/updating of this notification". Since the last canary update, there has probably been a gag order, National Security Request, FISA order, injunction, etc. Very concerning.
Chiefpacman ago
Can you explain this canary in lamen terms? It's really starting to make me feel stupid.
Sanegoati tried explaining it. I'm familiar with canary in the coal mine metaphor. How is this post protecting future posts?
SaneGoatiSwear ago
sanegoat's fine.
if they gag our admins, we can never know.
so the admins always keep posting this
they can't be made to lie to us, so if they get gagged, the couldn't click the update anymore, cause that would be lying to us (gag's can compel you not to speak truth, but not to lie)
thus telling us without telling us there's been a gag.
HarveyHarveyJones ago
At this point i'm not even convinced atko is himself anymore. I can never say for sure like some other users on here. And it would be nice to get a poll going.... it'd be awful if atko really was just himself, just much busier with stupid shit to deal with from voat, possibly all sorts of outlets. The admins website had a big effect of the election imo. Let's say hillary/soros/royals/elite stepped in and asked questions, then demanded answers... maybe even action... but at what point do these people stop to think about consequences? No such point exists because they're busy wearing about their next move to stay clean. He might not be dead... and he may very well still be admin of the site... but how hard would it be to find someone who knows computer-savy Web design, whose code punchy, and can figure out how to seem real with his audience. Then again how hard is it to strike fear into someone who operates a site that was hosting explicit CP and maybe something to do with all the [_____]gates and hacking over emails. I imagine you make quite a few enemies when rejecting regulated moderation requests.