I have seen so many insults, bad words and racism around voat that it seems it has turned into the crossroad of Gross people can we implement some moderation of the content.
Even if it's automated, it would still be that.
I’m just a tiny voice in an ocean of noise. Thar be some whales here. I reckon everyone’s lists would have lots of matching names. God they’re fuckin’ noisy sometimes! There’s orcas too. They might be fun to play with(?), but FUCK those teeth! I can only hope I might pass for a porpoise. I fuck around enough cause it’s interesting and sometimes I can focus long enough to sound like I know how to like I know how talk. Seals are a hoot and mostly fuckin’ stupid. There’s tons of shrimps and crabs. The ocean is a big place so the only real problem is the trash. So far as I’ve seen, ideas aren’t trash in these parts. I guess that means you folks are doing the right things and I figure to stick around whilst that continues to be the case. Thanks, dudes.
The sub must remain on the basis of free speech. The content doesn't matter. If we are to maintain our platform of free speech then regardless of the controversy it causes it must be restored and remain.
It seems to me that "purging" under option 1 is just another form of censorship, just one that you happen to be comfortable with. I don't see any difference between disabling the subverse (i.e. killing its message) and purging the mods (i.e. killing the messenger). All the options that you have presented involve modifying a discussion that you don't like - which is clearly censorship.
So if you are going to chose to censor things on voat, at least have the balls to acknowledge what you are doing and don't pretend you aren't stepping down to the exact same level as reddit. In fact, its funny that when voat starts to deal with the EXACT SAME PROBLEMS as reddit, they respond in the EXACT SAME WAY; exerting controll rather than letting the community thrive on its own. If you don't like the subverse, then block it. If you want control of the subverse, tough, go start one that has a similar name and start a more popular spinoff.
But if you do any of these options, then you have taken a large leap towards undoing the entire purpose of this site and it will immediately become just a reskinned reddit.
Please explain to me what the 1st amend is worth on an international website not hosted in the US alone? How does it trump all the other laws in countries were Voat content is being served via Cloudflare? Voat has to adhere to the laws of the countries their content is hosted in, Voat choose to use Cloudflare, thus choose to host their content on servers spread all over the world with different laws. I find it kind of silly that US law is the most important thing here. If so, please stop using Cloudflare OR make this a US only site by hosting it on US servers exclusively. @atko
Perhaps others feel that constructively discussing the "problems with black culture" is not the intent of a sub called "niggers".
Additionally, your reasoning offers a legitimate goal (improving things) that could be achieved without racism. Why should this be accepted as an excuse for racism then?
Let the 1st Amendment of the Constitution continue to find a home here.
Do nothing -> Option two.
That said, survival is paramount. If a sub actually presents an existential threat to VOAT due to legal i$$ues it presents then do what you have to do to keep VOAT alive. Free speech is nothing if no one can hear it.
Voat already serves content thats illegal in countries like the UK. Seems the site owners don't give a fuck about any other law than US law. Even though their website is served via international servers at Cloudflare.
If they want only US law to apply here, they should host it in US only. But who am I. I wish they would make it more clear that Voat is for US citizens only.
. Seems the site owners don't give a fuck about any other law
Thanks for the reply but I think you have been poisoned by cultural relativism. The First Amendment is not "just an American Law". It is a universal right of all men. It is an innate right.
All violations of the 1st Amendment that we see in Britain and Scandinavia and Germany are the product of a socialist-collectivist mindset which rejects the fundamental notion of democratic rights. These violations are just about power and the will of an elite to control the many.
There is no principled and reasoned argument by the elite in Europe against the 1st Amendment. You do not hear debates on this. Power is their only argument.
If the concept of a democracy is to hold, people must be allowed to speak freely and without fetter. The more speech we have, the more reasoned arguments can foster wise outcomes from Government and society.
The principles of the US Constitution's 1st Amendment are, thus, at the core to Western Democracy. The USA is the "shining city upon a hill" for this reason.
Now tell me how you want someone else to determine what you can say and think.
“How do I know what I think until I see what I say?” -EM Foster
I agree but is not really based in reality. Fact is that some subs here are illegal in countries such as the UK. It is a fact. You can say the UK has bad law, but it is their law. Anyhow, it is off topic in here. I'm just spewing, haha.
The UK can stop Cloudflare from serving content that is illegal in the UK on the Cloudflare servers located in the UK. As long as Voat uses Cloudflare, their content is served on servers located in different countries, the content on those servers have to adhere to the laws of those countries.
US law doesn't trump UK law for servers located in the UK. Though I realise judging by the amount of DMCA requests I get, some people think US law applies worldwide.
So ideally, Voat would be 100% hosted in the US, then only US law applies on content served by Voat. Until then it will be weird to me to cite the US constitution on a website that isn't exclusively hosted in the US.
If the UK wants to stop citizens from accessing information, that is national news. There was a case of Sweden blocking specific content in coordination with the content provider (I believe it was the dailymail.com). It got international attention, the kind of attention that embarrasses politicians.
So, by all means, let the UK violate the rights of its citizens to read content. I relish the fire storm that will create. We can document the hell out of it and make it news for months and that will make the next "Brexit" that much more severe for the establishment..
Power has its limits. It is good to see those limits brought into view. So bring it on, UK Censors!
Option 1. Fuck rogue moderators. If inwanted my speech controlled I couldve stayed at fuck-ville aka reddit.
Investors? Clearly they dont know what they invested in then. Good, bad, ugly, its part of voat, so fuck them too for not knowing and then trying to alter it because their name is attached.
I don't care about niggers. But lolicon is not freedom of speech. It is abusing a right. Voat shouldn't host subs that share lolicon. Even more so because it is fucking ILLEGAL in many countries. Or is the US law the only law that counts on a website served via international Cloudflare servers?
My account here is fairly new, and even though I’ve been reading stuff here almost every day since the summer of ’15, I know that my understanding of Voat’s inner workings is limited.
It should also be added that I have a quite sceptical view on the more crude and inarticulate racism, homophobia etc. that we see here. – It bores me, immensely, most of the time. But “I would die for it’s right to exist”.
Having now also read the top comments, here, I'd like to state that “Rinse and Repeat” / Option 1 sounds like the way to go.
I am intrigued though, about the we-may-even-have-more-options remark …
About sponsors & potential investors: I don’t think there is any reason to try to pander to the mainstream money. That ship has sailed. Probably.
Voat is a niche phenomenon. Seems to be, irrevocably. – “We few, we happy few, we band of brothers” etc. etc.
True. I tried to bring forward the problems of being an international website, served via international servers brings. Seem @atko doesn't give a fuck about legalities. As long as Voat serves its contents via international servers (Cloudflare), they have to abide by the laws of the countries those servers reside in and not just US law. This is will become a big problem when Voat grows bigger.
It is not just US law that governs the "free" speech here. But pointing out that fact will result in nothing at all. Except for tons of down votes, people don't want to hear the truth.
When someone hijacks a forum for discussion, suppresses free discourse, and begins silencing/banning people from discussing the policy it becomes very apparent that their ideals are counter to free speech.
The short term outcome of this particular sub should be irrelevant to the decision. At the end of the day this is a forum for free speech. Like what someone has to say or not they are entirely entitled to say what they want. You're also entitled to ignore or refute what they say. But when an entity takes the specific action of suppressing discourse we all are worse for it.
I don't care what happens to the sub in particular. But this attempt at suppression is what needs to be dealt with. Anyone caught intentionally trying to subvert the ideals of free speech needs to be removed from any level of authority. Let the individual dictate what content they want to or don't want to see
I say let it die. If the public's (the average voat user) opinion of a subverse is that it's bad or too controversial, it will loose members and visits really fast. I really think Voat should maintain freedom of speech, as annoying as it sometimes may be.
As far as being damaging to potential investors or companies interested in buying ads : I think it was pretty evident from the getgo you were not going to attrack Disney or Kelloggs. I'm guessing there is a slew of potential companies with products maybe more adult male oriented that would still love to hand you over their money. Voat is fleshing itself out as something very different from Reddit and that's something that should be kept in mind.
If i walk into a bar and I overhear someone being blatantly racist, yes I find it disturbing, but saying racist things and doing racist stuff are two totally different things. If someone mistreats or takes advantage of or subjugates someone else because of race, then I think that requires examination and condemnation (as all prejudicial behavior ought to illicit). But if theu're just saying racist things then they're to become the subject of mockery and satire.
but there is no such thing as racism, in fact being white not being able to say a fucking word, nigger. is simply disgusting. what does exist is prejudice, which "racism" is ment to destory. killing your own thought for...... asjkldfh its a brainwashing tatic fucking grow up.
racism is a made up staw man term, designed to keep black people angry, and whites in check. it is brainwashing.
noone on /v/niggers would call ben carson a nigger, or a a hard strong black blue collar worker a nigger as well. Its simply a way they have found a word to represent their judgment on a persons character. /v/niggers would quickly call a white person a nigger if it falls in thier judgement. And that SIMPLY DISPROVES ANY TYPE OF "RACISM" THAT YOU BELIEVE. Same calling them googles etc. its just a fucking word.
does the sub get stupid, yes.. no different than any other subverse.
lest not forget "racism" is path to obtain wealth... but i digress
I have never understood why Jesse Lee Peterson is not more popular on voat. I think its more because he christian and being atheist is trendy... but i digress again.
Perhaps problematic subverses could be hidden by default, and only visible to those who make the conscious decision to unhide them for viewing. Of course, this would probably lead to other subverses being flooded by the same content.
I think this question resolves itself nicely if we adhere to a couple of simple principles.
The first is that non-censorship applies at the admin level, not the moderator level. The second is the principle of ownership; found a subverse, and it's yours, to do with as you like. Give it away to someone else, and then it's theirs, to do with as they like. Admins only need to get involved if the transfer is the result of theft, or if a subverse is simply abandoned with no-one at the wheel at all.
We should not have default subverses. What floats to the top is what floats to the top.
one would at least be acting like a real world place. when someone comes in and causes trouble, you take care of business. two is fine if it doesn't cause problems. three seems like over stepping the bounds our manifesto. i'd go with two at first, if it didn't die but spilled out and started to cause problems with voat, then option one seems the most logical. one makes the most sense
It's really hard to believe that Voat has a "No Censorship and Freedom of Speech model " when FatPeopleHate is proud to have banned over 1200 people.
No other sub is allowed this kind of retarded censorship shit. When mods on other subs start banning people for speaking their minds those mods get removed.
Why does FatPeopleHate get a special status to censor any free speech?
Because they have 33,000 users compared to the top sub /v/news which is 70,000 users.
In other words, probably about 1/4 - 1/3 of this site are FPH users. Piss them off and they probably already have some other place to go. Piss them off, and the site drops to substantially less activity, quite possibly financial support for operating the site also.
1 conveys the message that a loud group of users can take over any sub they like. In this case it's justified, but what happens when SRS show up demanding /v/gifs?
2 conveys the message that mods can act as a strong safety measure against brigades
The solution here is for the userbase to rally under a trustworthy mod and get a new subverse. The fact is that subverse history isn't really all that important, and while it's sad to lose all that old content, probably no one is ever going to go trawling through it, so it's no great loss.
On the other hand, admins intervening and kicking a mod out because some users loudly protest sets a really bad precedent. It's easy to support it now because it's the result we all want, but what happens when an SRS brigade decide they want to kick out the mod of /v/videos because they have links to /v/niggers. Do you listen to them? Or do you only allow certain users to kick out mods.
Disable and get rid off. Your dedication to freedom of speech and neutrality will survive in tact. Those who cannot discern the difference btw freedom of speech and denigrating speech, well they are judgementalists and as such never will.
The significance of /v/Niggers is HUGE and it must be protected in the same way we protect free speech. Voat's free speech ideals will die if we allow controversial subs to die for the sake of pleasing the politically correct or the prudish.
That said, this problem results from mistakes made when approving bad requests on /v/SubverseRequests.
I recommend the process of nominating new moderators be made more public, specifically by notifying subscribers and by making an automated post to that subverse with details about the application... perhaps making that post a sticky.
OPTION 1: The appeal of Voat over Reddit is its lax approach to free speech. This website would not have a market if it wasn't for Reddit deliberately stifling the free marketplace of ideas and opinions. If you want to copy Reddit and its virtue-signaling heavy-handed approach to governing the community, go right ahead, but good luck differentiating your product and theirs.
Yes, it will never end, that is a fact, the sooner everyone and the admins come to terms with it the better. Freedom of speech is a constant fight. Option 1 is the only solution. I just wanna make sure that everyone understands that the moment Voat bow downs to investors is the moment this site is at risk of censorship, and loses it's whole meaning.
The answer to bad speech is better speech. I may not like the concept of the forum, but I can choose to either a) ignore it or b) challenge it. But the only answer that is not acceptable is c) deleting it. Voat is loaded with racism, but I can look past the racism or challenge it. THAT is what freedom of speech lovers do. FoS lovers don't seek to ban people's voices. If that affects Voat's bottom line in reference your public image, then those who are against you for it aren't needed here.
I know those aren't exactly what you asked, but in general it's how people really need to live their lives.
Don't worry you'll eventually find some investors that don't have a problem with niggers. I know they're a pain in the ass but they spend money too. You just need to find some investors that can really get behind the niggers.
Don't worry the niggers don't really tarnish your image, that's just what the MSM would have you believe. Voat should be all inclusive for niggers too.
Dave Chapel was really successful getting investors that didn't mind the niggers either. You should reach out to him.
With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably.
To do what you propose in 2 and 3 is to deny freedom of speech. It's a slippery slope. I mean just look over at reddit. I just caught them secretly adding 200,000 votes to President Obama's AMA from 4 years ago so that it appears at the top of /r/all, because to hell with what people actually upvoted. The admins want to control what you see but will ban others who they think are doing the same. I even had trouble posting this finding because reddit did some shady shadow banning of me. Reddit wasn't always like this, but over time they made a number of seemingly reasonable steps in this direction, each step was made carefully with the best of intentions.
It's easy to justify options 2 and 3 for something called /v/niggers, it's much harder to keep doing 1 and defend their right to say what they want. But freedom is not supposed to be easy. You know what the right thing to do is. And yes, you will be mocked. And yes, you will probably have to do it again. And again. AND AGAIN. But that is how it must be. Going with popular opinion over principles always bites you end in the end. Thankfully, the people here are here because their opinions are not always popular and they have faced heavy pushback from social conformists. Voat is one place where I suspect the majority will insist that you keep doing 1. And we will continue to be mocked for it. In return, we get true freedom. Sounds like a good deal to me!
I'd just like to say that the use of the term "nigger" probably deflates it more than it offends. I suggest that it would be used more and by a wider variety of people.
On an unrelated note, having subs optionally support anon posts like this alongside normal posting (like a checkbox a posting how nsfw is now) would be pretty cool I think.
As you've said, and I'll quote you directly. "Voat Is Yours"
Okay. I can even understand the investors being nervous but here's what I'd put in front of them.
Voat users create subverses and claim content based on what they want to see in an aggregate. v/niggers or v/fatpeoplehate or even v/redditisashitsiteforwankers #redditisashitsiteforwankers express views and opinions of the users and not necessarily the ownership. The ownership has sworn to leave content creation up to the users. The users have taken over the brunt of the work and will continue to do so. They'll continue, that is, until someone with money decides to turn it into another reddit. You could then present a timeline based solely on fact that the investors can check out for themselves exactly what happened to reddit and the continuing decline in membership. Explain also that this site and subverses like v/niggers and v/redditisashitsiteforwankers is a response to what happened at reddit.
I know that it takes money to run servers and grow that server base for more content but, it may need to be met with an attitude of, "Invest as is and you can remain anonymous, invest and prepare a PR statement in response or don't invest and other means of payment for those servers will be sought"
Granted there may be a more diplomatic way about it but I just can't think of one this late
Option one, and this time, give it to someone who has proven that they are loyal to free speech and that they cannot be bought off. Give it to someone who has a great deal of integrity and discipline.. Someone like me..
One thing that Voat needs is a serious discussion on what rules "all" mods and owners of subs follow regarding deletions and bans, then compiled and added to the FAQ. If this was clearly laid out there would be fewer questions to answer when an issue arises.
Just because Voat supports free speech, doesn't mean admins should be held hostage by a single sub. The balance to free speech is dealing with the consequences of the stupid things we say. I suggest separation of the subverse into a flagged ghetto of provocative idiocy.
Give me freedom (of speech) or give me death. There are three generalizations that can be made about any controversial post: 1) the reader agrees and it re-solidifies their own beliefs, 2) the reader disagrees and it re-solidifies their own beliefs, or 3) the reader is apathetic and it doesn't affect their own beliefs at all. v/niggers tends to be #3 for me personally.
There are some very pure freedom of speech arguments to be made for option 1, which is probably the option I'd support. That said however, the practical real world situation says that without advertisers and investors voat cannot probably last long term, especially if something drastic happens, such as Reddit's The_Donald moving here due to a ban. I would have concerns as to how voat would survive such an influx of folk, numbering well into the 1000's. The site needs investment, and that won't happen if an advertisers message is displayed along side a sub such as niggers or fatpeoplehate. They will just stay with reddit or others.
If I had to choose between those subs and Voat as a whole, I'd choose Voat.
Option 1, simply because investors always ruin everything.
They're concerned with P&L, not with whatever passion you have for your product. Using investors means that you are making a decision to sacrifice what your company stands for to suit their needs and get their money. It happened to Reddit, and it absolutely will happen again here.
In fact, Voat is already under attack from people who seek to control it. @henrycorp is already trying by eating up subverses, and we've seen how /v/Chicago and /v/niggers have BOTH been compromised.
The fact that a mod admitted to an investor trying to regulate Voat's content shows that I'm not too far off the mark. This is why we need Option 1, it's the only option that lets Voat stay true to what Voat stands for... Free speech and lack of censorship.
I don't like /v/niggers. Censoring them, however, is massively detrimental to everyone, as it's certainly going to lead to Reddit all over again.
I remember in the last good days of what has become "fattit"...
It was a raid from another forum (somethingawful iirc) gaslit the "jailbait" subreddit.
Of course you pick the sub that no one will defend (re: the poemAnd Then They Came). I warned at Jr time - "I'm not defending their content, but this could be just a foot in the door for them to ban any sub they don't like"
Then they fell - fatpeoplehate, et al; existing communities were forced to self-censor (/r/wtf just about turned into forwardsfromgrandma), and everyone has suffered.
You don't ban outlets for people to express themselves. You ban that behavior from schools because those are learning environments, not "expression places"
They stay because we are not going to judge their opinions unworthy.
I think people need to learn on who they choose to moderate their subs. This keeps happening because people keep modding retards. If people keep losing their subs bnecause of who they add maybe we should just let the sub die? You know. Instead of begging admins for help.
I voat that we make moderators less powerful. They don't need godlike powers to fulfill their role. We need to find a way to push permanent solutions to the community at large.
Option 2 is not really an option because the subverse will not exactly "die". It would linger on a zombie sub. Eventually, voat could fill with such zombie communities. New users might have to spend time deciphering where the "real" subverses are, and would rightly question which set really represents voat.
Option 1 - but the sub should go to an active, contributing member (someone who has been there a long time, and who clearly cares for the community) not just to the first user who requests the sub because that's how a rogue mod got in last time. I also agree there should be some way for active members to vote mods in and out. Absent that pick someone who has contributed a lot of content - @Cancel-Cat-Facts. This was an awesome sticky to see after a long day. Thank you.
@adhdferret would be my elected /v/Niggers mod. Honestly I feel like if we're gonna be free speech, we should have the ability to vote a Mod out. @Owlchemy (great idea btw) was working on a subverse request idea, would voting be an idea along side /v/SubverseRequest to curb mod abuse? @PuttItOut@Atko
I have blocked the sub, and would normally say 'let things run their course', but considering admins have intervened in subs before in order to preserve the integrity of the sub's soul, I would say intervention is warranted. Treating subs differently just because you agree or disagree with them is a stepping stone in solidifying bias. While the userbase of Voat has degraded into people who downvote liberal opinions no matter how well thought out while upvoting conservative opinions that match their narrative when it's demonstrably true that the users have not even read the linked article (just look at the article about Joe Biden's son prosecuting one of the most vile child sex offenders ever, in which 80%+ of the comments misinterpret the title to think that Joe Biden's son was the worst child sex offender ever), it's important to maintain neutrality as an admin.
Steam is going to be produced regardless of if that particular place exists or not. However, removing a vent often incites explosions. Why not just settle this place as a place of shared hatred? It beats getting real people hurt.
It is the same reason we can burn the American flag. FREEDOM! Option 1 is the only option. Feel free to open up /cracker as well. I will have freedom to block it as well.
The means to control eddit are known and they will be repeated here. So long as we rely on people to curate subs, it will be easy to control popular subs.
Free speech needs to prevail. We are already heading into 1984 so we need at least one space where anyone can say anything regardless of its content. SBBH FTW!
The best thing to do is that which makes the word lose its power as quickly as possible. I don't know what letting it die entails, but if its there and ignored by most of the community, that would pretty much speak for itself. It would be wrong to remove a copy of Tom Sawyer because the word nigger was printed in it, even though I don't want anyone called that word. Beware of investors, they can suck.
I think disabling it just because of investors is a slippery slope. It's one of the things that led to the current state of that other site. I vote for option 1.
It would be disappointing if everyone sat around and watched these scumbags ruin this site like they did the other.
Let it die. Freedom of speech means that the government can't suppress the expression of ideas. It does not mean that everyone is guaranteed a forum in which to spew garbage. It entails the possibility of being ignored, or scorned.
Such is life as an adult and a citizen of an un-repressive society.
In instances like this power should be given to the top x contributers to the sub(X=1 per every 1000 subscribers) while things are sorted out. We also need to get some user supermajority mutiny made available. After a sub reaches a minimum numbers of subscribers it becomes a community worth protecting, say 2000, if fuckery comes about users can mutiny and give power over to those top x contributers.
Edit. Why are we anonymous in this? FetusChrist here
Purge the moderators. Hand it over to @cancel-cat-facts and @adhdferret because they seem like the two most trustworthy people that care about the subverse.
Also, ban @whitesoimustberacist from the site. Delete the account. It was probably sold to the CTR people that were offering hundreds / thousands of dollars to a few active members, a few months back.
Definitely agree with IP Banning @whitesoimustberacist. Motherfuckers need to have consequences for pulling shit like this, and if they're buying accounts it should become a net loss for them.
So expand the idea until circumventing it isn't trivial. I'm not a coder, but there should be some sort of permanent Fuck You for people who do shit like this.
I think the subverse is a stain on this website and prevents critical discussion, but I don't think it should cease to exist because A) that's censorship and B) it creates a persecution complex for those who post there and provides vindication for their beliefs. I'm just wondering if people would feel the same if it was an Uhuru/ black nationalist subverse.
My general thoughs? I think that I sound like a racist to liberals and a race traitor to racists.
If potential investors are more concerned with v/niggers than they are v/loli, v/youngteens they're fucked in the head. Just like whoever the fuck it is that likes pretending that those two, and quite a few other image based subverses are any form of "free speech". And I know, "But the Supreme Court said....", yeah and they've also determined a presidential election outcome illegally, say it's okay to murder babies in the womb, and refuse to see cannabis as Life Liberty & the Pursuit of Happiness, or a protected religious sacrament. So fuck them too.
It's awfully fucking odd though, sarcasm, hyperbole, other literary devices, and maybe even a little racism are so damned controversial, yet feeding child rape enthusiast, and those who like to prey on slightly older children whose brains aren't even developed yet is just honky-fucking-dory....
I feel that voat died with v/ovenmagnets, and the fact that the site is so delusional that sexual images of children from just under the legal age to toddler are "free speech", and appropriate for this site, while "dangerous" subverses like v/ovenmagnets had to go, and now apparently v/niggers is on the chopping block.
You'll probably destroy voat no matter what you do, but trust me on this, as long as v/loli, v/youngteens, and anything similar remains, even if you get investors I'll make it a personal mission to make sure they don't stay for long. Might as well bring back v/ovenmagnets....
Not seeing how anyone is "Standing Behind" a "No Censorship", "Freedom of Speech" model though, the purge against "antisemitism" took place a long time ago with the removal of v/ovenmagnets, and it's easy enough to gather from the announcement you guys would be thrilled to purge v/niggers....... Just so long as lolis and youngteens can coexist with pizzagate... and the "investors" don't get "spooked"..........
I believe that this will not happen again if a mod is carefully chosen. Back in the day, Voat didn't have janitors so everyone was a mod. Now a sub can have just one mod.
I don't know anything about it, but the ONLY viable option is #1. #2 is giving completely up on freedom of speech. If you allow a terrorist to shut it down then we might as well go back to reddit. #3 is effectively the same as #2. It is an admit defeat and run away approach.
The only option is to ban the evil oppressor that has nothing better to do with his (her?) time than infringe on the rights of others. EVERY effort (although I'm fairly sure there are no effective means) should be taken to ban the user in question. They should not be allowed on the site ever again if there were any possible way to block them.
For your principles to mean anything at all you have to apply them to people with whom you disagree.
Option 1. I came here for freedom of speech. I've got /v/niggers blocked, but I agree with the majority that they should be free to express their opinions.
With that said, rinse and repeat isn't sustainable. There needs to be some kind of process in place to define and handle rogue moderators. IMO, a subverse should belong to its users. So, if someone is doing something that the users disagree with, then they are, by definition, a rogue moderator. The hard part is programmatically defining the users in a way that isn't subject to manipulation. If I had figured that part out, I would've posted something to /v/voatdev by now.
Option 4: Make each subverse state a charter, like the articles of incorporation for a company. Re-mod subverses only for severe charter violations, by analogy to a company president that embezzles money.
This way your decisions are value independent, like a judge impartially holding the presidents of a day care company and a defense contractor to different standards.
P.S. The U.S. presently has a terrible problem with charitable foundation officers hijacking the organizations and perverting their values. You are not alone in your quandary.
i am correct 100% percent that the adims took it over, i dont blame that... saying nigger is racist because you cannot say it as a white person. this site is dead to me
Hopefully this has already been said but I prefer a variation on option 3.
v/niggers should become a special landing page which describes voat's commitment to free speech. And then helpfully links to an alternate subverse that racists would approve of, as well as to a subverse about fighting racism.
Option 1
If you don't like a sub, block it. Although problems like this arise, don't sacrifice freedom of speech to fix it.
I know v/niggers could be an image problem to some but the right investor will eventually come along.
I have it blocked. I don't like it at all and I think it should be disabled, Option 3. I know Option 1 is the popular one and will probably win out but at least I got my opinion in.
I have no idea what is going on over there and I don't know how you "ruin" such a sub. To me it seems like it is begging to be a train wreck just by existing.
really there is no free talking on voat, you will get shot down as soon as you opposed. just delete the sub. its pretty equivalent to what the users do
thanks again, but i dont think i'll spend any more time here.
wanna know how fast i'd get downvoated to nothing for saying that to the free speech kids?
voat is is infected dude, people toss back and forth. i'd just get what kind of money you can out of it, and run for hills... no one that gave a shit about the site would care
I hope you guys come to the conclusion that free speech is a public domain issue. And as a private entity you guys can do whatever the fuck you want. If that means shutting down v/niggers than so be it.
Why is a stickied announcement posted by an anonymous user??.. Sorry if my question seems retarded, but I'm used to seeing announcements by atko or puttitout, not some random anon.. ｏ＿Ｏ？
Only admins can sticky like this. They did it so people arent worried about their online reps and can say what they truly feel. Its even written there in the main post.
This problem requires thinking outside the box. The only was to stop bad behavior here is to remove the cloak of anonymity. Adult content protections and demand name and email address for that sub like the newspapers do. Let the whole world know who is making the comments and you will quickly see it become a thing of the past without haveing to censor anyone. You get to keep your vision and they keep their speech ( if they dare).
Option 2 sends a message that someone with an agenda can dramatically and negatively affect subreddits they do not agree with instead of letting ideas stand or fall on their merits.
Option 3 sends a message that voat no longer has any regard for the principles of free speech.
v/niggers is a rather crude name to be sure, and its a target for sjw aggression
but the truth is that niggers are 12% of the US population commit 55% of all its violent crime.
they are a literal sub-human parasite on our civilization
you simply cant get that information anywhere, its taboo
i can understand why voat doesnt need v/niggers.....but the world does
I dislike the name of that sub and generally dislike the content. However, free speech should be protected. Some of the most-upvoted content in that sub is stuff like this: a Harvard study discussing racism shifting towards anti-white racism. It's not taken out of context. It's a discussion that has value.
I think the more interesting topic is why a free-speech platform such as Voat has such a hard time particularly because of the name of a specific sub. Are other subverses at Reddit banned for being equally racially offensive in nature? Well, reddit.com/r/crackers (a sub "about cringey white people") is a-ok by their standards. So it's not about racism, it's about political correctness.
I have the sub blocked, letting the sub rot or making it go away will force it's users to use the rest of voat as their space for the subs discussions.
I'm really not interested in seeing /v/niggers discussions in any relevant topic. You can already see what I mean with all the jew hate peppered through out voat. I don't think there's much that can be done about that but it would be much worse with /niggers talk sprinkled in.
None of these options sounds good. I'd like to point out that making Voat a bastion of free speech, and making a stand against hate speech are not mutually exclusive goals. I think if you run a bar, and 90% of your clients are white supremacists and you decide that you don't want to hassle people by trying to do anything to discourage the white supremacists from attending your bar, then congratulations, you have respected free speech, and you are now, for all intents and purposes, a white supremacist sympathizer. This is what Voat has become, and for that reason, I don't recommend Voat to my friends because I think this place has a lot of vile people, and I come here to see what people are talking about, while trying to ignore the hate speech. Although it's not easy.
I don't block v/niggers, but I also hardly go there. I have commented a couple times and have been downvoated. No trolling. Nothing to warrant a ban. Get rid of slimy mod. Anon commenting doesn't help much here, could be all alts pushing an agenda.
Admins need to make promise BEFORE DECISION they will make sure "Voats Opinion" is NOT total alt fuckery bullshit.
No matter how disgusting/stupid/ ignorant/silly a subverse may be,it should be left to flourish or wither on the vine all by itself.Don't like a subverse? Don't read it.
go with option #2, once it dies and becomes inactive, someone with the desire can request it to transfer. Voats system already works dont change it for the love of god dont change it.
I'm always for option 1. Seems to work every time this problem comes up. I'm by no means a supporter of the sub, but do support their right to exist. I've heard very little on this exact matter but think I know enough to recognize when change is needed. You're doing God's work, keep it up!
I vote option 1. I dislike and disagree with the sub and general contents of the sub. ,But as an Iraq Veteran, I did not swear an oath to only defend the constitution for people I agree with. Freedom of speech means freedom for all. The moment it is not freedom for all, it's not Freedom anymore. It's one group imposing their will on another. The only time speech should be locked down is if it brings harm. Not hurt feelings, but actual harm, such as exploitative pictures of underage children. If /v/niggers becomes a place where people organize lynchings, or encourage others to do so, it needs to go. As long as it's just "Blacks are bad and this is why," then it deserves a place on Voat. Anything less, and we might as well change the URL to LeReddit2.0.com
Rather than directly choosing sides as a mod, in such an event allow admins to trigger a mod election, where all active users in a sub can vote for anyone they want to be a mod. A complete mod election can be triggered by a 51% vote of active users.
For particularly volatile subs (or for subs where the creator sets it this way), set up a vote on a schedule so users can vote for mods regularly -- say, annually.
Democratic subs can't appoint mods at all, existing mods can trigger an election before their term ends by stepping down, or a group of mods can trigger an election for vacant spaces by voting 51% to increase the number of mod spaces.
The problem right now with the moderator system is that it's basically a system without accountability. Mods create and destroy mods, and so all it takes is for a sub to be taken over is one malicious mod.
At the end of the day moderators made believe that they own the communities they moderate. That is simply not true. The communities bring all the value to the community. If we reduce the power to individual moderators, if we allow the community to choose who they want leading them, if we Implement voting systems for key decisions man I feel the admin will need to step in a lot less because democracy tends to be a self regulating system.
I know a lot of people use free speech as a justification for subs like that, but personally I think it should be closed. A wise man once said your mouth is a prison that holds one of the most dangerous prisoners, and the only time you should let it out is when your sure it can't hurt anybody. I think every human being has the responsibility to each other of enjoining the good and preventing the evil, so I ask you users of voat, please prevent the evil. Thank you.
Can you combo Option 2 + 3? Instead of disabling and transferring (Option 3) -> Copy/Paste all the content into a new subverse with proper mods and let the community migrate freely (Go Merkel!), all the while leaving the original one (subverse and mod) intact (Option 2). That way you haven't censored or disabled anything or anyone, just giving the community options.
Option 1 is the clear choice . While i have not ever been to that sub i believe we as a community need to send a clear message to Reddit style mods that their tactics will not be tolerated on Voat .
You have to purge all of the moderators who are subverting your site. Freedom of speech is not a right or a privilege, it's a constant battle, a war of attrition. If you're not ready to fight, you've lost already.
Solve this by drawing up a "constitution" for the sub. Voat-document that all mods of the sub agree on such and such date. If a mod goes rogue, destroys all, and is changing/breaking the rules of the original constitution without it being Voat-officially changed.. kick that faggot to the curb. Problem solved. The end.
-auto_turret
Sorry I'm late to the party, boss made me work.
I'd really like some way to personally unmoderate moderators. If I click on their handle in the moderator's box to the right and uncheck them then all their moderation (banning, spiking stories or posts) becomes unhidden. That way if a moderator runs amok I can just deal with it myself.
I suppose you could have a mechanism in place where if enough people "fire" a moderator they get removed.
censorship is always wrong 100%. it's the reason i left reddit and came here. free speech is always under attack and must be protected at all times. that is the most important thing.
A canary was traditionally carried by miners because it is much more delicate than a human. If it died it was a sign there was poison or insufficient oxygen and the miners had to get out immediately. In this context I mean it was a test of true freedom of speech. If even the most reviled people are allowed to have their say then freedom of speech is truly protected. As it turns out, they are not.
There needs to be a better way for the community to regulate the moderators. If you don't want to deal with it as admins, build a site that truly gives more power to the users. It's not easy, but if you figure it out it'll set you apart from that other censoring site.
Is there an option 4? Doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result... It seems futile.
The only thing you accomplish by censoring them is acknowledging that you can't compete with them in a contest of ideas, that you feel threatened by what they have to say. Honestly, i think a lot of the actual educated racists (capable of defending their stance intelligently) left the sub a long time ago. At least i haven't heard from any of them in a little under a year.
No, it's not. In terms of activity, Voat was doing just fine before the white nationalists came along. I believe it was at its highest popularity after the IAMA controversy.
Also sorry for so many replies but if you look at who posts on those subs they mostly want v/coontown back. The cries to give back v/niggers is from the voat goats wanting to do the right thing but the mess is v/coontown being hijacked a long time ago. Time to put the interests of the site first as well. If voat has more chance of surviving transferring content to coontown then just do that.
The moderators also said that they were fine with just transferring to their current backup subverse of v/coonshire, so Option 3 to either v/coontown or v/coonshire would be the best.
We need a whole new platform that doesn't make decisions on whats allowed and whats not allowed. Something permanent and encrypted with the option of soft deleting where the post is still there but it can be deleted in general view or from your account view. You could always view the "raw" site but paid curated filters would work great as a way to make income for the site. Unpaid filter sets would make the site bearable to use (would be unbearable because of spam), but less often updated because of being community maintained.
Give them both v/niggers and v/coontown and let them choose. Then only allow janitors there that make a written statement that they will mod in the wishes of the majority.
In all seriousness, I think it is time for the admins to pursue other interests. Voat's userbase is not worth your time. They are a bunch of angry assholes who wouldn't have so many problems with censorship if they didn't act like dicks all the time. They don't even have the courtesy to respect the fact that you work full time jobs and can't cater to their every need.
You're not going to get an investor who is interested in free speech with this hateful lot. You'll get one that wants to control the narrative and weed out "undesirables." Most of the users don't even support free speech. Of course, they don't like being censored, but they'd be happy to kill and censor anyone who disagrees with them if they thought they could get away with it.
Be careful if you plan on implementing option 1. It sets a dangerous predicament for the future of Voat. Powerusers, sanctions, and drama-creators will have influence via mob rule. There should defitnetly be exceptions like if the mod accounts were bought/hacked/doxxed then there should be admin intervention. The /v/niggers head mod might have been a troll sleeper agent. Whether you think that's enough to implement rule 1 is up to you. In the case of the /v/Chicago mod, I don't think he should be kicked out since His intention wasn't to destroy the subvoat.
I think transfer the content to coontown because it was the original on reddit. That sub was hijacked by eugenix and populated by his sockpuppets. Give the sub to someone under the guarantee they will keep it for the good of the cmmunity.
Option 1. Free speech first.
Though this sub might / does raise at times to the level of being very racist, real life is not
warm and fuzzy. If people can't handle having to face the real world it's their problem.
provide a paywall between the public and the controversy, in this case put v/niggars behind a voat paywall - unless one is a member/subscribed to v/niggers it can't be accessed without a nominal payment.
This way voat continues to hold these accounts in place but not so much access as to warrant outcries and interference. Besides, voat needs some sort of compensation from these type of subverses.
I'm black, and I like v/niggers. Catching up on the posts on that sub on the way to my affirmative action'ed job at a Muslim and black coddling urban university while sipping mulatto coffee is a source of amusement and joy in my life. Option one is really the only option that I can support, as I'd like for the sub to be restored to what it was. Racism on the internet is really our last avenue to social victimhood and thus free things, which makes us black folks happy. For the love of black people, spread the hate. :3
I don't go to /v/niggers because racism is for morons. But I heartily stand by allowing freedom of speech. If /v/niggers was created by the problemed mod, why take it from him? Don't I have a right to kill my subverses? If people don't like it they will vote with their feet. /v/niggers will become a ghost town and word will get around about the next meeting place.
The mods of the sub were not responsible enough to prevent the takeover. When you own a community that's at high risk of being the target of subversive maneuvers like /v/niggers was, you have to take some precautions. Crying to the authorities because of your failures is, ironically, what the niggers do.
Option 2. Do not cause a precedent. Let them learn a lesson, if they can.
I am ambivalent towards the sub, but the actions of the mod are unwarranted. Antagonizing him further just to drum up drama was possibly also unwarranted.
The flippant me would say to toss the bum out, and let Amalek mod it just for lulz. I want to be reasonable here though, and say that the mod should be removed, and someone else put in place, or some sort of automoderator who would not practice censorship, but would only cull obvious spam.
I dislike the sub but still think people should free to congregate there if they wish. If the "moderators suck" for whatever reason, then people should create a new sub more to their liking.
I don't patronize v/niggers at all but I'd say option 1 is the best. They have a right to be assholes in they're own little corner. Usurping the sub is bullshit. If what's his face wants a polite sub, let him create one and curate it accordingly.
I would say let it be. Those who would be plagued by such a subverse do so willingly. It is as easy as blocking it and moving along.
If it leaks into other things in a negative way it should be handled appropriately but oftentimes the best way to leach the power from something it so ignore its existence. The opposite of feeling is indifference. Indifference takes all the power from something.
The only thing keeping it going is enough people feeling pushed or pulled or generally affected by its existence.
It is the only valid option. Investors should realize that the same majority that was ok with "grab 'em by the pussy" is ok with the existence of /v/niggers, and the only people who do have a problem with the existence of a /v/niggers are a very vocal, very disgusting, very repulsive, and very isolated minority. Most people prefer free speech to censorship. Most people are aware that social marxism is a toxic ideology, and the world is rapidly and increasingly resistant to SJW bullshit and economic terrorism. These investors you speak of would do well to ignore the cries of special snowflakes. History is moving forward and leaving these sycophants in the past. Anyone claiming /v/niggers is bad for business is flat out WRONG. Without free speech, there is nothing special about voat. Anyone who would like to invest in voat would recognize this as its only value, and would recognize how censoring /v/niggers would entirely eliminate that value - I honestly don't believe that there is any pressure from investors who wish to capitalize on voat's platform of free speech. If a so-called investor is putting that pressure on voat, then they are more likely just deep pockets who want to control the flow of information, and thusly, should be considered unfit for a role in the administration of voat.
/v/niggers is a shithole, and I don't give a fuck about it, or the self-righteous fucktards that subscribe to it. I find it funny that a bunch of bigots are crying about someone taking over their precious sub. I hope that cancerous piece of shit sub fucking dies.
That said, I am for free speech, and think the first option is probably the best of those given.
I don't care for the sub, and have it blocked, but no one should be allowed to take over a sub and turn it 180 from its original purpose for their own reasons. Option 1 is the best course of action. Ditto for HenryCorp.
It's got to be 1, but I hate it. Does the sub need a mod? If yes, can we get an indifferent mod, who is truly fucking indifferent?
Someone who doesn't frequent, or care about the sub? Someone with no horse in the race?
Strip the mods from the sub and let the downvotes decide.
Edit- or give it to me, i promise to do absolutely nothing except delete spam and advertisements, and only if notified about it.
So option 1.
Who becomes a mod should be a participant in the sub with good community standings. The rules should be made in cooperation with the community and open to adjustment as needed
While I believe it should stay as it is a freedom of expression issue to remove it.
I would personally let it die. If the community that uses that sub doesn't want to actually support it and generate content that is useful to those who wish to browse it, it doesn't deserve to exist.
Repeatedly requiring admin intervention ot maintain a sub isn't in the overall best nature of the community as it forces admin time on what should be a non-issue.
There's another option: Let the users of a subverse vote to initiate a mutiny against the mods and if more than 50% agree, then there is an election for mod replacements. This would be an awesome new feature, however it's probably difficult to implement well.
Option 1. We can't give them external censorship power via taking over subs. As much as despise racism, I abhor any and all forms of censorship and I will defend the most vile and pointless content from being taken away.
We set our morality, and follow it. If we make exceptions to things we don't like / things that cost us money, then we will end up the same as Every. One. Else.
I don't know. However, I say that these aren't sustainable solutions. Depending on the admins to solve each individual issue is good for a small, cohesive community, but neither of those apply to us. And the more we grow, the less it will apply to us.
Thus, we need to find solutions which gives the community the power to deal with these issues.
One way is by allowing users to remove moderators. To avoid brigading, we can limit this to top subverse contributors, or Trusted Members(decent activity, good recent activity upvote ratio, etc.). Could be done by each user having an individual vote, or by using upvotes as votes.
This could also apply to rules.
The other way I can think of is decentralizing moderation. I can see two ways, we get a fuckton of mods(nominated by the users), or the users moderate themselves.
Either way, the way it would work is by them individually checking whether posts and comments obey the rules, and if a super-mayority agrees that it doesn't, the post is removed.
Neither solution is perfect, though I prefer the first one. The second one could make subverses lose direction.
There is this idea called the "Streisand effect" that creates negative attention from people once someone makes a fuss about something reasonable people think is absurd. There will always be people trying to provoke others with stupid rhetoric. To me, the best course of action is to ignore these people or bots and give the community the ability to mute them. I like voat for its freedom and I tolerate trolls looking for a conflict. I recognize them for who they are and and I don't engage them.
I disagree it tarnishes voat. It makes voat unique. True, you have to have a thick skin here, but this is part of what makes this community unique. Once you censor contributors you become Google and FakeBook. You are not them. Your audience are the people looking for ideas not hosted by the left media. Tolerance is not something the corporate media has.
First and foremost, we must acknowledge that even if we don't necessarily like what the subscribers there say or how they say it, Voat is a platform entirely dedicated to free speech. If we start banning speech of any kind (other than spam, because that is usually agreed to be one of the first things that everyone is fine getting rid of), then it is a slippery slope to keep banning more and more kinds of speech until we turn into another echo chamber like Reddit, where the shadowbans supposedly created to stop spammers are regularly used to silence critics and AutoModerators are set by the subreddit mods to automatically delete any perceived "wrongthink" by the users.
Option 2 is basically surrendering to the people who bought/hacked/doxxed @WhiteSoIMustBeRacist into advancing their agenda, without ever even fighting them. It is an entirely unacceptable response.
Option 3 is the "scorched earth retreat" policy. It might solve the problem for now, but what happens next time, or the time after that, or the time after that? It is a policy that we can't allow to become the norm.
That leaves us with only 1 real option:
Option 1: purge the current mods, and hand them over to a user who supports the community. It may get annoying in how often it repeats itself (who knows, maybe it'll stop in a few months/years when the CTR money has finally dried up), but it prevents these rogues from gaining any permanent ground or doing any permanent damage.
I'm sorry that it keeps coming back to this community, both in terms of "making it difficult to find an investor" and "making life difficult when the site keeps regularly exploding over bad moderators", but right now, I can't see any better way of keeping everyone's free speech protected while also completely rejecting the attempts of these attackers to change our way of speaking and operating.
Apparently, @adhdferret and @Bilbo_Swaggins are both tired of the v/niggers subverse name, and want to have the content just transferred to either v/coontown (their original hope when coming to Voat, but it got taken by a rogue moderator and they moved on to v/niggers) or v/coonshire (their current backup subverse), so Option 3 to either of those subverses is actually the best here.
Like many, I have the sub blocked and find it highly offensive. That being said, if we let SJWs do this for an extreme sub like this, the next step is less offensive subs, then eventually the place gets overrun. That's exactly what these people are counting on. They want you to let it die, that's why they took it over to begin with.
It's a no brainer. The grand majority of Voaters came here because of this exact bullshit on the other site. You need to cut them off at the knees before it gets out of hand. Sure it might seem like a pain in the ass having to do this every couple of months, but it's far and wide worth it.
There's a reason you've had this problem with this sub before, and you'll most likely have it again. The answer isn't to buckle under the pressure, but to be steadfast in your (our) resolved that these strategies that have infected most social media platforms will not be tolerated or allowed to flourish here.
Like many others here, I appreciate the amount of work that this puts on the admins, but that's what sets this place apart from the other site. You're willing to step in and take action to preserve the intent of the site even if it means stepping outside of protocol.
Option 1 is the only clear choice here that will help dissuade people from attempting to force voat to conform. What's more, option 1 is the least likely to make people feel abandoned by the moderators. I blocked the sub but I agree it has every right to continue existing, especially in the state that its subscribers would most prefer.
Option 1, seems to the be the best choice. I don't like the sub just because the very name is meant to incite people. I don't know if there is a better option but I would like to explore the idea.
Coonshire already has about as many posts in the last 24 hours as /v/Niggers does in the same time period, counting the protest posts.
You're just wrong, so thoroughly wrong- all of the mods other than WSIMBR want to move to one of the other subs. You'd know that if you knew the first thing about our community. Which you don't.
Give it to eagleshigh, he's pretty much the only one you can guarantee won't fuck it. There are other users who would do well also, but it'd be unclear if they would just blow it up later.
Let's stop kidding ourselves and go full right by excluding leftists. If not this is just going to keep happening until were in the same position reddit is.
**“All organizations that are not actually right-wing will over time become left-wing.”
The political “law” is often called “O’Sullivan’s Law” and is often stated as “anything that is not actively conservative every day will eventually become liberal.” **
I say option #1. The content on that sub is no better or worse than FPH. Nigger is just a heavy word that some people aren't strong enough to handle. If Voat actually cares about free speech the way they say they do, option #1 is an unmistakable statement in support of that.
Disabling the subverse is letting them win. I'm not really objected to option #2 though. The userbase (formerly) supporting v/niggers is still here for the most part, and i'm sure they would still produce more content than the cucked version of the sub. That sounds like the definition of free speech to me: someone makes a hugbox sub and the users refuse to use it. Still say option #1 is the best bet though
Option 1. It has just as much right to exist as any other verse, regardless of how anyone may feel about it. Allow users themselves to decide how they want to either interact or block it. Even if the process must repeat it still feels like the best option.
I dislike THAT it exists. But it has the freedom TO exist. SRS works on Reddit by systematically infecting subs and controlling speech in each of them.
This should have the right TO exist, just as I have the right to not read it, or to be forced to read /r/shitredditsays or anything else.
Option 1 is the only valid option. Freedom of speech is why I came here. I don't agree with that sub, but I agree with the preservation of the commitment. If we sensor this, it'll be a slippery hill.
VIP740 here. Option one is the only real option. If you allow rogue admins to destroy forums you're not promoting free speech. I have v/niggers blocked and I don't want to see racism spread, but if you abandon that verse you're abandoning Voat.
As far as the investors go... If you can't get enough people to invest in free speech, Voat has failed. I can't offer much, but if v/niggers stands and I know Voat is serious about free speech I'll chip in what I can spare. How much would it take to keep Voat going if each user paid an equal share of the costs?
1 is the only option that does not force voat to bend towards SJW goals. It also shows that if the SJWs do want to waste their time and energy, and possibly even money, on such actions, it will be fruitless in the end anyway, and all they will have done is actually contribute to the things they ultimately wished to censor, only to lose the game when they attempted it. In fact, they only helped the cause they were fighting against.
Any other option would be seen as some sort of 'success' for the SJW scum, and it would encourage more of this type of behavior.
/v/niggers was a place where all the racist stuff can have its own place without cencorship. this mod goes against the spirit of voat, as does the moderator of /v/chicago. i hope /v/niggers sets a policy that gets applied to /v/chicago. both mods remove content that they don't approve of. /v/chicago removes anything negative about the city, aka all the murders, drug and gang violence, and the rising muslim tide in the north and west side of chicago that are blackmailing niggers into enforcing sharia law in their territories.
A sentence like my last 2 would result in a ban from /v/chicago, and this post would give me a ban in /v/niggers. those moderators need to go.
I would like to see a poll placed in subs for removing moderators, which must also have a poll for replacing the removed mod. Anyone can submit their name for replacement, but the community decides who that should be.
Then again...If some kind of bot army is used to remove mods it could get a little ugly. Maybe only allow users who participate in the sub to vote in the polls? With so many posts within the last month? I don't know...Something definitely needs to be worked out though.
Let's pretend /v/niggers was initially made for gansta rappers to call each other "nigga" and investigate the circumstances of Tupac's death. Would converting it to a racist sub justify performing option 1? Anyway, the mere circumstances of the takeover are shady and there should be a sitewide rule change that prevents this type of grab and switch (e.g. new owner must provide continuity to the subverses community.)
So the subverse owner should always be a benevolent dictator and be excellent to his community.
Option 1 should be the poa, thank you for the choice. Take a stand for individual choice to consume or ignore, if the individual loses ability to enforce personal choice then freedom is irrelevant.
Frankly I don't care about being anonymous here so for those who know who I am this is Gator I agree purging the moderators will likely not serve any purpose in this sub so in my humble opinion the sub should simply have a janitor that is held accountable buy moderation logs since you guys already have a janitor that you've appointed it would be very simple for that person to take over this subverse Janitor duties which would only include removing spam. Those are just my thoughts as an outsider to the sub itself.
I know everybody will scream about losing it, but two. Because honestly, 1 is only a temporary solution until it happens again, and I would vastly prefer if we went for the final solution already.
FUCK OFF /pol/ BITCH. I'm practically the only person on this site aside of the admins that don't think black people are sub-human and/or that the world is secretly controlled by jews.
Freedom of speech is freedom of speech. Remove the person censoring others from that sub and remove them from any other sub they mod. Ban them from future mod roles as well.
No I didn't... Thought your ISP gave it to you... and even ipconfig release/renew you still ended up with the same IP at your modem... I'm not computer science guy or anything I'm in construction that's just how it works in my head lol give me an education! :)
Your ISP DOES determine your IP address, that's true, but there's two easy ways to change it quickly. One is to unplug your modem for 5 to 10 minutes. Most ISPs will reallocate the IP address you had previously to a different client in that timeperiod, and then you can, in exchange get a new IP. This doesn't always work. The other way you can do this, is by going into your router settings, and hitting "clone mac address," prior to doing which will make it duplicate the MAC of some other chump on your ISPs network. Combine this with an ipconfig /release /renew, and you will end up with a new address.
They are already making more niggers-themed subverses, with more hateful names, like v/fuckniggers, so now there are dozens of worse subverses scattered around instead of one easily-blockable subverse.
As we stand now i believe we should take option 1 if we allow rogue mods to dictate something the user base is against and against the web site motto of free speech this sub should stay regardless of whether people agree to it or not.
If we allow these people to control the website against the wishes of the user database and the very reason most of us came here which is the right for a community without censorship and general tendency of fluff then we must assure that whenever is necessary these rogue mods be dealt with and the subs be kept as is as a mark for this website to say that it will not stand for people trying to dictate which content may or may not be present or dictate the overall community content. Down with rogue mods.
Option 1. Voat needs to be a bastion of all free speech. Let the niggers create and hate on us non-niggers. Maybe non niggers and niggers alike with will come to a consensus they hate each other while also accepting criticism from one another is part of life. No fucking snowflakes.
Option 4. None of the options listed are good. #2 encourages hostile takeover of subs, and we already know how that worked out on reddit. #1 isn't perfect either, because it requires subjective manual intervention from admins which is unsustainable, and well, subjective.
There has to be some sort of "mutiny" option where users of a sub can vote out a cancer mod. Having an automated, objective "fail-over" system is the only way.
Option1. Its the most work (any most annoying... rinse, repeat, rinse repeat). But it is the most worth while as like everything in life. The other two options are compromises that would/could lead to death of voat.
Never, ever delete a sub on this website. Free speech contains both the good and the bad and we need to show the world that this is not a place where censorship can win. Purge the bad moderators and hand the sub over to ones that are more qualified.
Obviously option one is the starting point, the bare minimum of what needs to be done. Purging the mod is a given. The asshole has gone full reddit power mod, and the cure for that kind of cancer is not just isolation but excision.
From a corporate view I understand why you'd want to rebrand v/niggers. It's a radioactive name when you're trying to find investment to keep Voat rolling. Much as I worry it might be the thin end of the wedge I'd be okay with disabling the sub and transferring the content to something less aggressively titled.
What I think is what I thought long ago. The users need a way to remove mods. If you want mods to be a stewardship and not an ownership, they have to be replaceable. And to quit dealing w this over and over the users need a say in who runs a sub.
let's be real, there are certain subs which are 'Name Brand' so to speak. IAMA, TIL, CatPeopleHate, Niggers, Chicago... It's a name everyone knows and it's the first search term used for said subject. So, even if they're not an @system sub they're Named. Those should be run by that community. IDGAF what goes on in v/philatilistsofMuncie. I mean nothing against philatilists of Muncie, but they should probably be able to police their own shit.
The horse has left the barn. I hate the existence of that sub, and probably a lot of the people in it, but none of that matters. If Voat's admins don't stand behind these beleaguered subs now, then the cancer will quickly spread to the rest of Voat. Oh, and don't give your already distrusting user base any reason to believe you're selling out to line your pockets with advertising money. Voat's character is already set in stone. Either take pride in it and protect it's integrity to the best of your ability, or close down the whole enterprise.
We need a way for the community to be able to do this. Voat them out, as it were. A community consensus should be all that is required to remove a moderator. No moderator should have the position indefinitely without recourse.
why not allow subscribers of a sub a method- such as a voat of confidence- for removing moderators who no longer live up to their responsibilities? although i'm sure it would involve a lot of work to code in the short term in the long it would resolve the constant issue of users with ill intent sabotaging subverses which has been an ongoing issue for everyone.
Option 1 is the only correct option in my opinion.
I think the mods should have stepped down, and created a different subverse to mold how they like instead of hijacking, and drastically altering preexisting subverses to please them.
I don't visit v/niggers, or v/chicago, but I believe demodding them would be for the best.
Option 1. - Purge the fucker. v/niggers is a cesspool but free speech means having to put up with stuff you don't agree with as well as the things you do.
Speaking as a moderator (/u/Bilbo_Swaggins) and the primary mod for its current backup subverse, many of us have been sick of the "niggers" branding for quite a while now, viewing it as crude at best.
If you pass the baton to another user, they'll probably just do the same thing again; the reason for this is that the first volunteer to jump up will be yet another dipshit who has absolutely no intention of moderating the community in a sensible manner. I honestly suspect that WSIMBR had something like this in mind since the beginning, and that many other volunteers have similar things in mind.
/u/adhdferret and myself are the two most active moderators left, basically. He's wanted to get /v/coontown back and move the community there; I've wanted to just move things to /v/Coonshire. We had agreed to put it up to a vote and see where the community wants to go. Either of us- and most users, I believe- would be satisfied with destroying /v/niggers and setting up on Coontown or Coonshire.
If the mods are all in agreement about the name issue and would be happy to transfer to a backup subverse (I personally think Coonshire is better, because CoonTown is somewhat infamous from people pointing out its continued existence on Reddit when FPH was banned, while Coonshire could be mistaken as the name of some fan-fiction town in some post-Tolkien fantasy setting, but I don't even go to any of the subverses in question, so my vote doesn't matter much), then Option 3 is far better than Option 1.
My only concern with that option is how it is like the "scorched earth retreat" tactic that was made into a part of many history textbooks during the Nazi invasion of Russia, in that it cuts out the problem area and nicely transitions into a subverse that the community already trusts, but it is an unsustainable tactic if we get multiple subverses taken over in short order.
My assumption is that /v/Coonshire will never be compromised. It's an easy assumption for me to make because I am top mod there and I know that I'm never going to mess with it.
We can again handle the situation by purging moderators and handing this subverse off to another user. (Rinse and Repeat)
This, indefinitely.
A benevolent dictator, you, removing mods when necessary, is the only solution. A hands-off approach just lets SWIPLs and Kikes know they can come in and destroy anything whenever it doesn't suit their agenda, and you won't do a damn thing about it.
If their existence is putting the medium in danger purge ; at the other hand i am wondering who is retarded enough to give retarded opinions credit by persecuting them .
If their existence does not put the medium in danger and they are gone as much as i dislike racists i will go too because then the question will be "who is next ?" .
There is no such thing as unfettered freedom of speech. There have always been consequences for hateful and provokative speech, even if that consequence is just a punch in the nose at the local watering hole. Voat is also not a government entity, and thus not accountable to anyone to maintain freedom of speech. It is a ridiculous goal to try to attain at the cost of everything else, especially the growth of the company, which should be atko's number one goal. This foolish policy has made Voat an obnoxious site that I rarely visit.
The mods need replaced, that's the only option listed that shows voat cares about free speech by ousting those against it. Ignoring it will exacerbate the problem, let's stay strong and absolute in the never ending fight to keep freedom of speech the shining beacon that herds goats here
I was thinking the solution could work if there is some sort of vote, weighted by a users CCP/SCP to that subverse, in a matter of confidence/no confidence, and after a threshold, the mod is booted. Ideally, this would mean that smaller subs are still controlled by their most prevalent users, banned users are a weird middle. But if they were decent contributors before banning, then they might still keep their say, with their SCP/CCP. Mainly, I would like to see /v/fatpeoplehate, /v/cheers, and yes, even /v/niggers or /v/RFH keep their communities unique. However, that shifts it potentially from mod abuse to power user abuse. My line of thinking is that the solution needs to protect /v/protectvoat, /v/fatpeoplehate, the ban hammer shitposters, and subs like /v/ilovemusicvideos or /v/ai.
It's either that, or admins need to draw up an intervention procedure. As said, rinse and repeat, this is not the first time this has happened, nor will it be the last. It would maybe require archived subverses/modlogs, that if a subverse ever changes direction drastically with its moderation, it can be proven. EDIT: So while I can be for option 1, it needs work. Also appreciate the open forum on the topic.
Option 2. This was used when v7coontown came under attack and all active members of it unsubscribed and switched to v7niggers.
Option 2 left the "Owner" of v7coontown with no one but himself posting his own authoritarian view onto a subverse with fewer and fewer members until it truly became an echo chamber. v7coontown has had little activity for more than 18 months, while v7niggers has been active ever since. Since v7coontown has been left with no participation, it "died on its own". Now that v7niggers has been compromised, I merely unsubscribed to it and switched back to v7coontown as well as subscribing to several new subverses that have sprung up in the last few days.
Option 2 works. Option 1 and 3 are a pain in the ass to have to deal with in what seems to be a growing trend of reddit SJWs invading this site and trying to impose their censorship in order to make little safe spaces. Just let them do their thing. They'll soon get tired of hearing themselves speak to a diminishing member base. Without activity, the site will die on its own. It's the users on a subverse that give it life, not the owners or mods.
Sane they weren't clicking it every few days at any point. The only time the updated the canary on any kind of regular basis was with announcements, and it was only Putt who really did so. This has been the first Putt announcement in over a month and consequently the canary has been updated. No agreement to adhere to any 30 day limit was ever made, and so nothing has been violated here.
Well then we're in agreement on most points. I understand that in the beginning things were different but most recently this has been the system: that they update the canary with announcements, specifically PuttItOut does. The fact that the canary went a month w/o being updated only means Putt went that long without making an announcement, and no agreement was violated so that canary still stands as well as it did before, no?
The problem with admins NOT interfering means that if enough mods go full SJW and ban everything they dislike, then it is possible for EVERY subverse to become corrupted. Admins NEED to mold their site to fit their vision for it.
Move all content to /v/eggplants and close /v/niggers. Eggplants, is obviously obvious as to what the subs. Content is but also not as obvious as straight up-niggers.
Getting rid of the /v/niggers sub all together is not an ideal situation but for the safety of voat I say move all its content to /v/eggplants and delete /v/niggers.
I have a preference for option 2. Nobody really cares about that subverse especially when /v/coontown is a viable alternative. I see no need for intervention. While I appriciate a dedication to free speech, I don't think you're bound to prevent users from making their own screw ups.
This would not be the preferred option in my mind, even enough it may end up being the popular option. As it will require too much input from the Admins, being nanny's for the site moving forwards. When that time would be much better spending their time making this site even better. Unless there is evidence a mods account has been hacked and a hostile take over as taken place, in which case they can just remove the bad mod and revert to the previous mods.
In the spirit of Voat and free speech this is the preferred option unless a top mods account is hacked and the subverse goes through a hostile takeover as previously mentions. Though it does leave the average user in the lurch, but there could be solutions to this problem via the users moving forwards.
I feel removing subverses should be avoided for as at all costs long as possible, because this is the start of a slippery slope and the beging of the end that ends up with Reddit style locked down platform
Futhermore
As previously mentioned I would be inclined to go for option 2 as this is most inline with Voats free speech stance, the Subverse is what the moderators want to make it and let the average user decided which succeeded and fails by their votes and the system should work. However I would suggest someone starting a subverse that is dedicated to pointing to alternatives to subverses when they become corrupted like this, something like /v/altersubverse or /v/subverseareus (sorry i am terrible and coming up with names).
Someone can waste a few months or a few £100 to get to control of a subverse but if there was a robust way for people to relocate to a new subverse all this time will be wasted as the user base can just move on with minimumal impact. This has the added benefit of allowing the average users to manage the whole process as they can just leave the subverse when it gains a Nazi mod and start again, using the old subverse as a template.
The account had a sudden change of behavior. Most likely hacked or purchased, either that or the mod acted as an enthusiastic supporter for a long time with a view of playing the long game.
The problem here is one of governance. Why should a mod have absolute control over what happens in a subverse? How about option zero:
0. We decentralize power over Voat subverse governance by creating a user-based system of rules and modding. Moderators can be kicked and banned by a vote of the subverse users. Members can establish and alter rules by way of subverse votes, including to establish a vesting period of X months of membership before members of a subverse have voting rights.
Yes, this will involve a lot of coding. Yes, it will involve a lot of messy discussion. Yes, different subverses will have different rules. But if Voat wants to be at the forefront of community-based discussion on the internet, it needs a correspondingly advanced -- and decentralized -- governance system.
This all looks like an inside operation to attract new investors by removing highly offensive subverses and it has been done in such a way that it trumps voats integrity and the very reason it has been created. I do support the idea of renaming the sub to something less obvious but to destroy a sub like that is unacceptable. Voat is one of the few sites i allow ads from, if shit like this continues, I will reconsider.
For this instance, perhaps a clean sweep and new moderator is in order, as the subscription base seems to be in revolt. I dislike the sub myself and never go there, so have no clue what's really up, but to me, a sub doesn't belong to its mod, it belongs to Voat first, and as importantly, its subscribers.
With this in mind, (for the future) I suggest a new rule be added. Anyone taking over a sub with an active subscriber base, must get input from that base before making any sub rule changes. It's only fair that those who are subscribed, and are vested in a sub, have some say in changes. This is how @HenryCorp got started, taking over a sub and completely changing it's focus 180 degrees. That caused a firestorm, just as is happening now in v/niggers and v/Chicago. With the subscriber base informed beforehand, people themselves can decide if they want to remain in the sub, or shut it down by unsubscribing. In any case, at least they'd be informed. After all, if you want a sub to have a different rule set, anyone can create their own and attract their own subscribers. To me, when you request a sub and are granted the mod position, you are agreeing to assume that sub as is, not as what you wish it to be ... the exception being a dead sub with no active subscribers, where a redirection may be warranted.
Not sure voat has the backend for what you describe. Of course, atko or putt could likely force a sticky onto the sub itself without the current mod being able to do much, but then those who unsubbed wouldn't be in the conversation....
While I follow a more free market approach to this, like the free market in the real world, once a product is established it becomes increasingly harder for a competitor to appear. Much like brand-name association, something becomes popular by name or reputation a replacement will never truly succeed (minus the very small handfull of cases where they do, those are the exceptions). That's like the CEO of Twitter establishing itself one way and then once it became the dominate platform to decide to start kicking everyone out because their "vision" changed, the CEO needs to be removed by the shareholders. Option 1 is the best course.
I for one wouldn't want the possibility of "raids" on subverses (people going there just to dismantle the sub by means of voting for someone who will dismantle it)
I disagree with that. What you are wishing for is essentially mob rule. It wouldn't be that hard to get SRS to subscribe to a low traffic subverse and vote for an SRS liked mod and force reddit-style censorship. There needs to be more than only the subscribers. The subscribers need to meet a certain criteria in order to vote. Something like 100 CCP or SCP for that particular subverse, that way only those who are active in the community can make a vote.
But, that's still a problem if those SRS fags have no life and will play ball only to get the CCP/SCP needed to vote. But, again, it's now harder for them to do so.
IDK, maybe there's a better way that I'm not thinking of.
We can do nothing and let this particular subverse die.
This. I don't agree with what's there, but from an outside perspective, I'm curious to see what happens when a community like that, on a site that takes a hands-off approach, will continue (or cease) to evolve.
Will it turn upon itself like the Uroboros and consume itself until nothing is left, or will it burn up and reignite from the ashes like the Phoenix?
We can again handle the situation by purging moderators and handing this subverse off to another user. (Rinse and Repeat)
If this becomes to much work for you guys, I would higher a Nazi to handle this so you don't feel bad doing it every time (Nazi's hate niggers and Jews).
The concept of free speech online is the most innocuous thing imaginable. There's not someone standing next to you yelling or annoying. If you don't like an idea, simply don't read it. How can anyone get offended at finding out that others think differently. Shutting off their expression doesn't change that fact. They may as well put their fingers in their ears and humm.
Let it die. I don't understand why any subverse would need admin intervention unless because of illegal content being posted to it. Forget default subverses, forget admin-appointed mods, just let the community handle each and every subverse and work on better algorithms for /v/all.
I neither particularly like nor dislike the sub, but censorship in any form should not be tolerated... Otherwise, we are no better than that place which we escaped from. I say uproot this foul 'moderator' and send him slithering back to that cesspool he leaked out of... Option 1
I would love to see you implement a user base no confidence mod removal tool that would be independent of your intervention. That way the active members in a sub can effectively vote in and out mods. Barring that if a mod does not conform to site policy (is there a violation here?) then they should get an auto-boot. I would also like to have the option of content transfer if I start a new sub. The v/chicago incident that also happened at the same time is something else to look at.
I've been thinking a lot over the last 48h or so about the meta-moderation model that Slashdot employs. I wonder if it would be possible to pick 50-100 'users in good standing' (whatever that happens to mean) every 24h or so and just ask them to anonymously give a 1-10 rating on a mod's performance. In theory, as long as you cast the net wide enough, you'll dial out the opinion of people trying to game the system and get the opinion of Voat as a whole.
If nothing else, I think it'd be a useful metric for starting to answer the question 'is this mod doing a good job'?
I dont think we need to do it every month. I was thinking along the lines of a parliamentary system, where there are terms, but a no confidence vote could be conducted before the term is complete. Voting privelege tied to a minimum ccp + scp in the sub. Working out the ability to game the system may be a challenge, but without an automated system, the load on the admins would be to much.
The community and discussion of v/niggers is absolutely disgusting and against my own convictions. That being said, I am for their continued existence, as we enter a slippery slope if we ban them.
I am also against interfering in non-system subs, and I think the original bail-out when Antiracist went rogue was a mistake. That subverse has also been a drama magnet time and time again, and an easy picking for rogue mods to worm their way in. I am for Option 2, leaving the compromised v/niggers hanging to dry and leaving it up to its community to revive v/coontown or build up a new subverse.
I'm a fan of the idea of "sink or swim", meaning #2.
Like you said, it's not the content (submissions) just the wrapper (subverse name). The wrapper isn't important, the communication of words, thoughts and ideas is what's important.
If the rogue mod causes OTHER problems, kill them off lickity split and "return" the sub to someone who wants it or simply disable the sub.
Don't be purposefully stupid. Flagging/flair doesn't hide the content from anyone. By this logic /v/news is hiding news content from people who don't subscribe to /v/news.
Embracing the spirit and purpose of the Goat, I think we should go with #1 or 2. 3 would stifle the ugly, yet requisite sub/material that in itself, acts as a canary.
I find it disheartening and distracting however, when we have the front page flooded with autistic posts about some shit that doesn't impact the majority of users here. If I have to block it, I will. But crying and acting out like a bunch of retards trying to hump a doorknob, only illustrates and highlights the downfalls of this endeavor; giving ammunition to those who oppose.
Never let the spectrum or emotions get in the way of free speech or intelligent and rational thought. My 2 cents.
Option 2. Get investors and take the site more mainstream. You're struggling financially now, and you will put in a lot of effort for little reward. It would be nice to get people in here who can add more to the conversation than "cuck joo faggot libtard nigger nigger nigger".
Ideally, however, get rid of moderation by humans. Easy to suggest, but that's the real answer, possible or impossible as it may be to achieve. I have always liked the idea of measuring the amount of time spent "using" the site and relating that to upvote/downvote impact per individual user. That's obviously hard to do, though.
I agree with Option 1. We need to do whatever it takes to tell Reddit Trolls that they can't win here. If you delete the sub or let it fester and die then will claim victory. If you take it back from them they will say "we forced the admins to get involved!" which is a lot less to brag about.
I agree with Option 1. You will only give in to Reddit trolls if you let it implode or shut it down. Despite being something people don't like it is still under free speech and need to respect it.
we need to make it standard, with clear rules of engagement at the admin level ,and create a log for it all that's permanently publicly visible.
also
whoever posted this post is pretending to be an admin.
putt and atko have no reason to hide
(inb4 testing out new feature; "putt" tested it out a couple days ago in their test sub)
*REMEMBER EVERYONE: THERE WERE POSTS BY MANY USERS ON THE FRONT PAGE FOR DAYS THAT THE CANARY WAS DEAD AND THEY DIDN'T PRESS IT EVEN THOUGH BOTH ADMINS WERE ON; PUTTITOUT COMMENTED TO SANEGOAT AND ATKO CHANGED THE FEATURED SUB TO V/MUSEUMS. THEY WERE ON AND DID NOT PRESS IT. WHOMEVER THIS OP IS IS NOT OUR ADMINS; THIS IS PART OF THE ATTACK. THIS IS EXTREMELY DECEPTIVE AND ANYONE FALLING FOR IT DESERVES REDDIT NO VOAT FOR A WEEK AS PUNISHMENT. -GOATKU
thanks goatku! wow, that's interesting! so v/niggers getting wrecked twice and the v/videos ninja removal of mods for doing the job of the admins when the admins failed to do it.... is all a conspiracy to normalize admins having reddit cancer power over mods of non-default subs?! and do v/chicago and v/historyanecdotesv/thegrittypast fit into this?
MAYBE, SANEGOAT. THAT"S YET TO BE ESTABLISHED; CHICAGO COULD BE DISTRACTION MAYBE NOT; UNCONFIRMED; @LOCKEPROPOSAL HAS LONG BEEN SJW CANCER. YOU CAN SEE ON HIS REDDIT PAGE ARCHIVES AND HIS STEAM PROFILE LINKS.
thanks goatku!
(P.S. check the nested comments below to see fake @puttitout doing a hit and run disinfo with a personal attack and a bonus fallacy!)
Lol, this is blip mate. Never stop being you SaneG :)
With all due respect faggot.
The last edit time for the canary was 2.7 hours ago at 5:14 +8:00 GMT ( https://voat.co/v/announcements/1330806 ) The link at the bottom of most announcements will direct you to the canary notice and the edit time in the sidebar reflects its status. Its usually updated monthly.
Also, the fact that this announcement was a /v/all sticky that originates from the admin sub /v/announcements goes a long way to ease my mind regarding impostors from reddit messing with Voat.co.
they were pressing it every few days to within 2 weeks. no where near 1 month.
i'm wellaware when the canary was clicked thanks for keeping it all out in the open
if they've gagged the admins, they could also control them to do things.
yes those things ease many minds
that may be why they are now being employed with the ANON post.
announcements should be public and transparent.
since the admins dissappeared the same day for a month and two months (atko putt respectively) **voat has been on a reddity slippery slope AWAY from transparency and free speech
less and less transparency
and now anon announcements
wecan't confirm nor deny this was an admin, and you know it.
we can't confirm nor deny this was an admin, and you know it. Ftfy mate ;)
I agree that we can't confirm but we never really could.
they were pressing it every few days to within 2 weeks. no where near 1 month.
I was under the impression that It was to be updated with announcements or monthly. Just my understanding and I could be wrong, as there are things I have missed in the past.
if they've gagged the admins, they could also control them to do things.
Couldn't @Atko just pull the plug if he needed to, then just relocate the code and database to Iceland or something? New Ip, but I'm sure it could be done and users informed before the big move without breaking a gag order, [shrugs shoulders].
announcements should be public and transparent.
All info regarding the posts public info point to Atko and Putt, also, the anon angle seems to be in place to allow the voat users their opinion while protecting them from haters as they go about their day to day activities on voat, I agree with this move as a broader spectrum of users will be more willing give their opinion. Maybe @PuttItOut could change /v/announcements anon posts to reflect the creators username?
still waiting for a1 proof you two are alive well and not under duress.
pull the plug
iceland has less protection than u.s.
there's a way to permanently require all users to be informed of a gag, but it's a corporate structuring thing that the admins would never listen to.
they don't give a fuck what users think anymore. they don't talk to us about changes. they don't even notify us after the fact.. and they silently demod mods for doing their jobfor them.
it's 100% cancer now
AND WE MUST FIGHT TO DEFEND FREE SPEECH. RIGHT HERE. ON VOAT. THERE'S NO WHERE ELSE. ITS THE FINAL STAND
reddit fee fee bullshit. slippery slope exhibit a.
Lol, I walked right into that one didn't I mate. What I was trying to say but got lazy because it takes me forever to type anything, was protect them from the reddit style downvoat brigade type that I've heard about lately. Idk
they basically gave no acknowledgement in any way other than whenthey announce, which is sub-standard and not acceptable for a canary.
C'mon big fella, this is Voat.co with only two admin's that have day jobs, a couple of appointed janitors and a few hundred thousand registered users, yet voat.co is still considered a free speech zone. Its not hard to see that we have been under fire by a class of people that would rather see voat burn by doing anything but follow voat's ethos of free speech and as far as I can tell these issues are slowly being dealt with.
iceland has less protection than u.s.
I was just saying?
there's a way to permanently require all users to be informed of a gag, but it's a corporate structuring thing that the admins would never listen to.
this is Voat.co with only two admin's that have day jobs.
You are asking too much given the available resources.
they don't give a fuck what users think anymore. they don't talk to us about changes. they don't even notify us after the fact..
This/op's discussion post announcement suggests otherwise.
and they silently demod mods for doing their jobfor them.
I know nothing of this.
it's 100% cancer now
I disagree.
AND WE MUST FIGHT TO DEFEND FREE SPEECH. RIGHT HERE. ON VOAT. THERE'S NO WHERE ELSE. ITS THE FINAL STAND
I half agree here. I disagree that this voat.co is or will be the last place on the Internets providing a platform for free speech. Gab, Phucks and wikileaks are a few. Hell the code is there for you to make your own.
Putt has one comment in this chain and it's completely reasonable. Being upset about the canary is one thing, but what you are doing is intellectually dishonest, especially when you have still not accepted that a 30 day limit was never agreed to, and that the admins have not actually done anything wrong at all with regards to the canary.
I voat (lol) for No. 1 - mainly because cancerous mods (i.e. SJWs) need to know that mod infiltration is useless here. For the weeks or months it can take to infiltrate a sub and fuck with it there is precedent that the Admins will simply remove you and give it to active members. The very fact that it can be done here and not on Plebbit will make them doubly buttmad.
Get rid of all moderators once a sub reaches more than, for instance, 100 unique users per day.
While this sub is coming into the spotlight, recently a large number of subs have come under control of "non-voaters" through the subverse request system. What these people plan to do with the subs they've obtained is anybody's guess, but it's probably not in Voat or the subs' best interest.
Start using votes to auto-moderate. If something reaches -5, delete it entirely. Stuff that hits -5 is already out of view from everybody anyhow. You'll need to crack down on the increasingly large number of people using bots since this would enable somebody to completely silence another user. Maybe as another option add another button people could choose beside upvote/downvote - delete. If (upvote+downvote) - delete < -4 then delete the comment/thread. upvote/downvote/delete would be mutually exclusive to prevent people from just going downvote+delete on everything they don't like.
For CSS and site rules each sub could have a single automated monthly poll thread for each. Users post their proposed css/rules to the thread. At the end of the month the votes decide what is used. Again there would need be more of a crackdown on vote botting. But anyhow yeah - there is no real point for moderators. Get rid of them.
Nopenopenopenope. Look in all/new. Tell me, how many posts do you see with no upvoats or downvoats that are more than a minute old? Close to a page full. all you need is 6 accounts which can DV to get rid of those posts entirely.
I've been around for a few of v/Niggers drama so far and honestly Atko, no matter what you do you're going to run into shit with it. Turning it into a mostly unmoderated anonymous piece of shit may possibly be your best hope.
Boot the renegade mod and Let nature take it's course...if not for the social experiment angle alone. Unwanted, uncomfortable speech separates the true free-man from the nigger slaves.
Before you try to claim that this anonymous post was made by someone other than the admins (ignoring the fact that it got stickied to the top of v/all, something that only the admins could do), have you tried to make a post on this subverse? It is locked to "Approved submitters". Since there is actually a mod level specifically for Submitters, that means that there are precisely 3 accounts that can make posts here:
Two of those are the admins' actual accounts, and the third is what they run the official bots on. These accounts are the least likely to be compromised out of all the accounts on the entire site. If any of those was compromised, then there is nothing any of us could do to get rid of their corruption, so it would be best to continue under the assumption that they are still clean until they prove otherwise.
When a moderator seemingly completely switches attitudes and begins going against Voats Freedom they are no longer fit to be a moderator. In addition they seem to have been hacked or sold their account, but regardles they are still unfit to moderate as they go against the ideals that are held here so they must go
Purge the mods. Rinse and repeat. The second you give up and shut that sub down is the second we will have confirmation to our suspicions that you sold the site out.
Yep. The talk of (((investors))) finding it to be a problem makes me uneasy. Of course they would, I understand that much. But the day we bend to the will of rich kikes is the day we become reddit and have to start all over again.
Investors do it so that their ideals are used and not what the site is intended to be, free speech. Money is the root of all evil, although investors who only invest without any predudice should be allowed.
Seems like all three have problems:
1: Relies on good faith presentation. If people are scamming their way in good faith has doubts, the counter to this is basic rule sets which have their own problems. (dead subs, one can't fulfill the requirements for transfer-it becomes arbitrary to admins, etc.)
2: If subs are allowed to die, then eventually that tactic can be used to destroy the site.
3: Similar as two, only a lot more work for everyone and resets on brand recognition as relevant.
Of the three, seems like #1 is the most usable, even with it's subset of problems. Too bad there isn't a way to data mine a 'good faith' ratio for anyone in mod position.
Admins should not intervene in the non default subverses. Much as I know the community desires admin intervention here, /v/niggers is NOT a default subverse, and much as I'm sure members of the community who frequent it dislike the road it has gone down, I think that admins intervening in user managed subs is something that should be avoided. We are not reddit, and yet the suggestion of admin intervention into a sub's administration does sound quite a bit like the actions we all left that place for.
At the same time, I recognize that completely destroying a sub, even one that I find dispicable, through inaction, thanks to what seems likely to be a sold account, is not a good solution either. As such, I propose intervention take place, and the offending account removed if deemed necessary by the community the account moderates, BUT; prior to this action, we should set in place ground rules like those governing the abandoned sub transfers on /v/subverserequest. One that recognizes situations where a mod has overstepped their bounds, say by attempting to transform an active subverse into a RADICALLY different community (notice I said ACTIVE. User Arotaes_forgehammer changed /v/dice to a sub about gaming dice, rather than Andrew dice clay. Dice was inactive at the time, there's nothing wrong with this). Once these ground rules are in place, it will ensure that future scenarios like this are handled smoothly, and it will ALSO give the admins more accountability, as the decision to make these subverse changes will be primarily in the hands of the users of said community. Sure, it ends up being you guys who actually make the transfer, but if we have another case like this, and it meets these established conditions (that need to be crowdsourced), we as the users can rest easy knowing that you will make the required leadership change, while, at the same time, not being able to make a change purely for your personal ideological reasons without raising a SERIOUS red flag and having another /v/videos situation that ISN'T someone crying wolf.
THE CANARY IS NOT PRESSED. IT WAS NOT PRESSED IN THE WORLD-WIDE STANDARD 30 DAYS. (the user claiming to be puttitout subtly has stated that they press when they fucking feel like it with annoucements ((which renders canaries useless anyway)))
THIS ISN'T JESUS CANARY. DIES AND COMES BACK 3 DAYS LATER.
voat is served, our admins gagged
AND WORSE
NOW THEY'RE FORCING THEM TO LIE
which means only one thing goats: it's a National Security Letter forcing Voat's Admins to lie.* :(
@puttitout go make an annoucement thread about this PUBLICLY WITH YOUR NAME ON IT and i will remain open minded to your reasons that you present clearly and openly for missing the deadline when you and atko were on the day of and the day before the 30 days.
I HAVE REPEATEDLY STATED THAT THIS IS ONE SMALL PART OF A LARGE ATTACK ON FREE SPEECH WORLD WIDE. ALL THE NET IS CENSORED ALL THEW ORLD IS CENSORED. WHY NOT VOAT? THEY CAN TRY BUT WE WILL NOT LET THEM. DO NOT LISTEN TO THESE SHILLS ATTEMPTING TO MAKE IT LOOK LIKE I HAVE SAID IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM RUN AWAAAAY! no. YOU STAND AND FIGHT AGAINST THE CENSORSHIP. RIGHT HERE. ON VOAT.
I AIN'T GOIN ANYWHERE, YOU FUCKING SHILLY NIGGERFAGGOT ROTTEN NIGGER TITTY.
Everyone promotes their own agenda and if you don't think so you're a dumbass. If that's how you define shill you're in fact right, everyone's a shill.
Sanegoatiswear BTFO. You got told by the admins you fucking clown. Just give it a rest, you act like you're some sort of legal expert, there is no fucking standard on a canary you jerk off.
If you want to be taken seriously fucking post actual case studies and/or court cases where a canary was relevant (protip: you won't post it because you're talking out your ass and haven't found any actual legal precedent).
No, I think you are great entertainment a good portion of the time. I simply request that annoying children leave the room while the adults are talking about important things. Seems reasonable to me.
Everyone is a shill to insane or spreading disinfo tactics or fallacies if insane decides what you have to say doesn't specifically conform to exactly what he wants you to think. All of Voat are shills apparently. No one is real if insane is to be believed.
oh p.s. if you are @Puttitout whom you seem to be suggesting you are on this anon thread
you areletting clear defamation per se posts remain on voat.
clear defamation per se. delaware law breaking content.
and you've done nothing for over a week.
i consider your user agreement to be worth less than toilet paper at this point because you representatives of voat inc don't uphold the user agreement you wrote.
So, you are for taking someone to court for defamation for spouting on a free speech forum their opinion of what you have to say and the way you act? They said mean things, admins please do something about it they're not presenting an accurate viewpoint of me.
Read what you wrote. Read what I wrote. If you think I'm being intellectually dishonest, I can't help you. What if that someone lives in a foreign country? Would you extradite them to delaware? What if they're in another state? You can't be serious mate. This is not what the law was meant to be used for.
You made the claim you link to it I'm not going to waste my time looking something up for the likes of you.
So you want to silence and censor me is that it? Yeah I'm one of the people that replied to you earlier in this thread. You proclaim to be for free speech and no censorship while hypocritically turning the cheek and spreading bullshit about how you want the admins to deal with people for "defamation and libel"?
Wow you're so right, you go protect your "image" on the internet by prosecuting anyone who speaks negatively of you or says something untrue on the internet you're the hero we deserve keep fighting the good fight against censorship! (As you fucking advocate censoring people and being intellectually dishonest about it while projecting your attributes onto me).. Is that enough of the validation you seek? All the while you're a snake with your words deceiving people into thinking it's for a good and just cause.
And that's why I'm doing it in anon. Because if I were to try to say these truths and not be anonymous you and others like you would target me. You can't have someone pointing you out so you must identify and destroy them. This is really helping your cause.
there is a worldwide standard of 30 days on warrant canaries..
frankly there's been talk of those that be in power adding a "kill the canary" clause to gags.
so how do i know you're not some 3-letter controlling this admin account or have granted your 3-letter account access to annoucements and convieniently put in the anony feature??
you hijacking top comments ensures that I will not take you seriously
(THIS IS A DISINFO TACTIC)
and
if you want respect
(MORE OF IT)
LISTEN HERE NIGGER
IF I WANTED RESPECT I WOULDN'T ACT THE WAY I DO
NO ONE WITH A REASONABLE BRAIN COULD REASONABLY EXPECT TO BELIEVE SANEGOAT WANTS OTHERS' RESPECT.
TRUTH SHALL SET US FREE.
YOU CANNOT STOP THE FUCKING WATER FROM ROLLING DOWN THE HILL FOREVER, 3-LETTER.
You must really be new around here. When they have an announcement to make, they update the canary. Once this situation gets resolved, the canary will be updated. They have always done this in the past, so why would they change it? I didn't know there was a world standard that they had to adhere to. I guess the UN resolution on cyber bullying should be the norm here?
You sounding like your overcompensating there buddy. Turn the words in to Trump and you sound just like a fuckwit SJW. So are you playing the long con here by trying to make it seem like you're full ant-SJW, when in fact you have done the same things as SJWs do and pointlessly remove shit from subs you mod?
He's playing the long con. I can see that shit from a mile away. I have been at the forefront of voat wading head on to keep the ping spammers at bay for a time. I also kept up on the various spammers form time to time. My operations on another site have been mostly fruitful. I will post a dump on protectvoat when it's completed.
Sane is probably just Amalek's new main account and all the upvoats he gets and all the downvoats his opposition gets are just the army of bots to bring down voat he was always on about
I really don't know who the fuck sane goat is. I guess your not important enough for me to remember. Well that, and I have been doing things on reddit for a while. I'm the former user notdobbler. /u/puttitout knows how I am, after all they do have the tools to see who is who here. I really enjoy an internet slap fight every once in a while but dude, tone it down a bit. Your meth intake needs to be brought down a notch or 10.
If you really knew what I was up to, you would see how fucking idiotic that shill statement was for me on here. The trick to being something you're not is to honestly believe your own lies. I read that same book as well there friend. Shills will always accuse others of being a shill first, or did you skip that part?
So hysterical. This is why you don't get taken seriously most of the time. You can't accept an answer given to you if it is not the answer you like or want. Get over yourself. If I were the admins I'd be ignoring you too. Inb4 disinfo tactic criminal shilling fallacy quotes from insane.
I see you got some fellow retards following you around defending everything you do. If we go by the votes, they agree everyone who doesn't think like you is a shill.
Everyone who doesn't conform or accept what you want them to think is a shill. InsaneGoatiSwear is a confirmed shill using disinfo tactics and character assassination attempts and fallacies. Logged and archived for criminal shilling Kappa.
Either Amalek or someone like him but with differing views/convictions. Idk those downvotes are a little suspicious but then again there are plenty of easily lead sheep on here. There are also a whole lot more intelligent goats who can think for themselves.
Also the second part was sarcasm playing back to insane what he says about others when he wants to end the discussion and declare victory. The Kappa was meant to show that. Funny how what he says about others so perfectly at times describes him.
probably just amalek and the bot army he was always talking about, Sane and Amalek are both anti-voat and not a lot of people on here are so they're probably the same person
You talk of investors. We appreciate all that you do and know this site sucks up a lot of your time. How much money would we have to throw at you to make many of your problems go away but be able to keep the site free as ever? Are you looking for someone to buy this site from you?
Like coat tailing the highest rated comment with an opposite opinion vote to garner more exposure instead of posting your vote off the OP and allowing the voaters to decide? That kind of natural?
Death by rogue mod is not a "natural" way for a sub to die. The users clearly want the sub the way it was.
The problem, now and in the future, is where to draw the line. Admins can't just ban every mod who intends to change a sub's content... But admins making calls like that is exactly what got Reddit in trouble (nothing personal Atko/Put, I'm just talking about the principle).
If you are a user of that sub, it's your own fault for letting your sub be modded by a dumb fuck. You can go fuck yourself ignint degenerate. My point is if you want something done right, do it yourself or don't do it at all. There should be no moderators before there should be little bitch fights over stupid moderated subs. Kill yourself braindead asshole
You are user /u/jerry. He is the only person on voat who uses the term "ignint", and he also has a habit of omitting punctuation marks at the end of paragraphs.
We never wanted to make a v/Niggers, we wanted our original v/CoonTown, but that was not an option do to another rogue mod. If possible, I believe the best option would be to move all subs to /v/CoonTown an give the mod privelages to @adhdferret and @Cancel-Cat-Facts. After that's done, there's no need to keep /v/niggers.
Letting it fail freely is a win for free speech. If their message is so compelling it should be able to endure on its own without someone propping it up. If it isn't then it'll die.
The message itself is what's being attacked. Someone wants to control the narrative and they'll do whatever it takes to nudge us even a tiny fraction towards submission and censorship. We cannot provide them that fraction.
It's not a problem. It's not a system sub. Nobody is required to babysit it. If people don't like what it happening there they're free to create a different sub. The strict moderator policies should only ever apply to system subs. Unless Voat wants to take them in to that context (and they really, really don't) they need to let whoever is large and in charge there do his thing.
i prefer option #4 where there is an electoral system put into place that makes it possible for established users with a min. membership period and which are known to be active in the sub, to vote out a mod, thereby allowing the community to police itself while avoiding administrator interference which, down the road, could become very problematic if it persists
as for potential investors, personally i think that should have precisely zero bearing
I'm new here. I came to study/ help with Pizzagate. I ventured to other subverse to take a break and encountered the variety of opinion. I am cool with it, I believe in free speech. I don't see v/niggers or any of the other subverse as a personal attack - its just people voicing there thoughts. To oppose that would be me being the Authoritarian.
We can again handle the situation by purging moderators and handing this subverse off to another user. (Rinse and Repeat)
Sounds good to me. It's the only way to keep the freedom here. Deputize a new person, and hope they don't fuck it up. If they do, rinse and repeat. Eventually there will be a perfect fit found.
I don't agree with /v/niggers, but the freedom that allows them to have that, also allows me to have what I want, so I accept that.
You mean an ad-free experience? Because that's basically what quarantining subs does: it rewards hate subs by giving them an ad-free experience. And the retards can't appreciate it?
Users can block subs they don't like. Giving tools like these to mods only sets up more room for abuse. What better way to kill a sub than to make it invisible against the users wishes? Fuck that.
You need big changes which remove power from the mods as well as automatically de-modding accounts which seem to have been hacked or sold (e.g. requiring anonymous 2FA for mods and de-modding when it's removed).
I vote 1. Its kind of fucked up but free speech must be defended. Its a slippery slope and if niggers is taken out, where is the line in the sand going to be drawn after? Reddit did this, and then took out more innocent subs like fatpeoplehate.
Not fat at all. Fat people hate has no understanding of obesity. Why is that always the first thing you idiots say? Let's say I was fat: does that take away the truth about what I say?
Can you have a serious scientific conversation about something or can you only say hurrr dur da fattees?
I can't tell if voats count in an anomymous theads... so I've voating fof #2. as @7553271 survival of the fittest. Darwinian Free Speech.
if the /v/niggers mod can't keep his subscribers, then he deserves to lose them. If he create more engaging dialog than his predecessors, we would all profit.
once he loses all his subscribers he may get bored & move on... if that happens then execute option 1 under the normal transfer of ownership rules.
Purge the moderator if it's obviously somebody who's been camping otherwise just let it die I mean there's a hundred million characters that we can use to form words to make another sub
Option 1. Mods should be janitors, even for non-default subs.
Same with /v/Chicago in my opinion. If a mod suddenly decides that only feel-good articles should be posted, he should be the one who has to make a new subverse, not change an obviously catch-all subverse into one that has a scope more limited than the name implies.
Option 1 sends a very clear message that the site is for freedom of speech, even if someone may personally find the content abhorrent. (As long as it's legal.)
Mods should be janitors, even for non-default subs.
See this I disagree with. Some communities might appreciate more heavy handed curation. The defaults need to remain janitorial only, but after that, I maintain it should be up to the particular sub. There should be a way to badge a subverse, though, to mark it publicly as "Our moderators agree to janitorial only moderation."
This website has already lost its way; and this particular sub-drama is merely a symptom and not the cause.
There are dedicated teams whose job it is to identify "potent" posters to humiliate in real life. These teams follow potential targets and document everything while also trying to bait the targets into saying something "beyond the pale".
This particular sub-drama is one manifestation of the strategy, although it's aimed perhaps at low-hanging fruit rather than a truly "potent" target.
Voat is already compromised. I don't think we can fix it, unfortunately. We can only mitigate the damage by switching users or going anon; and even this is only a temporary solution - as deep analysis can identify the same user under different aliases.
I say purge the mods and make it an anon sub. But in the long term, start planning to move.
I dislike the subverse, I think the content is shit. However, content ain't illegal. And that should be the only concern. If we start applying things like selective banning of subs, eventually we will become reddit.
Another important thing is that as hateful as it is, the users that enjoy it are focused there. Remove this space from them and they will sparse to other subs. Same way FPH did on reddit when it was closed.
I don't really care what happens to that verse, but it does affect voat. Is there some way through html to hide it from search bots? And use some seo techniques to promote the more acceptable verses? You don't have to censor things like that, but you don't have to show them to the world.
If you choose option 2, this will only spread to other subverses. As painful as it may be, I believe that the least-bad option is to step in and remove the problems manually. This may have to be repeated in different subverses in the coming years, but it is something that must be done since it's not as bad as the alternative of letting these issues fester and grow.
...and it tarnishes burnishes Voat’s public image.
Voat is still acquiring its own public image. v/niggers does more than tarnish Voat. It's a defining characteristic of Voat's 'No Censorship and Freedom of Speech Model' and, by extension, Voat Inc.
Growing into what? A site with a bunch of cunts from bullshit liberal personality cults running it like reddit? Look at reddit just 2-3 years ago. It isn't fun anymore it's too fucking safe. Voat is where you can get a taste of some raw fucking internet and let it know exactly what's on your mind. Using reddit feel's like a fucking human resources panel is watching you. The fags/niggers/pussies/edgelibs on reddit are extra bold knowing your tongue is tied and it amplifies their voice to the point where you can only go to your subs and talk about your specific things. All just incase some fucking pussie post history checker decides they want to go run and tell because you were being whatever the fuck you decided to be, Reddit is fucking itself Voat isn't reddit don't try to be reddit
A platform with millions of daily users and tangible influence in the world. WIth meetups, and popularity, and getting share links on other popular platforms. In short, powerful. LIke reddit was before the fattening.
I don't support site-wide censorship or coddling, but you're delusional if you think the toxic bigotry is helping voat grow. On reddit it was a minority and easily ignored. On voat it infests /v/funny and /v/whatever and it's making voat feel like a niche sight for the ignorant and the bigots.
There's this strange desire among some members on voat to become "respected" and they think to do that we need a good public image. The only way voat ever would have a "good public image" is to be completely cucked. To start with, if you want to be respectable in the eyes of the establishment (e.g. liberals) a good place to start is by ignoring what niggers do to our society.
Niggers destroy our cities, they violently attack whites, they vote for destructive liberals who raise our taxes to pay for niggers to breed without working. With affirmative action they push more qualified students out of college, force more qualified workers out of jobs, force more qualified contractors out of government contracts. Niggers are the reason your wife needs to feel anxiety when walking home in a major city. Niggers are the reason you need to pay 200% more for a house to put your kids into a non-nigger infested school.
Now if voat is willing to ignore all of that, they're on the road to being respectable in the eyes of the globalists who are rubbing their hands at the goyim's naivety.
There's a big difference between between supporting free speech and supporting hate speech. subs like /v/niggers and /v/fatpeoplehate should be allowed, but they should not in any way be supported by the site. This means the only time you see them is if you're in the sub. They should never be featured anywhere else.
Let me put it another way - there's a big difference between allowing hate speech and supporting it. The way they try to discuss racial problems doesn't help anything, and it makes voat look like shit. Sooner or later the money is going to run out, and this place will cease to exist. It's something to think about. The problems with racism against whites by blacks won't be solved with racism from whites against blacks. It's time to grow up, or vanish. Your choice.
Both those subs are hate speech, there's no other way to describe them. I think voat HAS to allow hate speech in order to continue being a free speech haven. It just doesn't need to pay any real attention to it.
I'd prefer to be feared more than seen as a "respectable", I don't mean feared in the menacing, truly scary meaning, I mean feared because you can't lie to me. We've all had that teacher, parent, or boss that's heard it all before that only a moron would try lying, that's what I mean.
I think the standard Voat sets is that you should be completely free to say what you just said, so long as your community isn't doing anything illegal.
I think there is a market growing for Voat and tolerance for freedom of expression.
I stuck with the facts instead of injecting personal feeling. But since you asked:
I don't decry Voat. I love Voat. For better or for worse, v/niggers is inextricably part of what makes Voat Voat. It's part of what defines Voat and will continue to be part of the life story.
Voat is built of communities. Those communities grow organically over time because of the structure in place by the rules laid out by the community and codified by the mod. When a mod takes a community and drastically changes this structure it is a huge disruption, and most of the time the community will never recover.
If a sub goes through a bait-and-switch then the mod should be removed.
If you look at reddit, the r/politics community never recovered; they were fragmented to r/libertarian (which also attracted power-mods and has itself fragmented), etc. and now there is not a good place that everyone goes to for politics.
I'm not saying that nothing can ever change, but it needs to be clear that the new direction is desired by the community. A good example is the banning of memes, the sub might not have started with a rule against them, but if it is a factual sub, like /v/news or something, then it might be a rule that the community would get behind.
lastly, if you start doing things for investors then it will never stop, and you (or the investors) will be left with a pile of poo.
You are so right about investors. Fuck them. Guess what Voat is selling... Real shit. Not a bunch of self censoring half truths carefully worded like PR so some fag mod wont ban you because it's fucking reddit. The unfiltered truth is hard to find and terrifying to some. But if you create an environment where it exists it's priceless.
Great point. A mod who requests and is granted a sub should never be permitted to change the rules within that sub, without a consensus of the subscriber base. I'm not saying a sub can't change it's direction, or what is or isn't permitted, just that if it already has a subscriber base, they should have an input in any changes. A mod, in my opinion, doesn't 'own' the sub, nor can they dictate, when a request sub is granted, he is simply agreeing to take it on as it is for the Voat community, not as his own personal realm. If they want to do that, create your own new sub, with the rules they want, and then get your own subscriber base. Otherwise, before changing rules, make very, very sure that your subscriber base is up to the changes.
So it now seems to be filled with people posting Minion stuff and saying how great the sub is in a invasion of the body snatchers type of way (hard to parse in text). Does anon have further explanation?
Do whatever you need to do--efficiently and effectively--to safeguard the existence and future of Voat overall. If need be, then make like a surgeon treating a gangrenous finger. The existence and future of the overall community shouldn’t be jeopardized for the sake of one small part of it or for the benefit of a small number of individuals.
To others the whole of voat is a gangrenous finger. Where does it end? What you are talking about is censorship. Let's just lop of one kind of speech on a site, let's lop off another. That's not even a reduced form of censorship. That's the whole point of censorship.
Awww... What’s the matter, little one? Can’t take it when anybody has thoughts that don’t run with your sheeple groupthink so you have to start spitting venom?
I never did Reddit and I’m not Jewish. Still---it’s good to see you soaring at the zenith of your intellectual capability. Please do keep on with your tough guy horseshit talk, though. I know it must help you feel like you’re a real adult--especially since mommy and daddy don’t let you use language like that around their house. Maybe you should go kick daddy’s dog for a while when mommy and daddy are out of the house. It’d probably also help you feel like a tough guy.
Excellent work! It’s good to know that we can always look to you for superb wit, profound insights and legndary high-quality analytical abilities. You’re a really great example for others to emulate and I’m sure you have a gigantic following.
I block shit I don't want to see... it's pretty simple. Option 2 makes the most sense to me, survival of the fittest and the least amount of admin intervention.
Rogue mod @whitesoimustberacist openly declared that he was taking the subverse and steering it away from its specifically stated purpose just to suit his own agenda.
This Reddit cancer mod did not want to start his own subverse because nobody would be interested -- so he instead specifically stole a subverse with over 6000 subscribers.
If you have been banned from v/niggers, then I am respectfully asking you to ping @atko and @puttitout in this post so that we can work together to have our voices heard and 'have our say.'
i like option 2. if people want to make a new subverse that is called something similar, they can do that. if this was a very old site and all the words have been used up than i could see a reason for not doing that. but it is easy enough to make a site called v-nignogs or something to that effect and simply use that new subverse. people are being lazy. free speech isn't protected by passive people. those on voat who want free speech should develop the habit of having to do something about it.
wait, let me make sure i got you right here. i advocate that free speech requires work, and that people shouldn't be lazy. you don't seem to agree, and you want people to assume that i am the nigger and not you? who is the type of person that hates having to do work? who is the type of person that wants everyone else to do the work for them? i agree, niggers go home. this site is for people who aren't afraid of a little work.
This problem will arise repeatedly with multiple subverses. Without knowing a lot on how it all works, option 1 seems sustainable, reasonable, and in the spirit of free speech.
Replace mods. These jerks are here to shit on people. If you let them, they'll keep taking over every sub they consider 'problematic' with the sole purpose of killing voat on sub at a time.
Good viewpoint. Also, don't let anyone fool you into thinking "investors" interested in a free speech forum will be deterred by certain subs. They are not trying to invest in free speech if they are not interested in free speech. This should be simple, but the OP thinks it is a valid viewpoint. It is not.
I'd say go with option 2. That way it becomes self regulating and requires less intervention from the admins. If you go with option 1 people will expect you to step up again in the future. This way you can only lose in the long term as your decisions are sure to piss of at least one group of people. Basically: let this shit sort itself out.
Which I think was a mistake. These are not decisions to make lightly and if it becomes common to solve these problems like this the admins will have to spend more and more time on this in the future (time which I think they don't have and can spend much better).
I would say please remove all mods from the subverse and leave it be. There are a tonne of successful modless subverses at this point. The fuck would /v/niggers need a mod for?
I like this just install one or two L3 janitors to remove spam. If they do anything other then remove spam it will be quickly reported and they can be removed.
THIS CANNOT AND WILL NOT BE SEEN AS A CANARY PRESS.
ONLY TWO MOTHERFUCKERS CAN POST IN HERE.
ATKO PUTT CANARY
REE.
you have been reed.
we know you're gagged
don't say anything
make it standard. HEAR ME? make it standard
and add an ADMIN deletion/ sub save log.
1. handle it like last time.
someone wants to make a v/niggerapologist sub they can, but maliciously coming in and taking an existing sub and turning it into the opposite AGAINST the sub's community's wishes is not free speech, t hat's an overt attack on free speech.
Hey Sane ;)
I don't think you ever linked me to the instance where they agreed that the 30 day void would be a thing? As far as I know the admins consider the Canary to be valid as far back as the last edit.
I don't think anyone besides the admins are able to post in /v/announcements, though I haven't tested it. I do know that only they can sticky /v/announcements posts, though. Based on the tone (and the fact that Putt historically is the one to edit the canary) I'd say it's the One True Putt, but I admit it could be Atko.
Regardless of worldwide standards (of which previous to your mentioning them I was not familiar) the way the admins have set up the Voat canary is that it holds true up to the last edit. Canaries are hardly meaningful in the first place so I see no reason to be concerned now that it has been updated.
8316131? ago
I agree. Win-win.
8146813? ago
I have seen so many insults, bad words and racism around voat that it seems it has turned into the crossroad of Gross people can we implement some moderation of the content. Even if it's automated, it would still be that.
7589422? ago
My weener may be to big. But, at least I'm packing godzilla in my pants.
Those are my thoughts
7568410? ago
I’m just a tiny voice in an ocean of noise. Thar be some whales here. I reckon everyone’s lists would have lots of matching names. God they’re fuckin’ noisy sometimes! There’s orcas too. They might be fun to play with(?), but FUCK those teeth! I can only hope I might pass for a porpoise. I fuck around enough cause it’s interesting and sometimes I can focus long enough to sound like I know how to like I know how talk. Seals are a hoot and mostly fuckin’ stupid. There’s tons of shrimps and crabs. The ocean is a big place so the only real problem is the trash. So far as I’ve seen, ideas aren’t trash in these parts. I guess that means you folks are doing the right things and I figure to stick around whilst that continues to be the case. Thanks, dudes.
7567759? ago
The sub must remain on the basis of free speech. The content doesn't matter. If we are to maintain our platform of free speech then regardless of the controversy it causes it must be restored and remain.
7567609? ago
It seems to me that "purging" under option 1 is just another form of censorship, just one that you happen to be comfortable with. I don't see any difference between disabling the subverse (i.e. killing its message) and purging the mods (i.e. killing the messenger). All the options that you have presented involve modifying a discussion that you don't like - which is clearly censorship.
So if you are going to chose to censor things on voat, at least have the balls to acknowledge what you are doing and don't pretend you aren't stepping down to the exact same level as reddit. In fact, its funny that when voat starts to deal with the EXACT SAME PROBLEMS as reddit, they respond in the EXACT SAME WAY; exerting controll rather than letting the community thrive on its own. If you don't like the subverse, then block it. If you want control of the subverse, tough, go start one that has a similar name and start a more popular spinoff.
But if you do any of these options, then you have taken a large leap towards undoing the entire purpose of this site and it will immediately become just a reskinned reddit.
IMHO of course.
7567526? ago
I have it blocked, but I support their right to free speech. Bad Ideas should be allowed a platform so others may realize they are bad ideas.
Option 1.
7567313? ago
Burn the current nods at the stake and put me in charge.
No one has the burning hatred for niggers like i do.
Niggers are subhuman garbage. Second lowest of them all.
7567056? ago
Option 1 is taking away free speech as well, think about it.
7567035? ago
Please explain to me what the 1st amend is worth on an international website not hosted in the US alone? How does it trump all the other laws in countries were Voat content is being served via Cloudflare? Voat has to adhere to the laws of the countries their content is hosted in, Voat choose to use Cloudflare, thus choose to host their content on servers spread all over the world with different laws. I find it kind of silly that US law is the most important thing here. If so, please stop using Cloudflare OR make this a US only site by hosting it on US servers exclusively. @atko
7566910? ago
What's wrong with racism if it's based on informed and rational reason?
Why should people pretend to respect violent rape culture?
If we can't have honest and robust discussions about the global problems with black culture then nothing will ever be improved.
7571167? ago
Perhaps others feel that constructively discussing the "problems with black culture" is not the intent of a sub called "niggers".
Additionally, your reasoning offers a legitimate goal (improving things) that could be achieved without racism. Why should this be accepted as an excuse for racism then?
7570927? ago
As an aside, is "racism based on informed and rational reason" still racism? Or just...common sense?
7566835? ago
Let the 1st Amendment of the Constitution continue to find a home here.
Do nothing -> Option two.
That said, survival is paramount. If a sub actually presents an existential threat to VOAT due to legal i$$ues it presents then do what you have to do to keep VOAT alive. Free speech is nothing if no one can hear it.
7566906? ago
Voat already serves content thats illegal in countries like the UK. Seems the site owners don't give a fuck about any other law than US law. Even though their website is served via international servers at Cloudflare.
If they want only US law to apply here, they should host it in US only. But who am I. I wish they would make it more clear that Voat is for US citizens only.
7567238? ago
Thanks for the reply but I think you have been poisoned by cultural relativism. The First Amendment is not "just an American Law". It is a universal right of all men. It is an innate right.
All violations of the 1st Amendment that we see in Britain and Scandinavia and Germany are the product of a socialist-collectivist mindset which rejects the fundamental notion of democratic rights. These violations are just about power and the will of an elite to control the many.
There is no principled and reasoned argument by the elite in Europe against the 1st Amendment. You do not hear debates on this. Power is their only argument.
If the concept of a democracy is to hold, people must be allowed to speak freely and without fetter. The more speech we have, the more reasoned arguments can foster wise outcomes from Government and society.
The principles of the US Constitution's 1st Amendment are, thus, at the core to Western Democracy. The USA is the "shining city upon a hill" for this reason.
Now tell me how you want someone else to determine what you can say and think.
7567254? ago
I agree but is not really based in reality. Fact is that some subs here are illegal in countries such as the UK. It is a fact. You can say the UK has bad law, but it is their law. Anyhow, it is off topic in here. I'm just spewing, haha.
7569034? ago
https://voat.co/v/announcements/1551024/7569022
7567358? ago
So, can the UK ban VOAT from the internet when the servers are in the USA? No?
Then not only are UK censorship laws illegitimate, they are also impotent. Good thing!
7567638? ago
The UK can stop Cloudflare from serving content that is illegal in the UK on the Cloudflare servers located in the UK. As long as Voat uses Cloudflare, their content is served on servers located in different countries, the content on those servers have to adhere to the laws of those countries.
US law doesn't trump UK law for servers located in the UK. Though I realise judging by the amount of DMCA requests I get, some people think US law applies worldwide.
So ideally, Voat would be 100% hosted in the US, then only US law applies on content served by Voat. Until then it will be weird to me to cite the US constitution on a website that isn't exclusively hosted in the US.
7569022? ago
If the UK wants to stop citizens from accessing information, that is national news. There was a case of Sweden blocking specific content in coordination with the content provider (I believe it was the dailymail.com). It got international attention, the kind of attention that embarrasses politicians.
So, by all means, let the UK violate the rights of its citizens to read content. I relish the fire storm that will create. We can document the hell out of it and make it news for months and that will make the next "Brexit" that much more severe for the establishment..
Power has its limits. It is good to see those limits brought into view. So bring it on, UK Censors!
7566895? ago
Not everyone here is from the US and wants to follow US laws.
7567647? ago
Voat is a U.S. based corporation. They have to follow U.S. law.
7567280? ago
https://voat.co/v/announcements/1551024/7567238
In the case of the 1st Amendment, you are foolish not to want that.
7566833? ago
Option 1. Fuck rogue moderators. If inwanted my speech controlled I couldve stayed at fuck-ville aka reddit.
Investors? Clearly they dont know what they invested in then. Good, bad, ugly, its part of voat, so fuck them too for not knowing and then trying to alter it because their name is attached.
7566787? ago
The goddamn Lock Ness Monster stole my three fitty too!
7566740? ago
I don't care about niggers. But lolicon is not freedom of speech. It is abusing a right. Voat shouldn't host subs that share lolicon. Even more so because it is fucking ILLEGAL in many countries. Or is the US law the only law that counts on a website served via international Cloudflare servers?
7566671? ago
Option 1.
It's the best option to deter further attacks through this vector.
The cost of attacking a sub needs to be high, the cost of defence needs to be low.
7566553? ago
It's a blocked subverse for me, if it cannot sustain itself let it die.
7566365? ago
Source?
7566261? ago
My account here is fairly new, and even though I’ve been reading stuff here almost every day since the summer of ’15, I know that my understanding of Voat’s inner workings is limited.
It should also be added that I have a quite sceptical view on the more crude and inarticulate racism, homophobia etc. that we see here. – It bores me, immensely, most of the time. But “I would die for it’s right to exist”.
Having now also read the top comments, here, I'd like to state that “Rinse and Repeat” / Option 1 sounds like the way to go.
I am intrigued though, about the we-may-even-have-more-options remark …
About sponsors & potential investors: I don’t think there is any reason to try to pander to the mainstream money. That ship has sailed. Probably.
Voat is a niche phenomenon. Seems to be, irrevocably. – “We few, we happy few, we band of brothers” etc. etc.
7566090? ago
Speaks volumes that you had to put this as anon for people to be able to talk.
As much as people talk about supporting free speech, this site fucking loves to silence dissent.
7566963? ago
True. I tried to bring forward the problems of being an international website, served via international servers brings. Seem @atko doesn't give a fuck about legalities. As long as Voat serves its contents via international servers (Cloudflare), they have to abide by the laws of the countries those servers reside in and not just US law. This is will become a big problem when Voat grows bigger.
It is not just US law that governs the "free" speech here. But pointing out that fact will result in nothing at all. Except for tons of down votes, people don't want to hear the truth.
7566085? ago
My thought is #1.
7566082? ago
Lol she's gotta be long past that point now. Maybe just big boned?
7566048? ago
Option 1. Do not become an irrelevant echo chamber like reddit.
7566030? ago
When someone hijacks a forum for discussion, suppresses free discourse, and begins silencing/banning people from discussing the policy it becomes very apparent that their ideals are counter to free speech.
The short term outcome of this particular sub should be irrelevant to the decision. At the end of the day this is a forum for free speech. Like what someone has to say or not they are entirely entitled to say what they want. You're also entitled to ignore or refute what they say. But when an entity takes the specific action of suppressing discourse we all are worse for it.
I don't care what happens to the sub in particular. But this attempt at suppression is what needs to be dealt with. Anyone caught intentionally trying to subvert the ideals of free speech needs to be removed from any level of authority. Let the individual dictate what content they want to or don't want to see
7565918? ago
I say let it die. If the public's (the average voat user) opinion of a subverse is that it's bad or too controversial, it will loose members and visits really fast. I really think Voat should maintain freedom of speech, as annoying as it sometimes may be.
As far as being damaging to potential investors or companies interested in buying ads : I think it was pretty evident from the getgo you were not going to attrack Disney or Kelloggs. I'm guessing there is a slew of potential companies with products maybe more adult male oriented that would still love to hand you over their money. Voat is fleshing itself out as something very different from Reddit and that's something that should be kept in mind.
7565789? ago
MAKING THIS ANON, MADE PURE REDDIT BTW, YOU POPTART
7565748? ago
If i walk into a bar and I overhear someone being blatantly racist, yes I find it disturbing, but saying racist things and doing racist stuff are two totally different things. If someone mistreats or takes advantage of or subjugates someone else because of race, then I think that requires examination and condemnation (as all prejudicial behavior ought to illicit). But if theu're just saying racist things then they're to become the subject of mockery and satire.
7565724? ago
Silly, most of us aren't white nationalists, we just respect freedom of speech
7565678? ago
huehuehuehuehue my mom is dead
7565628? ago
Fuck off nigger.
7565597? ago
Don't let v niggers die. Transfer it.
7565546? ago
I vote for option one. Thanks for asking!
7565278? ago
doubt this will get read,
but there is no such thing as racism, in fact being white not being able to say a fucking word, nigger. is simply disgusting. what does exist is prejudice, which "racism" is ment to destory. killing your own thought for...... asjkldfh its a brainwashing tatic fucking grow up.
racism is a made up staw man term, designed to keep black people angry, and whites in check. it is brainwashing.
noone on /v/niggers would call ben carson a nigger, or a a hard strong black blue collar worker a nigger as well. Its simply a way they have found a word to represent their judgment on a persons character. /v/niggers would quickly call a white person a nigger if it falls in thier judgement. And that SIMPLY DISPROVES ANY TYPE OF "RACISM" THAT YOU BELIEVE. Same calling them googles etc. its just a fucking word.
does the sub get stupid, yes.. no different than any other subverse.
lest not forget "racism" is path to obtain wealth... but i digress
I have never understood why Jesse Lee Peterson is not more popular on voat. I think its more because he christian and being atheist is trendy... but i digress again.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igZsHjhpZc8
7565237? ago
My thoughts are. This planet is an embarrassment to the entire universe.
7565170? ago
Perhaps problematic subverses could be hidden by default, and only visible to those who make the conscious decision to unhide them for viewing. Of course, this would probably lead to other subverses being flooded by the same content.
7565164? ago
I think this question resolves itself nicely if we adhere to a couple of simple principles.
The first is that non-censorship applies at the admin level, not the moderator level. The second is the principle of ownership; found a subverse, and it's yours, to do with as you like. Give it away to someone else, and then it's theirs, to do with as they like. Admins only need to get involved if the transfer is the result of theft, or if a subverse is simply abandoned with no-one at the wheel at all.
We should not have default subverses. What floats to the top is what floats to the top.
7565055? ago
one would at least be acting like a real world place. when someone comes in and causes trouble, you take care of business. two is fine if it doesn't cause problems. three seems like over stepping the bounds our manifesto. i'd go with two at first, if it didn't die but spilled out and started to cause problems with voat, then option one seems the most logical. one makes the most sense
7564881? ago
Option 1. And maybe try to work out some sort of more thorough vetting process?
7564827? ago
I didn't realize Voat was being groomed for investors..
7564709? ago
Option 1. The subverse, whether anyone agrees with it or not, should remain. Simply block it if you don't want to see it.
7564601? ago
it looks like they cleared out the SDBH retards to somewhere else, fuck 'em
7564506? ago
whats the difference between #1 & 3?
7564459? ago
It's really hard to believe that Voat has a "No Censorship and Freedom of Speech model " when FatPeopleHate is proud to have banned over 1200 people.
No other sub is allowed this kind of retarded censorship shit. When mods on other subs start banning people for speaking their minds those mods get removed.
Why does FatPeopleHate get a special status to censor any free speech?
7565052? ago
Because they have 33,000 users compared to the top sub /v/news which is 70,000 users.
In other words, probably about 1/4 - 1/3 of this site are FPH users. Piss them off and they probably already have some other place to go. Piss them off, and the site drops to substantially less activity, quite possibly financial support for operating the site also.
7564434? ago
Voat will never be able to grow past a certain point with that sub so just do today what you'll be forced to do tomorrow and get rid of it.
7564243? ago
1 conveys the message that a loud group of users can take over any sub they like. In this case it's justified, but what happens when SRS show up demanding /v/gifs?
2 conveys the message that mods can act as a strong safety measure against brigades
7564238? ago
Option 1. Burn that faggot. Is it done yet?
7564225? ago
How do the admins decide which users get to dictate who runs a sub? This rule makes brigading miles easier.
7564218? ago
Option 2: Do nothing.
The solution here is for the userbase to rally under a trustworthy mod and get a new subverse. The fact is that subverse history isn't really all that important, and while it's sad to lose all that old content, probably no one is ever going to go trawling through it, so it's no great loss.
On the other hand, admins intervening and kicking a mod out because some users loudly protest sets a really bad precedent. It's easy to support it now because it's the result we all want, but what happens when an SRS brigade decide they want to kick out the mod of /v/videos because they have links to /v/niggers. Do you listen to them? Or do you only allow certain users to kick out mods.
7564161? ago
Disable and get rid off. Your dedication to freedom of speech and neutrality will survive in tact. Those who cannot discern the difference btw freedom of speech and denigrating speech, well they are judgementalists and as such never will.
7564092? ago
I haven't touched reddit in months, I'll bail on this one to, in a hot second, option 1
7564010? ago
option 1
7563973? ago
Why not make System the [O]wner of every sub that his taken over by hostiles?
I'm not suggesting they all become default subs, just use System (or similar) to let CTR, HenryCorp and Cucks know that sub is protected.
7563855? ago
I nominate Option 1.
The significance of /v/Niggers is HUGE and it must be protected in the same way we protect free speech. Voat's free speech ideals will die if we allow controversial subs to die for the sake of pleasing the politically correct or the prudish.
That said, this problem results from mistakes made when approving bad requests on /v/SubverseRequests.
I recommend the process of nominating new moderators be made more public, specifically by notifying subscribers and by making an automated post to that subverse with details about the application... perhaps making that post a sticky.
This idea was essentially posted to /v/IdeasForVoat in this post.
7563660? ago
OPTION 1: The appeal of Voat over Reddit is its lax approach to free speech. This website would not have a market if it wasn't for Reddit deliberately stifling the free marketplace of ideas and opinions. If you want to copy Reddit and its virtue-signaling heavy-handed approach to governing the community, go right ahead, but good luck differentiating your product and theirs.
7563590? ago
1
7563561? ago
I don't even know what's that verse is all about =\
Only see posts about people screaming niggers left and right.
7563483? ago
Yes, it will never end, that is a fact, the sooner everyone and the admins come to terms with it the better. Freedom of speech is a constant fight. Option 1 is the only solution. I just wanna make sure that everyone understands that the moment Voat bow downs to investors is the moment this site is at risk of censorship, and loses it's whole meaning.
7563362? ago
hav the nigger banned and make a new mod!
7563345? ago
It is the first thing investors have a concern with and it tarnishes Voat’s public image.
This is the beginning of the end.
7563252? ago
The answer to bad speech is better speech. I may not like the concept of the forum, but I can choose to either a) ignore it or b) challenge it. But the only answer that is not acceptable is c) deleting it. Voat is loaded with racism, but I can look past the racism or challenge it. THAT is what freedom of speech lovers do. FoS lovers don't seek to ban people's voices. If that affects Voat's bottom line in reference your public image, then those who are against you for it aren't needed here.
I know those aren't exactly what you asked, but in general it's how people really need to live their lives.
7563024? ago
Don't worry you'll eventually find some investors that don't have a problem with niggers. I know they're a pain in the ass but they spend money too. You just need to find some investors that can really get behind the niggers.
Don't worry the niggers don't really tarnish your image, that's just what the MSM would have you believe. Voat should be all inclusive for niggers too.
Dave Chapel was really successful getting investors that didn't mind the niggers either. You should reach out to him.
7562845? ago
With the first link, the chain is forged. The first speech censured, the first thought forbidden, the first freedom denied, chains us all irrevocably.
To do what you propose in 2 and 3 is to deny freedom of speech. It's a slippery slope. I mean just look over at reddit. I just caught them secretly adding 200,000 votes to President Obama's AMA from 4 years ago so that it appears at the top of /r/all, because to hell with what people actually upvoted. The admins want to control what you see but will ban others who they think are doing the same. I even had trouble posting this finding because reddit did some shady shadow banning of me. Reddit wasn't always like this, but over time they made a number of seemingly reasonable steps in this direction, each step was made carefully with the best of intentions.
It's easy to justify options 2 and 3 for something called /v/niggers, it's much harder to keep doing 1 and defend their right to say what they want. But freedom is not supposed to be easy. You know what the right thing to do is. And yes, you will be mocked. And yes, you will probably have to do it again. And again. AND AGAIN. But that is how it must be. Going with popular opinion over principles always bites you end in the end. Thankfully, the people here are here because their opinions are not always popular and they have faced heavy pushback from social conformists. Voat is one place where I suspect the majority will insist that you keep doing 1. And we will continue to be mocked for it. In return, we get true freedom. Sounds like a good deal to me!
7562803? ago
I've never seen it but I did see v/niggerhate and post there recently
7562800? ago
I'd just like to say that the use of the term "nigger" probably deflates it more than it offends. I suggest that it would be used more and by a wider variety of people.
7562706? ago
I don't believe so. It's existed for a while and the mod has only been a member for about 2 days.
7563853? ago
The mod of v/chicago (@Clueless-Joe-Jackson) has been a member for 1.9 years, and did create v/chicago.
You might be confusing v/chicago, and it's owner @Clueless-Joe-Jackson with v/CHlCAGO, and the owners of that sub who are (@CIueIess-Joe-Jackson, @CIueless-Joe-Jackson ).
7564594? ago
Hmmm... no idea why that would be confusing. :)
7562616? ago
Your demographic doesn't mean shit
7562310? ago
On an unrelated note, having subs optionally support anon posts like this alongside normal posting (like a checkbox a posting how nsfw is now) would be pretty cool I think.
7562646? ago
It already exists, just never made an announcement about it. ;)
Sub owners can turn it on. We are probably going to pilot it on AskVoat or whatever soon.
7562918? ago
Make an announcement, and default it to on for NSFW (read porn) subs but allow them to turn it off (that's why you need the announcement)
I think it could help increase contributions.
Going further, anon comment replies to non-anon threads would be sweet. Plenty of times I'd like to answer something in AskVoat or similar anon.
As long as subverses can turn it off it shouldn't be a problem and I don't think many would even want to.
This is and should be a key differentiator from that other site.
7562295? ago
As you've said, and I'll quote you directly. "Voat Is Yours"
Okay. I can even understand the investors being nervous but here's what I'd put in front of them.
Voat users create subverses and claim content based on what they want to see in an aggregate. v/niggers or v/fatpeoplehate or even v/redditisashitsiteforwankers #redditisashitsiteforwankers express views and opinions of the users and not necessarily the ownership. The ownership has sworn to leave content creation up to the users. The users have taken over the brunt of the work and will continue to do so. They'll continue, that is, until someone with money decides to turn it into another reddit. You could then present a timeline based solely on fact that the investors can check out for themselves exactly what happened to reddit and the continuing decline in membership. Explain also that this site and subverses like v/niggers and v/redditisashitsiteforwankers is a response to what happened at reddit.
I know that it takes money to run servers and grow that server base for more content but, it may need to be met with an attitude of, "Invest as is and you can remain anonymous, invest and prepare a PR statement in response or don't invest and other means of payment for those servers will be sought"
Granted there may be a more diplomatic way about it but I just can't think of one this late
7562194? ago
Option one, and this time, give it to someone who has proven that they are loyal to free speech and that they cannot be bought off. Give it to someone who has a great deal of integrity and discipline.. Someone like me..
Or not.
7562145? ago
Option 1 is the only way.
One thing that Voat needs is a serious discussion on what rules "all" mods and owners of subs follow regarding deletions and bans, then compiled and added to the FAQ. If this was clearly laid out there would be fewer questions to answer when an issue arises.
7562106? ago
you must be new
7562097? ago
That has nothing to do with how we view mods. THEY ARE NOT OWNERS, just janitors.
7561981? ago
What's with the usernames in this thread? Why are they all numbers? To allow people to comment anonymously?
7562671? ago
Yes, it's a voat feature and I turned it on for this post.
7562693? ago
Awesome feature!
7561906? ago
If you do anything other than 1, voat is cucked and everyone will leave which is how they got here in the first place.
Ask your investors if they want to invest in the second Reddit or the first voat.
7561890? ago
That doesn't matter here, mods do not own subs they curate them, they are spam janitors and nothing else.
7561871? ago
Just because Voat supports free speech, doesn't mean admins should be held hostage by a single sub. The balance to free speech is dealing with the consequences of the stupid things we say. I suggest separation of the subverse into a flagged ghetto of provocative idiocy.
7561819? ago
Give me freedom (of speech) or give me death. There are three generalizations that can be made about any controversial post: 1) the reader agrees and it re-solidifies their own beliefs, 2) the reader disagrees and it re-solidifies their own beliefs, or 3) the reader is apathetic and it doesn't affect their own beliefs at all. v/niggers tends to be #3 for me personally.
7561818? ago
There are some very pure freedom of speech arguments to be made for option 1, which is probably the option I'd support. That said however, the practical real world situation says that without advertisers and investors voat cannot probably last long term, especially if something drastic happens, such as Reddit's The_Donald moving here due to a ban. I would have concerns as to how voat would survive such an influx of folk, numbering well into the 1000's. The site needs investment, and that won't happen if an advertisers message is displayed along side a sub such as niggers or fatpeoplehate. They will just stay with reddit or others.
If I had to choose between those subs and Voat as a whole, I'd choose Voat.
7561769? ago
Option 1.
7561747? ago
Option 1, simply because investors always ruin everything.
They're concerned with P&L, not with whatever passion you have for your product. Using investors means that you are making a decision to sacrifice what your company stands for to suit their needs and get their money. It happened to Reddit, and it absolutely will happen again here.
In fact, Voat is already under attack from people who seek to control it. @henrycorp is already trying by eating up subverses, and we've seen how /v/Chicago and /v/niggers have BOTH been compromised.
The fact that a mod admitted to an investor trying to regulate Voat's content shows that I'm not too far off the mark. This is why we need Option 1, it's the only option that lets Voat stay true to what Voat stands for... Free speech and lack of censorship.
I don't like /v/niggers. Censoring them, however, is massively detrimental to everyone, as it's certainly going to lead to Reddit all over again.
7561718? ago
1.
Also your mom's a swedish boar.
7562692? ago
My mom?
7561708? ago
I remember in the last good days of what has become "fattit"...
It was a raid from another forum (somethingawful iirc) gaslit the "jailbait" subreddit.
Of course you pick the sub that no one will defend (re: the poem And Then They Came). I warned at Jr time - "I'm not defending their content, but this could be just a foot in the door for them to ban any sub they don't like"
Then they fell - fatpeoplehate, et al; existing communities were forced to self-censor (/r/wtf just about turned into forwardsfromgrandma), and everyone has suffered.
You don't ban outlets for people to express themselves. You ban that behavior from schools because those are learning environments, not "expression places"
They stay because we are not going to judge their opinions unworthy.
7561705? ago
I think people need to learn on who they choose to moderate their subs. This keeps happening because people keep modding retards. If people keep losing their subs bnecause of who they add maybe we should just let the sub die? You know. Instead of begging admins for help.
~HomerSimpson Moderator of /v/fatpeoplehate
7564491? ago
This one. They will come crying again in 3 months when the next mole takes over their sub, without having learned anything from the last experience.
7562709? ago
This can't be Homer because I'm pretty sure that guy is banned
7562807? ago
Yeah but putt putt is lazy so he never forwarded the git code to ban me.
~HomeSlice
7561698? ago
Option 1, and fix /v/Chicago with Option 1 as well. Anything else is a concession and this is quite literally a war we are fighting.
7561591? ago
Seven hundred and sixth!
7561562? ago
I voat that we make moderators less powerful. They don't need godlike powers to fulfill their role. We need to find a way to push permanent solutions to the community at large.
7562718? ago
This my friend is where we are headed, but we aren't there yet.
7561518? ago
Option 1 seems logical I just discovered v/niggers so dont rob me of the joys
7561473? ago
Purge the censor-mod.
Option 2 is not really an option because the subverse will not exactly "die". It would linger on a zombie sub. Eventually, voat could fill with such zombie communities. New users might have to spend time deciphering where the "real" subverses are, and would rightly question which set really represents voat.
7561462? ago
Option 1 - but the sub should go to an active, contributing member (someone who has been there a long time, and who clearly cares for the community) not just to the first user who requests the sub because that's how a rogue mod got in last time. I also agree there should be some way for active members to vote mods in and out. Absent that pick someone who has contributed a lot of content - @Cancel-Cat-Facts. This was an awesome sticky to see after a long day. Thank you.
7561016? ago
1
7560975? ago
@adhdferret would be my elected /v/Niggers mod. Honestly I feel like if we're gonna be free speech, we should have the ability to vote a Mod out. @Owlchemy (great idea btw) was working on a subverse request idea, would voting be an idea along side /v/SubverseRequest to curb mod abuse? @PuttItOut @Atko
Love you all sorry to bother.
7560879? ago
I have blocked the sub, and would normally say 'let things run their course', but considering admins have intervened in subs before in order to preserve the integrity of the sub's soul, I would say intervention is warranted. Treating subs differently just because you agree or disagree with them is a stepping stone in solidifying bias. While the userbase of Voat has degraded into people who downvote liberal opinions no matter how well thought out while upvoting conservative opinions that match their narrative when it's demonstrably true that the users have not even read the linked article (just look at the article about Joe Biden's son prosecuting one of the most vile child sex offenders ever, in which 80%+ of the comments misinterpret the title to think that Joe Biden's son was the worst child sex offender ever), it's important to maintain neutrality as an admin.
7560843? ago
Tacos mang, tacos
7560841? ago
Steam is going to be produced regardless of if that particular place exists or not. However, removing a vent often incites explosions. Why not just settle this place as a place of shared hatred? It beats getting real people hurt.
7560815? ago
It is the same reason we can burn the American flag. FREEDOM! Option 1 is the only option. Feel free to open up /cracker as well. I will have freedom to block it as well.
7560761? ago
Personally I have that sub blocked but free speech is free speech so option 1.
7560693? ago
Give the sub to CANCEL-CAT-FACTS Eagleshigh or some other active member.
7560655? ago
Administrative cleansing process. Keep thinking on it at practice.
7560364? ago
I have that sub blocked, but I would have to vote for option #1.
7560306? ago
The means to control eddit are known and they will be repeated here. So long as we rely on people to curate subs, it will be easy to control popular subs.
7562095? ago
we just need functionality for users to oppose and remove corrupt mods, rather than taking power from mods we should give more to the users
7564837? ago
A fine idea, but how would this happen? What prevents a significantly large swarm of botted accounts from colluding to take over a sub?
7564846? ago
make restrictions based on account age and subverse CCP
7571510? ago
That's not indicative of anything. CCP can be and is farmed. Those looking to take over can plan and wait months for it to take effect.
7560272? ago
i hate /v/niggers. but i can block them (and i have).
but if you can wipe out a sub I find offensive, that means you can wipe out a sub that i enjoy.
/v/niggers is the true Canary Notice. once it goes, then Voat goes.
i don't like them at all, but I have to go with option 1.
7560269? ago
Option 1.
Kill one sub, you open the gates for every other unpopular sub to be killed off as well. This will just become another deaddit.
Also, if an investor doesn't like it, they do not believe in what Voat stands for.
7560236? ago
Free speech needs to prevail. We are already heading into 1984 so we need at least one space where anyone can say anything regardless of its content. SBBH FTW!
7560221? ago
Second comment: Good for you for making a request-for-comments.
7560216? ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zw97LIBGbR4
7560214? ago
The best thing to do is that which makes the word lose its power as quickly as possible. I don't know what letting it die entails, but if its there and ignored by most of the community, that would pretty much speak for itself. It would be wrong to remove a copy of Tom Sawyer because the word nigger was printed in it, even though I don't want anyone called that word. Beware of investors, they can suck.
7560205? ago
I think disabling it just because of investors is a slippery slope. It's one of the things that led to the current state of that other site. I vote for option 1.
It would be disappointing if everyone sat around and watched these scumbags ruin this site like they did the other.
7560202? ago
It has to stay. There needs to be a way to make Google stop displaying it as a top subverse in the search result for Voat
7560196? ago
Let it die. Freedom of speech means that the government can't suppress the expression of ideas. It does not mean that everyone is guaranteed a forum in which to spew garbage. It entails the possibility of being ignored, or scorned.
Such is life as an adult and a citizen of an un-repressive society.
7560103? ago
It should remain.The majority of OP are just shit posters anyway.
7559884? ago
The MODS are AI
7559858? ago
1
7559812? ago
I already said to give it to me. There's no one more anti jew on this site than I am. I won't let it get taken over again.
7559786? ago
Like many who responded, I don't like the sub either. But This is Voat. Give the sub to someone else and let it ride.
7559606? ago
In instances like this power should be given to the top x contributers to the sub(X=1 per every 1000 subscribers) while things are sorted out. We also need to get some user supermajority mutiny made available. After a sub reaches a minimum numbers of subscribers it becomes a community worth protecting, say 2000, if fuckery comes about users can mutiny and give power over to those top x contributers.
Edit. Why are we anonymous in this? FetusChrist here
7559585? ago
Purge the moderators. Hand it over to @cancel-cat-facts and @adhdferret because they seem like the two most trustworthy people that care about the subverse.
Also, ban @whitesoimustberacist from the site. Delete the account. It was probably sold to the CTR people that were offering hundreds / thousands of dollars to a few active members, a few months back.
7566603? ago
Definitely agree with IP Banning @whitesoimustberacist. Motherfuckers need to have consequences for pulling shit like this, and if they're buying accounts it should become a net loss for them.
7566773? ago
Circumventing this is trival.
7567283? ago
So expand the idea until circumventing it isn't trivial. I'm not a coder, but there should be some sort of permanent Fuck You for people who do shit like this.
7559530? ago
I think the subverse is a stain on this website and prevents critical discussion, but I don't think it should cease to exist because A) that's censorship and B) it creates a persecution complex for those who post there and provides vindication for their beliefs. I'm just wondering if people would feel the same if it was an Uhuru/ black nationalist subverse.
My general thoughs? I think that I sound like a racist to liberals and a race traitor to racists.
7559381? ago
I voat option 1. Niggardly tactics such as these will not impede freedom of speech.
7566649? ago
Niggardly means stingy...
7576668? ago
Does it really? If so I have been incorrectly using it in place of cowardly (but different) for years.
7559307? ago
The limited resource that lets this happen is v/niggers name. Just make subverses non-unique, that way users can migrate and keep the same name
7559230? ago
Option 1
7559208? ago
If potential investors are more concerned with v/niggers than they are v/loli, v/youngteens they're fucked in the head. Just like whoever the fuck it is that likes pretending that those two, and quite a few other image based subverses are any form of "free speech". And I know, "But the Supreme Court said....", yeah and they've also determined a presidential election outcome illegally, say it's okay to murder babies in the womb, and refuse to see cannabis as Life Liberty & the Pursuit of Happiness, or a protected religious sacrament. So fuck them too.
It's awfully fucking odd though, sarcasm, hyperbole, other literary devices, and maybe even a little racism are so damned controversial, yet feeding child rape enthusiast, and those who like to prey on slightly older children whose brains aren't even developed yet is just honky-fucking-dory....
I feel that voat died with v/ovenmagnets, and the fact that the site is so delusional that sexual images of children from just under the legal age to toddler are "free speech", and appropriate for this site, while "dangerous" subverses like v/ovenmagnets had to go, and now apparently v/niggers is on the chopping block.
You'll probably destroy voat no matter what you do, but trust me on this, as long as v/loli, v/youngteens, and anything similar remains, even if you get investors I'll make it a personal mission to make sure they don't stay for long. Might as well bring back v/ovenmagnets....
Not seeing how anyone is "Standing Behind" a "No Censorship", "Freedom of Speech" model though, the purge against "antisemitism" took place a long time ago with the removal of v/ovenmagnets, and it's easy enough to gather from the announcement you guys would be thrilled to purge v/niggers....... Just so long as lolis and youngteens can coexist with pizzagate... and the "investors" don't get "spooked"..........
7559141? ago
I believe that this will not happen again if a mod is carefully chosen. Back in the day, Voat didn't have janitors so everyone was a mod. Now a sub can have just one mod.
7559050? ago
I don't know anything about it, but the ONLY viable option is #1. #2 is giving completely up on freedom of speech. If you allow a terrorist to shut it down then we might as well go back to reddit. #3 is effectively the same as #2. It is an admit defeat and run away approach.
The only option is to ban the evil oppressor that has nothing better to do with his (her?) time than infringe on the rights of others. EVERY effort (although I'm fairly sure there are no effective means) should be taken to ban the user in question. They should not be allowed on the site ever again if there were any possible way to block them.
For your principles to mean anything at all you have to apply them to people with whom you disagree.
7559042? ago
Option 1
7558946? ago
I don't see an option to just remove all moderators and allow it to be a system sub. Let the up/down vote work.
7558921? ago
Option 1. I came here for freedom of speech. I've got /v/niggers blocked, but I agree with the majority that they should be free to express their opinions.
With that said, rinse and repeat isn't sustainable. There needs to be some kind of process in place to define and handle rogue moderators. IMO, a subverse should belong to its users. So, if someone is doing something that the users disagree with, then they are, by definition, a rogue moderator. The hard part is programmatically defining the users in a way that isn't subject to manipulation. If I had figured that part out, I would've posted something to /v/voatdev by now.
7558874? ago
Option 2.
Let someone request the sub and let that happen. If the sub dies, so be it.
7558844? ago
Option 4: Make each subverse state a charter, like the articles of incorporation for a company. Re-mod subverses only for severe charter violations, by analogy to a company president that embezzles money.
This way your decisions are value independent, like a judge impartially holding the presidents of a day care company and a defense contractor to different standards.
P.S. The U.S. presently has a terrible problem with charitable foundation officers hijacking the organizations and perverting their values. You are not alone in your quandary.
7558841? ago
I think 1 is the only option to keep with the integrity of the site.
7558819? ago
really all you need to is comment from @akto that he say racisim is a prom....
yes you hearMUTHER FUCKING ZERO SUPPIORT THAT IS DOESNT EXIST.
YOU ARE ALL FALSE, IHAVE YOU HOMOSEXUAL HUGBOX, VOAT IS REALLY.... REALLY FUCKED RIGHT NOW
7558813? ago
Go ahead, and don't forget to advertise it in /v/gasthekikes.
7558775? ago
i am correct 100% percent that the adims took it over, i dont blame that... saying nigger is racist because you cannot say it as a white person. this site is dead to me
7558768? ago
Hopefully this has already been said but I prefer a variation on option 3.
v/niggers should become a special landing page which describes voat's commitment to free speech. And then helpfully links to an alternate subverse that racists would approve of, as well as to a subverse about fighting racism.
7558757? ago
7558737? ago
Of course, this could be solved by simply putting that in the sidebar...
7558736? ago
https://voat.co/v/allmanipulationdsafsfdfa
maniputation, hahahahaha cana===
@SaneGoatiSwear
you probably to silly to see it, this will be my last post... even fucking reacher left
7558832? ago
lol wut?
7558695? ago
Option 1 If you don't like a sub, block it. Although problems like this arise, don't sacrifice freedom of speech to fix it. I know v/niggers could be an image problem to some but the right investor will eventually come along.
7558675? ago
Niggers
7558632? ago
I have it blocked. I don't like it at all and I think it should be disabled, Option 3. I know Option 1 is the popular one and will probably win out but at least I got my opinion in.
I have no idea what is going on over there and I don't know how you "ruin" such a sub. To me it seems like it is begging to be a train wreck just by existing.
7558520? ago
Option 4: Code a vote of confidence feature that would allow a majority of longtime contributing subscribers to vote out a mod.
7558492? ago
really there is no free talking on voat, you will get shot down as soon as you opposed. just delete the sub. its pretty equivalent to what the users do
thanks again, but i dont think i'll spend any more time here.
wanna know how fast i'd get downvoated to nothing for saying that to the free speech kids?
voat is is infected dude, people toss back and forth. i'd just get what kind of money you can out of it, and run for hills... no one that gave a shit about the site would care
7558409? ago
We can always overwhelmingly up vote what we want
No need to down vote
Just call the target and we'll make him/them understand that his/their opinion isn't that popular
usually, it's enough to stop narcissists
Because in the end, that's what they truly are
So if you know the narcissist game, you win everytime
7558404? ago
I hope you guys come to the conclusion that free speech is a public domain issue. And as a private entity you guys can do whatever the fuck you want. If that means shutting down v/niggers than so be it.
7558368? ago
Why is a stickied announcement posted by an anonymous user??.. Sorry if my question seems retarded, but I'm used to seeing announcements by atko or puttitout, not some random anon.. ｏ＿Ｏ？
7558982? ago
Only admins can sticky like this. They did it so people arent worried about their online reps and can say what they truly feel. Its even written there in the main post.
7558129? ago
Haha Me too thanks
7569413? ago
Yep, that's me, cancel-cat-facts. PM me nudes of your sister/mom/gf/yourself if female so I can unban you. Thanks
7558116? ago
This problem requires thinking outside the box. The only was to stop bad behavior here is to remove the cloak of anonymity. Adult content protections and demand name and email address for that sub like the newspapers do. Let the whole world know who is making the comments and you will quickly see it become a thing of the past without haveing to censor anyone. You get to keep your vision and they keep their speech ( if they dare).
7558066? ago
Option 1 and I would also be interested in knowing if there was evidence that the account /u/WhiteSoIMustBeRacist may have been sold or compromised
7558064? ago
Option 1 is the only one that Voat wins.
Option 2 sends a message that someone with an agenda can dramatically and negatively affect subreddits they do not agree with instead of letting ideas stand or fall on their merits.
Option 3 sends a message that voat no longer has any regard for the principles of free speech.
7558049? ago
v/niggers is a rather crude name to be sure, and its a target for sjw aggression
but the truth is that niggers are 12% of the US population commit 55% of all its violent crime. they are a literal sub-human parasite on our civilization
you simply cant get that information anywhere, its taboo i can understand why voat doesnt need v/niggers.....but the world does
7558014? ago
It's back.
7558011? ago
I dislike the name of that sub and generally dislike the content. However, free speech should be protected. Some of the most-upvoted content in that sub is stuff like this: a Harvard study discussing racism shifting towards anti-white racism. It's not taken out of context. It's a discussion that has value.
I think the more interesting topic is why a free-speech platform such as Voat has such a hard time particularly because of the name of a specific sub. Are other subverses at Reddit banned for being equally racially offensive in nature? Well, reddit.com/r/crackers (a sub "about cringey white people") is a-ok by their standards. So it's not about racism, it's about political correctness.
7557995? ago
my thoughts really, voat is a sinking buoy. fuck it.. as a admin wipe the stupid subverse as a whole. every one just to /v/niggers/ to get attention .
free speech, 75% of users dont understands what that means anyways. better up upkeep for you
7557987? ago
Option one, best option of the three.
7557973? ago
Implying that hasn't already happened a long time ago. They infect the entirety of Voat with their narrative.
7557939? ago
No, /v/preteens was.
7557898? ago
I have the sub blocked, letting the sub rot or making it go away will force it's users to use the rest of voat as their space for the subs discussions.
I'm really not interested in seeing /v/niggers discussions in any relevant topic. You can already see what I mean with all the jew hate peppered through out voat. I don't think there's much that can be done about that but it would be much worse with /niggers talk sprinkled in.
option 1 has my voat.
7557893? ago
Anonymous you doesn't understand what's going on and let's his stupidity free because it's more anonymous than usual. Yawn.
7557867? ago
None of these options sounds good. I'd like to point out that making Voat a bastion of free speech, and making a stand against hate speech are not mutually exclusive goals. I think if you run a bar, and 90% of your clients are white supremacists and you decide that you don't want to hassle people by trying to do anything to discourage the white supremacists from attending your bar, then congratulations, you have respected free speech, and you are now, for all intents and purposes, a white supremacist sympathizer. This is what Voat has become, and for that reason, I don't recommend Voat to my friends because I think this place has a lot of vile people, and I come here to see what people are talking about, while trying to ignore the hate speech. Although it's not easy.
7557847? ago
I don't block v/niggers, but I also hardly go there. I have commented a couple times and have been downvoated. No trolling. Nothing to warrant a ban. Get rid of slimy mod. Anon commenting doesn't help much here, could be all alts pushing an agenda.
Admins need to make promise BEFORE DECISION they will make sure "Voats Opinion" is NOT total alt fuckery bullshit.
@Atko @PuttItOut
7557843? ago
FREEDOM OF SPEECH!
7557821? ago
Option 2 please.
7557769? ago
No matter how disgusting/stupid/ ignorant/silly a subverse may be,it should be left to flourish or wither on the vine all by itself.Don't like a subverse? Don't read it.
7557747? ago
found the fatty
7557721? ago
go with option #2, once it dies and becomes inactive, someone with the desire can request it to transfer. Voats system already works dont change it for the love of god dont change it.
7557695? ago
1 is the best option. Freedom of speech should always remain as this site's top priority.
Toxic users should always be allowed their own sub. It gives them a place to vent that is easy for others to block if they wish to.
If mods purposely try to destroy a subs userbase, then it should be fine if the admins step in to replace them so that the users can keep their sub.
7557686? ago
My position is that it burnishes Voat, aka part of what makes Voat what it is.
7557637? ago
I'm always for option 1. Seems to work every time this problem comes up. I'm by no means a supporter of the sub, but do support their right to exist. I've heard very little on this exact matter but think I know enough to recognize when change is needed. You're doing God's work, keep it up!
7557576? ago
I vote option 1. I dislike and disagree with the sub and general contents of the sub. ,But as an Iraq Veteran, I did not swear an oath to only defend the constitution for people I agree with. Freedom of speech means freedom for all. The moment it is not freedom for all, it's not Freedom anymore. It's one group imposing their will on another. The only time speech should be locked down is if it brings harm. Not hurt feelings, but actual harm, such as exploitative pictures of underage children. If /v/niggers becomes a place where people organize lynchings, or encourage others to do so, it needs to go. As long as it's just "Blacks are bad and this is why," then it deserves a place on Voat. Anything less, and we might as well change the URL to LeReddit2.0.com
7557572? ago
Mod democracy.
Rather than directly choosing sides as a mod, in such an event allow admins to trigger a mod election, where all active users in a sub can vote for anyone they want to be a mod. A complete mod election can be triggered by a 51% vote of active users.
For particularly volatile subs (or for subs where the creator sets it this way), set up a vote on a schedule so users can vote for mods regularly -- say, annually.
Democratic subs can't appoint mods at all, existing mods can trigger an election before their term ends by stepping down, or a group of mods can trigger an election for vacant spaces by voting 51% to increase the number of mod spaces.
The problem right now with the moderator system is that it's basically a system without accountability. Mods create and destroy mods, and so all it takes is for a sub to be taken over is one malicious mod.
At the end of the day moderators made believe that they own the communities they moderate. That is simply not true. The communities bring all the value to the community. If we reduce the power to individual moderators, if we allow the community to choose who they want leading them, if we Implement voting systems for key decisions man I feel the admin will need to step in a lot less because democracy tends to be a self regulating system.
7557521? ago
Why isn't there a White People I Hate sub?
Populate one and make it equally prominent.
7557497? ago
I know a lot of people use free speech as a justification for subs like that, but personally I think it should be closed. A wise man once said your mouth is a prison that holds one of the most dangerous prisoners, and the only time you should let it out is when your sure it can't hurt anybody. I think every human being has the responsibility to each other of enjoining the good and preventing the evil, so I ask you users of voat, please prevent the evil. Thank you.
7557469? ago
I'll take a number one please.
7557426? ago
Can you combo Option 2 + 3? Instead of disabling and transferring (Option 3) -> Copy/Paste all the content into a new subverse with proper mods and let the community migrate freely (Go Merkel!), all the while leaving the original one (subverse and mod) intact (Option 2). That way you haven't censored or disabled anything or anyone, just giving the community options.
7557424? ago
Do you even know your own website? People here will obviously vote for option #1. A very small minority may vote for option #2.
I don't know why you even included option #3 as I don't see anyone voting for it.
7557409? ago
Option 1 is the clear choice . While i have not ever been to that sub i believe we as a community need to send a clear message to Reddit style mods that their tactics will not be tolerated on Voat .
7557355? ago
Maybe with an NSFW tag or something similar for controversy
7557346? ago
You have to purge all of the moderators who are subverting your site. Freedom of speech is not a right or a privilege, it's a constant battle, a war of attrition. If you're not ready to fight, you've lost already.
7557328? ago
The internet is God.
7557295? ago
Solve this by drawing up a "constitution" for the sub. Voat-document that all mods of the sub agree on such and such date. If a mod goes rogue, destroys all, and is changing/breaking the rules of the original constitution without it being Voat-officially changed.. kick that faggot to the curb. Problem solved. The end. -auto_turret Sorry I'm late to the party, boss made me work.
7557270? ago
I'd really like some way to personally unmoderate moderators. If I click on their handle in the moderator's box to the right and uncheck them then all their moderation (banning, spiking stories or posts) becomes unhidden. That way if a moderator runs amok I can just deal with it myself.
I suppose you could have a mechanism in place where if enough people "fire" a moderator they get removed.
7557247? ago
Wtf is going on itt im so confused
7557184? ago
Let the sub die.
If enough people unsubscribe to the sub, then allow it to be reclaimed. Inactive accounts don't count as subs.
7557160? ago
censorship is always wrong 100%. it's the reason i left reddit and came here. free speech is always under attack and must be protected at all times. that is the most important thing.
7557125? ago
I vote do nothing and let it die. Also bring back /v/preteens. It was a canary.
edit: I am an idiot. The subvoat used to be banned but I can view it now. I just didn't know because I never tried.
7557263? ago
Wtf does canary mean
7557297? ago
A canary was traditionally carried by miners because it is much more delicate than a human. If it died it was a sign there was poison or insufficient oxygen and the miners had to get out immediately. In this context I mean it was a test of true freedom of speech. If even the most reviled people are allowed to have their say then freedom of speech is truly protected.
As it turns out, they are not.7557118? ago
I vote for Freedom of Speech. Always.
7557116? ago
I like to believe there are investors that share our values. I have no idea how to find one.
7557113? ago
There needs to be a better way for the community to regulate the moderators. If you don't want to deal with it as admins, build a site that truly gives more power to the users. It's not easy, but if you figure it out it'll set you apart from that other censoring site.
7557102? ago
option 2 would make me laugh. do it.
7557073? ago
damn. dubs witnessed
7557048? ago
Is there an option 4? Doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result... It seems futile.
The only thing you accomplish by censoring them is acknowledging that you can't compete with them in a contest of ideas, that you feel threatened by what they have to say. Honestly, i think a lot of the actual educated racists (capable of defending their stance intelligently) left the sub a long time ago. At least i haven't heard from any of them in a little under a year.
7557027? ago
No, it's not. In terms of activity, Voat was doing just fine before the white nationalists came along. I believe it was at its highest popularity after the IAMA controversy.
7557061? ago
Most of those users left. Many were brigaded off the site.
7557025? ago
Also sorry for so many replies but if you look at who posts on those subs they mostly want v/coontown back. The cries to give back v/niggers is from the voat goats wanting to do the right thing but the mess is v/coontown being hijacked a long time ago. Time to put the interests of the site first as well. If voat has more chance of surviving transferring content to coontown then just do that.
7558180? ago
The moderators also said that they were fine with just transferring to their current backup subverse of v/coonshire, so Option 3 to either v/coontown or v/coonshire would be the best.
7557005? ago
You lost me at "tarnish"
7556979? ago
Its much more but you are probably the type that needs it gone so you can do the shit this thread is about.
7556968? ago
Option 1.
7556962? ago
Hoping you will read this and unban @derram while you are at it.
https://voat.co/v/ProtectVoat/1540715/7539720
7556942? ago
We need a whole new platform that doesn't make decisions on whats allowed and whats not allowed. Something permanent and encrypted with the option of soft deleting where the post is still there but it can be deleted in general view or from your account view. You could always view the "raw" site but paid curated filters would work great as a way to make income for the site. Unpaid filter sets would make the site bearable to use (would be unbearable because of spam), but less often updated because of being community maintained.
7556934? ago
Give them both v/niggers and v/coontown and let them choose. Then only allow janitors there that make a written statement that they will mod in the wishes of the majority.
7556919? ago
nobody is forced to read v/niggers, their complaints are invalid. fuck censorship. long live v/niggers!
7556898? ago
I like the idea of v/coontown taking place of it. Let v/niggers die.
7556873? ago
Option 1. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance. And sometimes eternal repetition.
7556868? ago
Option 1. It's the right way to go on these type of issues.
7556844? ago
In all seriousness, I think it is time for the admins to pursue other interests. Voat's userbase is not worth your time. They are a bunch of angry assholes who wouldn't have so many problems with censorship if they didn't act like dicks all the time. They don't even have the courtesy to respect the fact that you work full time jobs and can't cater to their every need.
You're not going to get an investor who is interested in free speech with this hateful lot. You'll get one that wants to control the narrative and weed out "undesirables." Most of the users don't even support free speech. Of course, they don't like being censored, but they'd be happy to kill and censor anyone who disagrees with them if they thought they could get away with it.
7556831? ago
Be careful if you plan on implementing option 1. It sets a dangerous predicament for the future of Voat. Powerusers, sanctions, and drama-creators will have influence via mob rule. There should defitnetly be exceptions like if the mod accounts were bought/hacked/doxxed then there should be admin intervention. The /v/niggers head mod might have been a troll sleeper agent. Whether you think that's enough to implement rule 1 is up to you. In the case of the /v/Chicago mod, I don't think he should be kicked out since His intention wasn't to destroy the subvoat.
7556820? ago
Option 1 for sure.
7556726? ago
I think transfer the content to coontown because it was the original on reddit. That sub was hijacked by eugenix and populated by his sockpuppets. Give the sub to someone under the guarantee they will keep it for the good of the cmmunity.
7556682? ago
Option 1. Free speech first.
Though this sub might / does raise at times to the level of being very racist, real life is not
warm and fuzzy. If people can't handle having to face the real world it's their problem.
7556674? ago
What about option 4?
This way voat continues to hold these accounts in place but not so much access as to warrant outcries and interference. Besides, voat needs some sort of compensation from these type of subverses.
7556667? ago
Option 1.
7556619? ago
Version 1! Roll the dice and take the risk.
7556617? ago
I'm subbed, I enjoy it, but geez folks I have a damn life. Do what you want. I don't give a shit. The drama is getting old.
7556591? ago
Do not allow those cancer to moderate any subverse is the only option.
The problem is not /v/niggers or any particular sub, the real problem here is those cancer mod that trying to ruin voat.
7556555? ago
I'm black, and I like v/niggers. Catching up on the posts on that sub on the way to my affirmative action'ed job at a Muslim and black coddling urban university while sipping mulatto coffee is a source of amusement and joy in my life. Option one is really the only option that I can support, as I'd like for the sub to be restored to what it was. Racism on the internet is really our last avenue to social victimhood and thus free things, which makes us black folks happy. For the love of black people, spread the hate. :3
7556534? ago
I don't go to /v/niggers because racism is for morons. But I heartily stand by allowing freedom of speech. If /v/niggers was created by the problemed mod, why take it from him? Don't I have a right to kill my subverses? If people don't like it they will vote with their feet. /v/niggers will become a ghost town and word will get around about the next meeting place.
7556532? ago
The mods of the sub were not responsible enough to prevent the takeover. When you own a community that's at high risk of being the target of subversive maneuvers like /v/niggers was, you have to take some precautions. Crying to the authorities because of your failures is, ironically, what the niggers do.
Option 2. Do not cause a precedent. Let them learn a lesson, if they can.
7556427? ago
I am ambivalent towards the sub, but the actions of the mod are unwarranted. Antagonizing him further just to drum up drama was possibly also unwarranted.
The flippant me would say to toss the bum out, and let Amalek mod it just for lulz. I want to be reasonable here though, and say that the mod should be removed, and someone else put in place, or some sort of automoderator who would not practice censorship, but would only cull obvious spam.
7556236? ago
I don't care. Shut it down. I never felt pleasure by ranting about others because of their skin colour.
7556204? ago
How about removing mods?
7556099? ago
Let people who don't like niggers blow off steam with other likeminded people. For fuck sake there are lots of them and you can't ban an idea.
7556058? ago
The lack of a comment on the Warrant Canary tells me that Voat has been compromised by far more than an unruly subreddit.
Do #1.
7556013? ago
Option 1.
7556001? ago
I dislike the sub but still think people should free to congregate there if they wish. If the "moderators suck" for whatever reason, then people should create a new sub more to their liking.
7555979? ago
I don't patronize v/niggers at all but I'd say option 1 is the best. They have a right to be assholes in they're own little corner. Usurping the sub is bullshit. If what's his face wants a polite sub, let him create one and curate it accordingly.
7555937? ago
The Purge - Rogue Mods
(Option 1 please)
7555936? ago
I would say let it be. Those who would be plagued by such a subverse do so willingly. It is as easy as blocking it and moving along.
If it leaks into other things in a negative way it should be handled appropriately but oftentimes the best way to leach the power from something it so ignore its existence. The opposite of feeling is indifference. Indifference takes all the power from something.
The only thing keeping it going is enough people feeling pushed or pulled or generally affected by its existence.
7555930? ago
OPTION 1
It is the only valid option. Investors should realize that the same majority that was ok with "grab 'em by the pussy" is ok with the existence of /v/niggers, and the only people who do have a problem with the existence of a /v/niggers are a very vocal, very disgusting, very repulsive, and very isolated minority. Most people prefer free speech to censorship. Most people are aware that social marxism is a toxic ideology, and the world is rapidly and increasingly resistant to SJW bullshit and economic terrorism. These investors you speak of would do well to ignore the cries of special snowflakes. History is moving forward and leaving these sycophants in the past. Anyone claiming /v/niggers is bad for business is flat out WRONG. Without free speech, there is nothing special about voat. Anyone who would like to invest in voat would recognize this as its only value, and would recognize how censoring /v/niggers would entirely eliminate that value - I honestly don't believe that there is any pressure from investors who wish to capitalize on voat's platform of free speech. If a so-called investor is putting that pressure on voat, then they are more likely just deep pockets who want to control the flow of information, and thusly, should be considered unfit for a role in the administration of voat.
7555906? ago
Ha ha voat will fall too. LOL
7555875? ago
/v/niggers is a shithole, and I don't give a fuck about it, or the self-righteous fucktards that subscribe to it. I find it funny that a bunch of bigots are crying about someone taking over their precious sub. I hope that cancerous piece of shit sub fucking dies.
That said, I am for free speech, and think the first option is probably the best of those given.
7555867? ago
Boot and IP ban all rouge mods. I vote for @Cancel_Cat_Facts to take ownership of v/niggers even if he his a dirty jew.
7555848? ago
Option 1. Reddit went to shit not because of rules, but because of bad actors, in particular the admins and mods.
There's no such thing as a perfect ruleset, whats needed are lazy (not petty) tyrants as mods.
7555826? ago
I don't care for the sub, and have it blocked, but no one should be allowed to take over a sub and turn it 180 from its original purpose for their own reasons. Option 1 is the best course of action. Ditto for HenryCorp.
7555825? ago
It's got to be 1, but I hate it. Does the sub need a mod? If yes, can we get an indifferent mod, who is truly fucking indifferent? Someone who doesn't frequent, or care about the sub? Someone with no horse in the race?
7555792? ago
Strip the mods from the sub and let the downvotes decide. Edit- or give it to me, i promise to do absolutely nothing except delete spam and advertisements, and only if notified about it. So option 1.
7555719? ago
Why not just leave the sub unmoderated like /v/whatever to eliminate the "who gets to be mod?" issue
7555836? ago
Spam
7555927? ago
But who gets to be mod then and how do we determine what the new rules should be?
7556921? ago
Who becomes a mod should be a participant in the sub with good community standings. The rules should be made in cooperation with the community and open to adjustment as needed
7555714? ago
Option 1
7555646? ago
I would prefer a fourth option to make the sub unmoderated much like /v/whatever unless we can somehow solve the problem of who gets to be moderator.
7555612? ago
Of course Voat needs to be defended! Kick the bums out.
7555610? ago
While I believe it should stay as it is a freedom of expression issue to remove it.
I would personally let it die. If the community that uses that sub doesn't want to actually support it and generate content that is useful to those who wish to browse it, it doesn't deserve to exist.
Repeatedly requiring admin intervention ot maintain a sub isn't in the overall best nature of the community as it forces admin time on what should be a non-issue.
7555577? ago
There's another option: Let the users of a subverse vote to initiate a mutiny against the mods and if more than 50% agree, then there is an election for mod replacements. This would be an awesome new feature, however it's probably difficult to implement well.
7555549? ago
Option 1. We can't give them external censorship power via taking over subs. As much as despise racism, I abhor any and all forms of censorship and I will defend the most vile and pointless content from being taken away.
We set our morality, and follow it. If we make exceptions to things we don't like / things that cost us money, then we will end up the same as Every. One. Else.
7555483? ago
The first amendment protects ALL speech, which includes unpopular speech. If it only protected popular speech, there would be no need for protection.
7555512? ago
No, it doesn't protect ALL speech. Sorry. It protects MOST speech.
7555471? ago
I don't know. However, I say that these aren't sustainable solutions. Depending on the admins to solve each individual issue is good for a small, cohesive community, but neither of those apply to us. And the more we grow, the less it will apply to us.
Thus, we need to find solutions which gives the community the power to deal with these issues.
One way is by allowing users to remove moderators. To avoid brigading, we can limit this to top subverse contributors, or Trusted Members(decent activity, good recent activity upvote ratio, etc.). Could be done by each user having an individual vote, or by using upvotes as votes.
This could also apply to rules.
The other way I can think of is decentralizing moderation. I can see two ways, we get a fuckton of mods(nominated by the users), or the users moderate themselves.
Either way, the way it would work is by them individually checking whether posts and comments obey the rules, and if a super-mayority agrees that it doesn't, the post is removed.
Neither solution is perfect, though I prefer the first one. The second one could make subverses lose direction.
7555465? ago
There is this idea called the "Streisand effect" that creates negative attention from people once someone makes a fuss about something reasonable people think is absurd. There will always be people trying to provoke others with stupid rhetoric. To me, the best course of action is to ignore these people or bots and give the community the ability to mute them. I like voat for its freedom and I tolerate trolls looking for a conflict. I recognize them for who they are and and I don't engage them.
I disagree it tarnishes voat. It makes voat unique. True, you have to have a thick skin here, but this is part of what makes this community unique. Once you censor contributors you become Google and FakeBook. You are not them. Your audience are the people looking for ideas not hosted by the left media. Tolerance is not something the corporate media has.
7555437? ago
First and foremost, we must acknowledge that even if we don't necessarily like what the subscribers there say or how they say it, Voat is a platform entirely dedicated to free speech. If we start banning speech of any kind (other than spam, because that is usually agreed to be one of the first things that everyone is fine getting rid of), then it is a slippery slope to keep banning more and more kinds of speech until we turn into another echo chamber like Reddit, where the shadowbans supposedly created to stop spammers are regularly used to silence critics and AutoModerators are set by the subreddit mods to automatically delete any perceived "wrongthink" by the users.
Option 2 is basically surrendering to the people who bought/hacked/doxxed @WhiteSoIMustBeRacist into advancing their agenda, without ever even fighting them. It is an entirely unacceptable response.
Option 3 is the "scorched earth retreat" policy. It might solve the problem for now, but what happens next time, or the time after that, or the time after that? It is a policy that we can't allow to become the norm.That leaves us with only 1 real option:Option 1: purge the current mods, and hand them over to a user who supports the community. It may get annoying in how often it repeats itself (who knows, maybe it'll stop in a few months/years when the CTR money has finally dried up), but it prevents these rogues from gaining any permanent ground or doing any permanent damage.I'm sorry that it keeps coming back to this community, both in terms of "making it difficult to find an investor" and "making life difficult when the site keeps regularly exploding over bad moderators", but right now, I can't see any better way of keeping everyone's free speech protected while also completely rejecting the attempts of these attackers to change our way of speaking and operating.Apparently, @adhdferret and @Bilbo_Swaggins are both tired of the v/niggers subverse name, and want to have the content just transferred to either v/coontown (their original hope when coming to Voat, but it got taken by a rogue moderator and they moved on to v/niggers) or v/coonshire (their current backup subverse), so Option 3 to either of those subverses is actually the best here.
7555412? ago
Like many, I have the sub blocked and find it highly offensive. That being said, if we let SJWs do this for an extreme sub like this, the next step is less offensive subs, then eventually the place gets overrun. That's exactly what these people are counting on. They want you to let it die, that's why they took it over to begin with.
It's a no brainer. The grand majority of Voaters came here because of this exact bullshit on the other site. You need to cut them off at the knees before it gets out of hand. Sure it might seem like a pain in the ass having to do this every couple of months, but it's far and wide worth it.
There's a reason you've had this problem with this sub before, and you'll most likely have it again. The answer isn't to buckle under the pressure, but to be steadfast in your (our) resolved that these strategies that have infected most social media platforms will not be tolerated or allowed to flourish here.
Like many others here, I appreciate the amount of work that this puts on the admins, but that's what sets this place apart from the other site. You're willing to step in and take action to preserve the intent of the site even if it means stepping outside of protocol.
7555398? ago
Option 1 is the only clear choice here that will help dissuade people from attempting to force voat to conform. What's more, option 1 is the least likely to make people feel abandoned by the moderators. I blocked the sub but I agree it has every right to continue existing, especially in the state that its subscribers would most prefer.
Power to the people, niggers.
7555389? ago
If it were a sub I cared about, option 1.
7555382? ago
Option 1, seems to the be the best choice. I don't like the sub just because the very name is meant to incite people. I don't know if there is a better option but I would like to explore the idea.
7555378? ago
Coonshire is a backup sub. You'd know that if you knew the first thing about our community. Which you don't.
I literally referred to it as the backup subverse in the FIRST SENTENCE of my original comment.
7555289? ago
Coonshire already has about as many posts in the last 24 hours as /v/Niggers does in the same time period, counting the protest posts.
You're just wrong, so thoroughly wrong- all of the mods other than WSIMBR want to move to one of the other subs. You'd know that if you knew the first thing about our community. Which you don't.
7555211? ago
Give it to eagleshigh, he's pretty much the only one you can guarantee won't fuck it. There are other users who would do well also, but it'd be unclear if they would just blow it up later.
7555206? ago
Option 1 Unless it's illegal (like pictures of pizza) then it needs to be allowed.
7555163? ago
Let's stop kidding ourselves and go full right by excluding leftists. If not this is just going to keep happening until were in the same position reddit is.
**“All organizations that are not actually right-wing will over time become left-wing.”
The political “law” is often called “O’Sullivan’s Law” and is often stated as “anything that is not actively conservative every day will eventually become liberal.” **
7555408? ago
Go back to your echo chamber.
This is being as pussy as the same sjw crybabies
7555116? ago
How about hand it off to no one & let the votes decide?
7555066? ago
I say option #1. The content on that sub is no better or worse than FPH. Nigger is just a heavy word that some people aren't strong enough to handle. If Voat actually cares about free speech the way they say they do, option #1 is an unmistakable statement in support of that.
Disabling the subverse is letting them win. I'm not really objected to option #2 though. The userbase (formerly) supporting v/niggers is still here for the most part, and i'm sure they would still produce more content than the cucked version of the sub. That sounds like the definition of free speech to me: someone makes a hugbox sub and the users refuse to use it. Still say option #1 is the best bet though
7555028? ago
I fall into the category of
I personally don't agree with v/niggers yet am only here on Voat for the freedom of speech.
I vote option 1 and implore anyone with issues to either block the subverse in question or engage in debate to voice your concern.
7555025? ago
I think that we should do option 1.
7555021? ago
Option 1. It has just as much right to exist as any other verse, regardless of how anyone may feel about it. Allow users themselves to decide how they want to either interact or block it. Even if the process must repeat it still feels like the best option.
7555004? ago
How about you get rid of the goddamned moderators and let us just up and downvote content?
7555000? ago
Option 1 hands down
7554976? ago
I dislike THAT it exists. But it has the freedom TO exist. SRS works on Reddit by systematically infecting subs and controlling speech in each of them.
This should have the right TO exist, just as I have the right to not read it, or to be forced to read /r/shitredditsays or anything else.
7554962? ago
Thanks
7554954? ago
Option 1 is the only valid option. Freedom of speech is why I came here. I don't agree with that sub, but I agree with the preservation of the commitment. If we sensor this, it'll be a slippery hill.
7554917? ago
VIP740 here. Option one is the only real option. If you allow rogue admins to destroy forums you're not promoting free speech. I have v/niggers blocked and I don't want to see racism spread, but if you abandon that verse you're abandoning Voat.
As far as the investors go... If you can't get enough people to invest in free speech, Voat has failed. I can't offer much, but if v/niggers stands and I know Voat is serious about free speech I'll chip in what I can spare. How much would it take to keep Voat going if each user paid an equal share of the costs?
7554902? ago
Option 1.
7554834? ago
1 is the only option that does not force voat to bend towards SJW goals. It also shows that if the SJWs do want to waste their time and energy, and possibly even money, on such actions, it will be fruitless in the end anyway, and all they will have done is actually contribute to the things they ultimately wished to censor, only to lose the game when they attempted it. In fact, they only helped the cause they were fighting against.
Any other option would be seen as some sort of 'success' for the SJW scum, and it would encourage more of this type of behavior.
7554804? ago
Option 1.
7554796? ago
option 1.
/v/niggers was a place where all the racist stuff can have its own place without cencorship. this mod goes against the spirit of voat, as does the moderator of /v/chicago. i hope /v/niggers sets a policy that gets applied to /v/chicago. both mods remove content that they don't approve of. /v/chicago removes anything negative about the city, aka all the murders, drug and gang violence, and the rising muslim tide in the north and west side of chicago that are blackmailing niggers into enforcing sharia law in their territories.
A sentence like my last 2 would result in a ban from /v/chicago, and this post would give me a ban in /v/niggers. those moderators need to go.
7554792? ago
1
7554780? ago
I would like to see a poll placed in subs for removing moderators, which must also have a poll for replacing the removed mod. Anyone can submit their name for replacement, but the community decides who that should be.
Then again...If some kind of bot army is used to remove mods it could get a little ugly. Maybe only allow users who participate in the sub to vote in the polls? With so many posts within the last month? I don't know...Something definitely needs to be worked out though.
7554769? ago
Let's pretend /v/niggers was initially made for gansta rappers to call each other "nigga" and investigate the circumstances of Tupac's death. Would converting it to a racist sub justify performing option 1? Anyway, the mere circumstances of the takeover are shady and there should be a sitewide rule change that prevents this type of grab and switch (e.g. new owner must provide continuity to the subverses community.)
So the subverse owner should always be a benevolent dictator and be excellent to his community.
7554743? ago
Option 1 should be the poa, thank you for the choice. Take a stand for individual choice to consume or ignore, if the individual loses ability to enforce personal choice then freedom is irrelevant.
7554701? ago
Best option. If community can't regulate itself, it deserves to die. I'm writing it as a v/niggers poster.
7554684? ago
the users need more control over the site. Mods have too much power and not enough can be done to oppose them
7554672? ago
Frankly I don't care about being anonymous here so for those who know who I am this is Gator I agree purging the moderators will likely not serve any purpose in this sub so in my humble opinion the sub should simply have a janitor that is held accountable buy moderation logs since you guys already have a janitor that you've appointed it would be very simple for that person to take over this subverse Janitor duties which would only include removing spam. Those are just my thoughts as an outsider to the sub itself.
7554659? ago
7554676? ago
I also would like to hear more about this "final solution" ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
7554736? ago
FUCK OFF /pol/ BITCH. I'm practically the only person on this site aside of the admins that don't think black people are sub-human and/or that the world is secretly controlled by jews.
I don't want to be part of your puns.
7554809? ago
I'm also one of those people, there's more of us than you might think. Doesn't mean i'm above a little shitposting, though.
7555749? ago
You triggered the fuck out of that kike.
Kek
7555793? ago
I'm really enjoying the trolling options on this thread. Primarily because its so easy to identify SaneGoatSwear, but still
7554627? ago
Freedom of speech is freedom of speech. Remove the person censoring others from that sub and remove them from any other sub they mod. Ban them from future mod roles as well.
7554621? ago
Option 1 with IP permaban for mods who need to be removed. Make 'em buy a VPN to get back on.
7554846? ago
you DO realize it takes less than 5 minutes to permanently change your IP without a VPN, right?
7559617? ago
No I didn't... Thought your ISP gave it to you... and even ipconfig release/renew you still ended up with the same IP at your modem... I'm not computer science guy or anything I'm in construction that's just how it works in my head lol give me an education! :)
7560367? ago
Your ISP DOES determine your IP address, that's true, but there's two easy ways to change it quickly. One is to unplug your modem for 5 to 10 minutes. Most ISPs will reallocate the IP address you had previously to a different client in that timeperiod, and then you can, in exchange get a new IP. This doesn't always work. The other way you can do this, is by going into your router settings, and hitting "clone mac address," prior to doing which will make it duplicate the MAC of some other chump on your ISPs network. Combine this with an ipconfig /release /renew, and you will end up with a new address.
7563743? ago
Thanks bro now I know
7554612? ago
1 but let the users select the replacement
7554601? ago
They are already making more niggers-themed subverses, with more hateful names, like v/fuckniggers, so now there are dozens of worse subverses scattered around instead of one easily-blockable subverse.
7554597? ago
As we stand now i believe we should take option 1 if we allow rogue mods to dictate something the user base is against and against the web site motto of free speech this sub should stay regardless of whether people agree to it or not. If we allow these people to control the website against the wishes of the user database and the very reason most of us came here which is the right for a community without censorship and general tendency of fluff then we must assure that whenever is necessary these rogue mods be dealt with and the subs be kept as is as a mark for this website to say that it will not stand for people trying to dictate which content may or may not be present or dictate the overall community content. Down with rogue mods.
7554592? ago
How about no nigger loving investors
7554589? ago
Option 1. Voat needs to be a bastion of all free speech. Let the niggers create and hate on us non-niggers. Maybe non niggers and niggers alike with will come to a consensus they hate each other while also accepting criticism from one another is part of life. No fucking snowflakes.
7554585? ago
Option 4. None of the options listed are good. #2 encourages hostile takeover of subs, and we already know how that worked out on reddit. #1 isn't perfect either, because it requires subjective manual intervention from admins which is unsustainable, and well, subjective.
There has to be some sort of "mutiny" option where users of a sub can vote out a cancer mod. Having an automated, objective "fail-over" system is the only way.
7554664? ago
I like this. Need a way for users to "force sticky" a vote request.
7554547? ago
Option1. Its the most work (any most annoying... rinse, repeat, rinse repeat). But it is the most worth while as like everything in life. The other two options are compromises that would/could lead to death of voat.
7554532? ago
bodyfat you disgusting fat mother fucker
7554507? ago
Never, ever delete a sub on this website. Free speech contains both the good and the bad and we need to show the world that this is not a place where censorship can win. Purge the bad moderators and hand the sub over to ones that are more qualified.
7554494? ago
Obviously option one is the starting point, the bare minimum of what needs to be done. Purging the mod is a given. The asshole has gone full reddit power mod, and the cure for that kind of cancer is not just isolation but excision.
From a corporate view I understand why you'd want to rebrand v/niggers. It's a radioactive name when you're trying to find investment to keep Voat rolling. Much as I worry it might be the thin end of the wedge I'd be okay with disabling the sub and transferring the content to something less aggressively titled.
7554486? ago
Option 1
7554479? ago
What I think is what I thought long ago. The users need a way to remove mods. If you want mods to be a stewardship and not an ownership, they have to be replaceable. And to quit dealing w this over and over the users need a say in who runs a sub.
let's be real, there are certain subs which are 'Name Brand' so to speak. IAMA, TIL, CatPeopleHate, Niggers, Chicago... It's a name everyone knows and it's the first search term used for said subject. So, even if they're not an @system sub they're Named. Those should be run by that community. IDGAF what goes on in v/philatilistsofMuncie. I mean nothing against philatilists of Muncie, but they should probably be able to police their own shit.
And that's MrPim, I don't need no anon.
And this'll be buried at this point butt fuck it
7554476? ago
The horse has left the barn. I hate the existence of that sub, and probably a lot of the people in it, but none of that matters. If Voat's admins don't stand behind these beleaguered subs now, then the cancer will quickly spread to the rest of Voat. Oh, and don't give your already distrusting user base any reason to believe you're selling out to line your pockets with advertising money. Voat's character is already set in stone. Either take pride in it and protect it's integrity to the best of your ability, or close down the whole enterprise.
7554449? ago
Option 1, purge the bad moderators.
We need a way for the community to be able to do this. Voat them out, as it were. A community consensus should be all that is required to remove a moderator. No moderator should have the position indefinitely without recourse.
7554429? ago
why not allow subscribers of a sub a method- such as a voat of confidence- for removing moderators who no longer live up to their responsibilities? although i'm sure it would involve a lot of work to code in the short term in the long it would resolve the constant issue of users with ill intent sabotaging subverses which has been an ongoing issue for everyone.
7554426? ago
Voat isn't mine or yours. The warrant canary is up. It's "theirs".
7554424? ago
im 10% BF bro nice try
7554423? ago
option 1
the rogue mod has openly said that he is taking it away from it's intended purpose and using it to front his own agenda
7554419? ago
Option 4 purge the mods from the sub and place only a janitor level mod and prevent any other mods from taking it.
7554329? ago
Rinse and repeat is the best available option.
7554324? ago
Option 1 is the only correct option in my opinion.
I think the mods should have stepped down, and created a different subverse to mold how they like instead of hijacking, and drastically altering preexisting subverses to please them.
I don't visit v/niggers, or v/chicago, but I believe demodding them would be for the best.
7554320? ago
Option 1. - Purge the fucker. v/niggers is a cesspool but free speech means having to put up with stuff you don't agree with as well as the things you do.
While you're at it purge v/chicago.
7554313? ago
Speaking as a moderator (/u/Bilbo_Swaggins) and the primary mod for its current backup subverse, many of us have been sick of the "niggers" branding for quite a while now, viewing it as crude at best.
If you pass the baton to another user, they'll probably just do the same thing again; the reason for this is that the first volunteer to jump up will be yet another dipshit who has absolutely no intention of moderating the community in a sensible manner. I honestly suspect that WSIMBR had something like this in mind since the beginning, and that many other volunteers have similar things in mind.
/u/adhdferret and myself are the two most active moderators left, basically. He's wanted to get /v/coontown back and move the community there; I've wanted to just move things to /v/Coonshire. We had agreed to put it up to a vote and see where the community wants to go. Either of us- and most users, I believe- would be satisfied with destroying /v/niggers and setting up on Coontown or Coonshire.
7558037? ago
If the mods are all in agreement about the name issue and would be happy to transfer to a backup subverse (I personally think Coonshire is better, because CoonTown is somewhat infamous from people pointing out its continued existence on Reddit when FPH was banned, while Coonshire could be mistaken as the name of some fan-fiction town in some post-Tolkien fantasy setting, but I don't even go to any of the subverses in question, so my vote doesn't matter much), then Option 3 is far better than Option 1.
My only concern with that option is how it is like the "scorched earth retreat" tactic that was made into a part of many history textbooks during the Nazi invasion of Russia, in that it cuts out the problem area and nicely transitions into a subverse that the community already trusts, but it is an unsustainable tactic if we get multiple subverses taken over in short order.
7558211? ago
My assumption is that /v/Coonshire will never be compromised. It's an easy assumption for me to make because I am top mod there and I know that I'm never going to mess with it.
7554312? ago
This, indefinitely.
A benevolent dictator, you, removing mods when necessary, is the only solution. A hands-off approach just lets SWIPLs and Kikes know they can come in and destroy anything whenever it doesn't suit their agenda, and you won't do a damn thing about it.
Option 1.
7554285? ago
If their existence is putting the medium in danger purge ; at the other hand i am wondering who is retarded enough to give retarded opinions credit by persecuting them .
If their existence does not put the medium in danger and they are gone as much as i dislike racists i will go too because then the question will be "who is next ?" .
7554280? ago
make #COONTOWN great again.
Un anomynyze it. as https://voat.co/v/announcements/1551024# suggested. and move all niggers content there.
7554232? ago
There is no such thing as unfettered freedom of speech. There have always been consequences for hateful and provokative speech, even if that consequence is just a punch in the nose at the local watering hole. Voat is also not a government entity, and thus not accountable to anyone to maintain freedom of speech. It is a ridiculous goal to try to attain at the cost of everything else, especially the growth of the company, which should be atko's number one goal. This foolish policy has made Voat an obnoxious site that I rarely visit.
7554231? ago
Option 1. Ideas are not defeated by silencing them.
7556973? ago
Go to another sub? And try to have mods with an IQ higher than the average black.
7554228? ago
Option 1, rinse and repeat seems like the way to go for the time being anyway.
7554213? ago
KAIO-KENx10
7554179? ago
The mods need replaced, that's the only option listed that shows voat cares about free speech by ousting those against it. Ignoring it will exacerbate the problem, let's stay strong and absolute in the never ending fight to keep freedom of speech the shining beacon that herds goats here
7554171? ago
you're just a faggot. has nothing to do with free speech
7554170? ago
I was thinking the solution could work if there is some sort of vote, weighted by a users CCP/SCP to that subverse, in a matter of confidence/no confidence, and after a threshold, the mod is booted. Ideally, this would mean that smaller subs are still controlled by their most prevalent users, banned users are a weird middle. But if they were decent contributors before banning, then they might still keep their say, with their SCP/CCP. Mainly, I would like to see /v/fatpeoplehate, /v/cheers, and yes, even /v/niggers or /v/RFH keep their communities unique. However, that shifts it potentially from mod abuse to power user abuse. My line of thinking is that the solution needs to protect /v/protectvoat, /v/fatpeoplehate, the ban hammer shitposters, and subs like /v/ilovemusicvideos or /v/ai.
It's either that, or admins need to draw up an intervention procedure. As said, rinse and repeat, this is not the first time this has happened, nor will it be the last. It would maybe require archived subverses/modlogs, that if a subverse ever changes direction drastically with its moderation, it can be proven. EDIT: So while I can be for option 1, it needs work. Also appreciate the open forum on the topic.
7554167? ago
NOT SANE IS NOT SANE
i am sane goat.
fuck anony posts.
i am truth for all to see.
7554151? ago
Option 2. This was used when v7coontown came under attack and all active members of it unsubscribed and switched to v7niggers.
Option 2 left the "Owner" of v7coontown with no one but himself posting his own authoritarian view onto a subverse with fewer and fewer members until it truly became an echo chamber. v7coontown has had little activity for more than 18 months, while v7niggers has been active ever since. Since v7coontown has been left with no participation, it "died on its own". Now that v7niggers has been compromised, I merely unsubscribed to it and switched back to v7coontown as well as subscribing to several new subverses that have sprung up in the last few days.
Option 2 works. Option 1 and 3 are a pain in the ass to have to deal with in what seems to be a growing trend of reddit SJWs invading this site and trying to impose their censorship in order to make little safe spaces. Just let them do their thing. They'll soon get tired of hearing themselves speak to a diminishing member base. Without activity, the site will die on its own. It's the users on a subverse that give it life, not the owners or mods.
7554141? ago
they were clicking it every few days to under a couple weeks.
this is the first time they've gone over.
it's prudent to be wary when the rest of the world censors and the rest of the net is censored.
7555058? ago
Sane they weren't clicking it every few days at any point. The only time the updated the canary on any kind of regular basis was with announcements, and it was only Putt who really did so. This has been the first Putt announcement in over a month and consequently the canary has been updated. No agreement to adhere to any 30 day limit was ever made, and so nothing has been violated here.
7555568? ago
lie.
when it first started it was clicked every few seconds.
then i bitched to get them to do it as humans not a bot
then it was clicked ever day or so
then that stretched out to every week or 2 or so.
never near a month.
try again
i am the watcher of the canary.
i have never said there was an agreement
you can go to the canary and see that i TOLD putt about the 30 day thing. he of course never responds. just hits and runs
it's normal to have 30 days but they were clicking it far more frequently.
try again.
7557345? ago
Well then we're in agreement on most points. I understand that in the beginning things were different but most recently this has been the system: that they update the canary with announcements, specifically PuttItOut does. The fact that the canary went a month w/o being updated only means Putt went that long without making an announcement, and no agreement was violated so that canary still stands as well as it did before, no?
7554133? ago
It should stay.
The good comes with the bad.
Maybe astriks in the name??
7554121? ago
The problem with admins NOT interfering means that if enough mods go full SJW and ban everything they dislike, then it is possible for EVERY subverse to become corrupted. Admins NEED to mold their site to fit their vision for it.
7554108? ago
Option 1. Allowing outside groups to win here will only embolden them. This is how it started on reddit. No ground should be conceded to these people.
7554107? ago
Move all content to /v/eggplants and close /v/niggers. Eggplants, is obviously obvious as to what the subs. Content is but also not as obvious as straight up-niggers. Getting rid of the /v/niggers sub all together is not an ideal situation but for the safety of voat I say move all its content to /v/eggplants and delete /v/niggers.
7554089? ago
1.
NO CENSORSHIP, good, bad or ugly. This is what makes VOTE unique and valuable.
7554077? ago
There can be only one choice: Option 1
To do anything else would be the beginning of the end.
7554059? ago
Option 1. Purge cancermods and preserve the sub.
7554058? ago
Divide and conquer seems to be happening here. A house divided won't stand.
7554047? ago
you need to go back to eddit bro
7554245? ago
you need to learn when someone is trolling... bro
7554045? ago
I have a preference for option 2. Nobody really cares about that subverse especially when /v/coontown is a viable alternative. I see no need for intervention. While I appriciate a dedication to free speech, I don't think you're bound to prevent users from making their own screw ups.
7554040? ago
Option 1 is the only option
7554034? ago
Thoughts on the options.
This would not be the preferred option in my mind, even enough it may end up being the popular option. As it will require too much input from the Admins, being nanny's for the site moving forwards. When that time would be much better spending their time making this site even better. Unless there is evidence a mods account has been hacked and a hostile take over as taken place, in which case they can just remove the bad mod and revert to the previous mods.
In the spirit of Voat and free speech this is the preferred option unless a top mods account is hacked and the subverse goes through a hostile takeover as previously mentions. Though it does leave the average user in the lurch, but there could be solutions to this problem via the users moving forwards.
I feel removing subverses should be avoided for as at all costs long as possible, because this is the start of a slippery slope and the beging of the end that ends up with Reddit style locked down platform
Futhermore As previously mentioned I would be inclined to go for option 2 as this is most inline with Voats free speech stance, the Subverse is what the moderators want to make it and let the average user decided which succeeded and fails by their votes and the system should work. However I would suggest someone starting a subverse that is dedicated to pointing to alternatives to subverses when they become corrupted like this, something like /v/altersubverse or /v/subverseareus (sorry i am terrible and coming up with names). Someone can waste a few months or a few £100 to get to control of a subverse but if there was a robust way for people to relocate to a new subverse all this time will be wasted as the user base can just move on with minimumal impact. This has the added benefit of allowing the average users to manage the whole process as they can just leave the subverse when it gains a Nazi mod and start again, using the old subverse as a template.
7554018? ago
Totally agree. Rinse and repeat, although a pain, is the only way to maintain Voat's credibility.
7554015? ago
Get rid of all mods and you'll never have this problem again.
7553995? ago
Who gave him control of the sub?
7555016? ago
The account had a sudden change of behavior. Most likely hacked or purchased, either that or the mod acted as an enthusiastic supporter for a long time with a view of playing the long game.
7564670? ago
Could be.
Or his jimmies are rustled and he's playing the SJW out of spite.
7553990? ago
Definitely need survey options! :-)
7553983? ago
Not sure if you're actually tallying these as voats, but if so, put me down for option 1.
7553978? ago
Option 1.
Free speech is both the future and past of Voat.
7553972? ago
The problem here is one of governance. Why should a mod have absolute control over what happens in a subverse? How about option zero:
0. We decentralize power over Voat subverse governance by creating a user-based system of rules and modding. Moderators can be kicked and banned by a vote of the subverse users. Members can establish and alter rules by way of subverse votes, including to establish a vesting period of X months of membership before members of a subverse have voting rights.
Yes, this will involve a lot of coding. Yes, it will involve a lot of messy discussion. Yes, different subverses will have different rules. But if Voat wants to be at the forefront of community-based discussion on the internet, it needs a correspondingly advanced -- and decentralized -- governance system.
7553965? ago
This all looks like an inside operation to attract new investors by removing highly offensive subverses and it has been done in such a way that it trumps voats integrity and the very reason it has been created. I do support the idea of renaming the sub to something less obvious but to destroy a sub like that is unacceptable. Voat is one of the few sites i allow ads from, if shit like this continues, I will reconsider.
Offtopic, why has the time been edited?
7553952? ago
Don't bail out subverses. If one dies another will thrive.
7553945? ago
Option 1, for now; and clear rules for the future.
7553936? ago
Make it a system sub (and have no other moderators)?
I know that sounds radical and antithetical to your morals (mine too, I hate the sub). But purging non-system subs over and over is touchy.
I do like Option 1 since the mod stole the sub from its community.
But since it's a non-system sub I feel funny about admins getting involved. I'm torn between 1 and 2.
Any potential investor who balks at the sub (and its ilk) are not the kind of people I'd want involved in our freedom of speech anyway.
7553931? ago
For this instance, perhaps a clean sweep and new moderator is in order, as the subscription base seems to be in revolt. I dislike the sub myself and never go there, so have no clue what's really up, but to me, a sub doesn't belong to its mod, it belongs to Voat first, and as importantly, its subscribers.
With this in mind, (for the future) I suggest a new rule be added. Anyone taking over a sub with an active subscriber base, must get input from that base before making any sub rule changes. It's only fair that those who are subscribed, and are vested in a sub, have some say in changes. This is how @HenryCorp got started, taking over a sub and completely changing it's focus 180 degrees. That caused a firestorm, just as is happening now in v/niggers and v/Chicago. With the subscriber base informed beforehand, people themselves can decide if they want to remain in the sub, or shut it down by unsubscribing. In any case, at least they'd be informed. After all, if you want a sub to have a different rule set, anyone can create their own and attract their own subscribers. To me, when you request a sub and are granted the mod position, you are agreeing to assume that sub as is, not as what you wish it to be ... the exception being a dead sub with no active subscribers, where a redirection may be warranted.
7554443? ago
Well said
7553929? ago
you're an idiot or a shill.
the 30 day window closed days ago.
it wa just pressed minutes ago, long long after the due date
and both admins showed activity on voat the day of andthe day before.
7553925? ago
Can you do this again but lock participation only to subscribers to /v/niggers
Ideally subscribers for a certain length of time.
It should be up to them. If a mod takes a subverse in a direction that its subscribers disagree with, that mod should be removed.
That's about the clearest and most effective standard you could derive from this I think.
7554877? ago
This is something that I think we need to build out. There is a lot of input from people who are not subscribers of a sub when things like this occur.
We have a design spec much like what you suggest but have not started development on it. This may just be the catalyst that forces us to dev it out.
7554722? ago
Not sure voat has the backend for what you describe. Of course, atko or putt could likely force a sticky onto the sub itself without the current mod being able to do much, but then those who unsubbed wouldn't be in the conversation....
7553897? ago
I agree.
While I follow a more free market approach to this, like the free market in the real world, once a product is established it becomes increasingly harder for a competitor to appear. Much like brand-name association, something becomes popular by name or reputation a replacement will never truly succeed (minus the very small handfull of cases where they do, those are the exceptions). That's like the CEO of Twitter establishing itself one way and then once it became the dominate platform to decide to start kicking everyone out because their "vision" changed, the CEO needs to be removed by the shareholders. Option 1 is the best course.
7554728? ago
Mods should be elected by a community's subscribers
7556082? ago
I for one wouldn't want the possibility of "raids" on subverses (people going there just to dismantle the sub by means of voting for someone who will dismantle it)
7555560? ago
I disagree with that. What you are wishing for is essentially mob rule. It wouldn't be that hard to get SRS to subscribe to a low traffic subverse and vote for an SRS liked mod and force reddit-style censorship. There needs to be more than only the subscribers. The subscribers need to meet a certain criteria in order to vote. Something like 100 CCP or SCP for that particular subverse, that way only those who are active in the community can make a vote.
But, that's still a problem if those SRS fags have no life and will play ball only to get the CCP/SCP needed to vote. But, again, it's now harder for them to do so.
IDK, maybe there's a better way that I'm not thinking of.
7553894? ago
This. I don't agree with what's there, but from an outside perspective, I'm curious to see what happens when a community like that, on a site that takes a hands-off approach, will continue (or cease) to evolve.
Will it turn upon itself like the Uroboros and consume itself until nothing is left, or will it burn up and reignite from the ashes like the Phoenix?
I say we let nature take its course.
7553891? ago
If this becomes to much work for you guys, I would higher a Nazi to handle this so you don't feel bad doing it every time (Nazi's hate niggers and Jews).
7553871? ago
Option 1. We must defend Free Speech.
7553863? ago
I strongly agree with option 2. Option 1 is still better than option 3.
And lastly about investors, if I could invest, and I may be able to at some point in my life, I would only invest if Voat stays as it does.
I don't care how many times I have to read "nigger faggot" on a Welcome To Voat post. It's sure as hell better than the alternative.
7553861? ago
The concept of free speech online is the most innocuous thing imaginable. There's not someone standing next to you yelling or annoying. If you don't like an idea, simply don't read it. How can anyone get offended at finding out that others think differently. Shutting off their expression doesn't change that fact. They may as well put their fingers in their ears and humm.
7553856? ago
7553854? ago
Let it die. I don't understand why any subverse would need admin intervention unless because of illegal content being posted to it. Forget default subverses, forget admin-appointed mods, just let the community handle each and every subverse and work on better algorithms for /v/all.
7553849? ago
I neither particularly like nor dislike the sub, but censorship in any form should not be tolerated... Otherwise, we are no better than that place which we escaped from. I say uproot this foul 'moderator' and send him slithering back to that cesspool he leaked out of... Option 1
7553839? ago
Option one.
7553828? ago
Option 1. These SRS douchebags have to be destroyed.
7553816? ago
Purge it to v/naggers, Just because.
7553814? ago
I say purge the mods, and leave it in the hands of people who want to take care of the sub.
7553801? ago
7553790? ago
As much as I hate that sub, option 1. Free speech is exactly that.
7553782? ago
Option #1.
7553768? ago
janitors can delete and ban you like a mod can. ;)
7553761? ago
I would love to see you implement a user base no confidence mod removal tool that would be independent of your intervention. That way the active members in a sub can effectively vote in and out mods. Barring that if a mod does not conform to site policy (is there a violation here?) then they should get an auto-boot. I would also like to have the option of content transfer if I start a new sub. The v/chicago incident that also happened at the same time is something else to look at.
7556581? ago
I've been thinking a lot over the last 48h or so about the meta-moderation model that Slashdot employs. I wonder if it would be possible to pick 50-100 'users in good standing' (whatever that happens to mean) every 24h or so and just ask them to anonymously give a 1-10 rating on a mod's performance. In theory, as long as you cast the net wide enough, you'll dial out the opinion of people trying to game the system and get the opinion of Voat as a whole.
If nothing else, I think it'd be a useful metric for starting to answer the question 'is this mod doing a good job'?
7558002? ago
I dont think we need to do it every month. I was thinking along the lines of a parliamentary system, where there are terms, but a no confidence vote could be conducted before the term is complete. Voting privelege tied to a minimum ccp + scp in the sub. Working out the ability to game the system may be a challenge, but without an automated system, the load on the admins would be to much.
7556447? ago
Great idea.
7553754? ago
Option 1 and don't let them add new moderators. Spam is less annoying than the drama to coming from that sub.
7553746? ago
The community and discussion of v/niggers is absolutely disgusting and against my own convictions. That being said, I am for their continued existence, as we enter a slippery slope if we ban them.
I am also against interfering in non-system subs, and I think the original bail-out when Antiracist went rogue was a mistake. That subverse has also been a drama magnet time and time again, and an easy picking for rogue mods to worm their way in. I am for Option 2, leaving the compromised v/niggers hanging to dry and leaving it up to its community to revive v/coontown or build up a new subverse.
7553736? ago
Option 1
7553735? ago
I'm a fan of the idea of "sink or swim", meaning #2.
Like you said, it's not the content (submissions) just the wrapper (subverse name). The wrapper isn't important, the communication of words, thoughts and ideas is what's important.
If the rogue mod causes OTHER problems, kill them off lickity split and "return" the sub to someone who wants it or simply disable the sub.
But I'm a lurker, a commenter, not a contributor.
7553724? ago
I disagree with everything about that sub.
It should still exist though.
Option 1 is best. What else do you do when the purchasing of an account or sub happens?
7553718? ago
While I agree with everyone's thoughts and the goal, it was like fucking high school at all the fucking whining about it.
Note it. Get it controlled, don't make 10 threads about it. It was no better than the trashiest of Facebook posts. You goats are all better than that.
My opinion on it. Thank you all for purging crap.
7553717? ago
Don't be purposefully stupid. Flagging/flair doesn't hide the content from anyone. By this logic /v/news is hiding news content from people who don't subscribe to /v/news.
7553703? ago
Embracing the spirit and purpose of the Goat, I think we should go with #1 or 2. 3 would stifle the ugly, yet requisite sub/material that in itself, acts as a canary.
I find it disheartening and distracting however, when we have the front page flooded with autistic posts about some shit that doesn't impact the majority of users here. If I have to block it, I will. But crying and acting out like a bunch of retards trying to hump a doorknob, only illustrates and highlights the downfalls of this endeavor; giving ammunition to those who oppose.
Never let the spectrum or emotions get in the way of free speech or intelligent and rational thought. My 2 cents.
7553700? ago
Option 2. Get investors and take the site more mainstream. You're struggling financially now, and you will put in a lot of effort for little reward. It would be nice to get people in here who can add more to the conversation than "cuck joo faggot libtard nigger nigger nigger".
7553698? ago
Practically speaking, though it sucks, #1.
Ideally, however, get rid of moderation by humans. Easy to suggest, but that's the real answer, possible or impossible as it may be to achieve. I have always liked the idea of measuring the amount of time spent "using" the site and relating that to upvote/downvote impact per individual user. That's obviously hard to do, though.
Thanks for asking.
7553651? ago
I agree with Option 1. We need to do whatever it takes to tell Reddit Trolls that they can't win here. If you delete the sub or let it fester and die then will claim victory. If you take it back from them they will say "we forced the admins to get involved!" which is a lot less to brag about.
7871961? ago
I agree with Option 1. You will only give in to Reddit trolls if you let it implode or shut it down. Despite being something people don't like it is still under free speech and need to respect it.
7554558? ago
So we are in agreeance then?
7555102? ago
agreement*?
7556389? ago
No. I meant what I said.
7557354? ago
Fair enough
7555605? ago
So you concur?
7555622? ago
Concurr*?
7577117? ago
Bad Fur Day*?
7554516? ago
こんにちは誰もが、それは悟空! それらは私たちの管理者ではないです。
7565405? ago
Well said. I'm humbled to have your valuable input, Anon-son
7558325? ago
Weird japanese.. Obvious machine translation..
You gotta study more so you don't have to use translators!.. ;P
7554553? ago
Translation: Hello everyone, that is Goku! They are not our administrator.
7557871? ago
wrong moonrunes, it really says ,"I SHIT AFRICAN HONEYBEES"
7558369? ago
That's terrifying.
7553975? ago
i agree with you.
i'm sane goat
we need to make it standard, with clear rules of engagement at the admin level ,and create a log for it all that's permanently publicly visible.
also
whoever posted this post is pretending to be an admin.
putt and atko have no reason to hide
(inb4 testing out new feature; "putt" tested it out a couple days ago in their test sub)
*REMEMBER EVERYONE: THERE WERE POSTS BY MANY USERS ON THE FRONT PAGE FOR DAYS THAT THE CANARY WAS DEAD AND THEY DIDN'T PRESS IT EVEN THOUGH BOTH ADMINS WERE ON; PUTTITOUT COMMENTED TO SANEGOAT AND ATKO CHANGED THE FEATURED SUB TO V/MUSEUMS. THEY WERE ON AND DID NOT PRESS IT. WHOMEVER THIS OP IS IS NOT OUR ADMINS; THIS IS PART OF THE ATTACK. THIS IS EXTREMELY DECEPTIVE AND ANYONE FALLING FOR IT DESERVES REDDIT NO VOAT FOR A WEEK AS PUNISHMENT. -GOATKU
thanks goatku! wow, that's interesting! so v/niggers getting wrecked twice and the v/videos ninja removal of mods for doing the job of the admins when the admins failed to do it.... is all a conspiracy to normalize admins having reddit cancer power over mods of non-default subs?! and do v/chicago and v/historyanecdotes v/thegrittypast fit into this?
MAYBE, SANEGOAT. THAT"S YET TO BE ESTABLISHED; CHICAGO COULD BE DISTRACTION MAYBE NOT; UNCONFIRMED; @LOCKEPROPOSAL HAS LONG BEEN SJW CANCER. YOU CAN SEE ON HIS REDDIT PAGE ARCHIVES AND HIS STEAM PROFILE LINKS.
thanks goatku!
(P.S. check the nested comments below to see fake @puttitout doing a hit and run disinfo with a personal attack and a bonus fallacy!)
7565612? ago
God, fuck off. Who the fuck cares. This is anonymous for a reason.
7562152? ago
From the wall of bold text, I would have never figured out it was you. :)
7555463? ago
I'll say it again, I admire your efforts, keep it up and tell it like it is.
7555392? ago
Lol, this is blip mate. Never stop being you SaneG :)
With all due respect faggot.
The last edit time for the canary was 2.7 hours ago at 5:14 +8:00 GMT ( https://voat.co/v/announcements/1330806 ) The link at the bottom of most announcements will direct you to the canary notice and the edit time in the sidebar reflects its status. Its usually updated monthly.
Also, the fact that this announcement was a /v/all sticky that originates from the admin sub /v/announcements goes a long way to ease my mind regarding impostors from reddit messing with Voat.co.
Just saying mate.
peace...
7555526? ago
blip! hey bro!
they were pressing it every few days to within 2 weeks. no where near 1 month.
i'm wellaware when the canary was clicked thanks for keeping it all out in the open
if they've gagged the admins, they could also control them to do things.
yes those things ease many minds
that may be why they are now being employed with the ANON post.
announcements should be public and transparent.
since the admins dissappeared the same day for a month and two months (atko putt respectively) **voat has been on a reddity slippery slope AWAY from transparency and free speech
less and less transparency
and now anon announcements
wecan't confirm nor deny this was an admin, and you know it.
7556080? ago
G'day SaneG mate :)
I agree that we can't confirm but we never really could.
I was under the impression that It was to be updated with announcements or monthly. Just my understanding and I could be wrong, as there are things I have missed in the past.
Couldn't @Atko just pull the plug if he needed to, then just relocate the code and database to Iceland or something? New Ip, but I'm sure it could be done and users informed before the big move without breaking a gag order, [shrugs shoulders].
All info regarding the posts public info point to Atko and Putt, also, the anon angle seems to be in place to allow the voat users their opinion while protecting them from haters as they go about their day to day activities on voat, I agree with this move as a broader spectrum of users will be more willing give their opinion. Maybe @PuttItOut could change /v/announcements anon posts to reflect the creators username?
What say you SaneG mate?
peace...
7556167? ago
reddit fee fee bullshit. slippery slope exhibit a.
they basically gave no acknowledgement in any way other than whenthey announce, which is sub-standard and not acceptable for a canary.
they stopped respondining meaningfully at all about it at that point.
@atko @puttitout
still waiting for a1 proof you two are alive well and not under duress.
iceland has less protection than u.s.
there's a way to permanently require all users to be informed of a gag, but it's a corporate structuring thing that the admins would never listen to.
they don't give a fuck what users think anymore. they don't talk to us about changes. they don't even notify us after the fact.. and they silently demod mods for doing their jobfor them.
it's 100% cancer now
AND WE MUST FIGHT TO DEFEND FREE SPEECH. RIGHT HERE. ON VOAT. THERE'S NO WHERE ELSE. ITS THE FINAL STAND
7556923? ago
Lol, I walked right into that one didn't I mate. What I was trying to say but got lazy because it takes me forever to type anything, was protect them from the reddit style downvoat brigade type that I've heard about lately. Idk
C'mon big fella, this is Voat.co with only two admin's that have day jobs, a couple of appointed janitors and a few hundred thousand registered users, yet voat.co is still considered a free speech zone. Its not hard to see that we have been under fire by a class of people that would rather see voat burn by doing anything but follow voat's ethos of free speech and as far as I can tell these issues are slowly being dealt with.
I was just saying?
You are asking too much given the available resources.
This/op's discussion post announcement suggests otherwise.
I know nothing of this.
I disagree.
I half agree here. I disagree that this voat.co is or will be the last place on the Internets providing a platform for free speech. Gab, Phucks and wikileaks are a few. Hell the code is there for you to make your own.
peace...
7555095? ago
Putt has one comment in this chain and it's completely reasonable. Being upset about the canary is one thing, but what you are doing is intellectually dishonest, especially when you have still not accepted that a 30 day limit was never agreed to, and that the admins have not actually done anything wrong at all with regards to the canary.
7555535? ago
come at me with fact and reason not lies and reason
7554209? ago
Did that same user pretend to sticky the post?
7554816? ago
My thoughts exactly.
7555601? ago
I'll jump on this wagon. Only one of the admins could sticky the post.
7554094? ago
Still fighting the good fight! You're a star, sane
7554197? ago
ay no i am a meat popsicle.
all meatsacks must speak freely.
it's not about the messenger
it's about sending the message.
freedom of speech or nothing.
defend every attack
prevent every abuse
rebuke every shithead fuking nigger shilly sjw srs ctr mother fucker here and anywhere who wishes to silence others.
7558142? ago
I love you.
7553648? ago
Me idiot? That's unpossible.
7553647? ago
I voat (lol) for No. 1 - mainly because cancerous mods (i.e. SJWs) need to know that mod infiltration is useless here. For the weeks or months it can take to infiltrate a sub and fuck with it there is precedent that the Admins will simply remove you and give it to active members. The very fact that it can be done here and not on Plebbit will make them doubly buttmad.
7553643? ago
While this sub is coming into the spotlight, recently a large number of subs have come under control of "non-voaters" through the subverse request system. What these people plan to do with the subs they've obtained is anybody's guess, but it's probably not in Voat or the subs' best interest.
Start using votes to auto-moderate. If something reaches -5, delete it entirely. Stuff that hits -5 is already out of view from everybody anyhow. You'll need to crack down on the increasingly large number of people using bots since this would enable somebody to completely silence another user. Maybe as another option add another button people could choose beside upvote/downvote - delete. If (upvote+downvote) - delete < -4 then delete the comment/thread. upvote/downvote/delete would be mutually exclusive to prevent people from just going downvote+delete on everything they don't like.
For CSS and site rules each sub could have a single automated monthly poll thread for each. Users post their proposed css/rules to the thread. At the end of the month the votes decide what is used. Again there would need be more of a crackdown on vote botting. But anyhow yeah - there is no real point for moderators. Get rid of them.
7554752? ago
Nopenopenopenope. Look in all/new. Tell me, how many posts do you see with no upvoats or downvoats that are more than a minute old? Close to a page full. all you need is 6 accounts which can DV to get rid of those posts entirely.
7553629? ago
I've been around for a few of v/Niggers drama so far and honestly Atko, no matter what you do you're going to run into shit with it. Turning it into a mostly unmoderated anonymous piece of shit may possibly be your best hope.
7553619? ago
For now it's a small fire in a big forest. Contain, stomp and get rid of. Option One bigtime.
7553611? ago
If you weed out the ugliest weeds you got a rad garden. I get your point but it seemed like a heavy handed analogy.
7553606? ago
So, option 3 is essentially renaming it?
What good would that do?
7553596? ago
Boot the renegade mod and Let nature take it's course...if not for the social experiment angle alone. Unwanted, uncomfortable speech separates the true free-man from the nigger slaves.
7553593? ago
Option 1, unless the sub in question broke any laws (did they?)
Also check em.
7553585? ago
Option 2. let it die of infighting. Who cares.
7553581? ago
https://voat.co/v/announcements/1330806
Last edit time: 36 minutes ago on 1/9/2017 6:31:36 PM
Thank you ^_^
7554000? ago
how do you know an admin pressed it?
how do you know an admin posted this?
how do you know no one's forcing them with an NS letter to press this canary late after it died, publicly with multiple front page posts over days
7558155? ago
Before you try to claim that this anonymous post was made by someone other than the admins (ignoring the fact that it got stickied to the top of v/all, something that only the admins could do), have you tried to make a post on this subverse? It is locked to "Approved submitters". Since there is actually a mod level specifically for Submitters, that means that there are precisely 3 accounts that can make posts here:
@Atko [O],
@PuttItOut [O], and
@Voat [M]
Two of those are the admins' actual accounts, and the third is what they run the official bots on. These accounts are the least likely to be compromised out of all the accounts on the entire site. If any of those was compromised, then there is nothing any of us could do to get rid of their corruption, so it would be best to continue under the assumption that they are still clean until they prove otherwise.
7554409? ago
Its a real good point man
7553579? ago
Option #1
When a moderator seemingly completely switches attitudes and begins going against Voats Freedom they are no longer fit to be a moderator. In addition they seem to have been hacked or sold their account, but regardles they are still unfit to moderate as they go against the ideals that are held here so they must go
7553571? ago
Safest best. If it's important, someone will make a new subverse and people will migrate themselves.
Feels a little anti-freedom of speech.
Good call.
7553563? ago
As long as you flag them as NSFW/NSFL, I think so.
7557790? ago
That goes against my freedom of speech, You are trying to force me to include in my post letters I don't want to include.
7556878? ago
Thumbnail hiding has been broken for quite some time, unless they fixed it. I suggest not.
7557726? ago
I believe it's fixed now, especially if you click the "Is Adult" box.
7553557? ago
Purge the mods. Rinse and repeat. The second you give up and shut that sub down is the second we will have confirmation to our suspicions that you sold the site out.
7553663? ago
Yep. The talk of (((investors))) finding it to be a problem makes me uneasy. Of course they would, I understand that much. But the day we bend to the will of rich kikes is the day we become reddit and have to start all over again.
7554620? ago
Investors do it so that their ideals are used and not what the site is intended to be, free speech. Money is the root of all evil, although investors who only invest without any predudice should be allowed.
7556434? ago
I think it's more about money. No one will advertise or monetise a site with /v/niggers so why would anyone invest in it?
However 4chan has ads so there must be a way.
7556454? ago
Exactlly, 4chan is a prime example.
7553556? ago
Seems like all three have problems: 1: Relies on good faith presentation. If people are scamming their way in good faith has doubts, the counter to this is basic rule sets which have their own problems. (dead subs, one can't fulfill the requirements for transfer-it becomes arbitrary to admins, etc.) 2: If subs are allowed to die, then eventually that tactic can be used to destroy the site. 3: Similar as two, only a lot more work for everyone and resets on brand recognition as relevant.
Of the three, seems like #1 is the most usable, even with it's subset of problems. Too bad there isn't a way to data mine a 'good faith' ratio for anyone in mod position.
7553552? ago
Of course get rid of the SJW takeover of Niggers and Chicago. We have to defend Voat and not take any shit from those shits!
7553547? ago
if this is a free speech zone, why even have moderators?
7553546? ago
Your original post described a reddit quarantine exactly. You are a nigger. Eat shit and die.
7553540? ago
Option 4: remove all mods and let the users decide the content with their votes.
7553521? ago
sometimes i pull a u-turn over a solid line. whoops. boot the faggot. hand over the sub.
7553519? ago
Option 1
7553515? ago
I Second, freedom isn't free. Some things are met to be exceptions and some things need to be in the gray zone.
Also it is my suspicion that /u/WhiteSoIMustBeRacist may have just been hacked.
7554323? ago
If not hacked, then purchased. If it was a case of the account being hacked how hard is it to create a new account and make a ruckus?
7556486? ago
Or potentially doxxed and blackmailed.
7553509? ago
no.11!
7553503? ago
Option 1.
7553494? ago
Why not leave it with no mods at all
7566380? ago
So niggers can post cuck porn? No thanks.
7553490? ago
Option 1
7553483? ago
Admins should not intervene in the non default subverses. Much as I know the community desires admin intervention here, /v/niggers is NOT a default subverse, and much as I'm sure members of the community who frequent it dislike the road it has gone down, I think that admins intervening in user managed subs is something that should be avoided. We are not reddit, and yet the suggestion of admin intervention into a sub's administration does sound quite a bit like the actions we all left that place for.
At the same time, I recognize that completely destroying a sub, even one that I find dispicable, through inaction, thanks to what seems likely to be a sold account, is not a good solution either. As such, I propose intervention take place, and the offending account removed if deemed necessary by the community the account moderates, BUT; prior to this action, we should set in place ground rules like those governing the abandoned sub transfers on /v/subverserequest. One that recognizes situations where a mod has overstepped their bounds, say by attempting to transform an active subverse into a RADICALLY different community (notice I said ACTIVE. User Arotaes_forgehammer changed /v/dice to a sub about gaming dice, rather than Andrew dice clay. Dice was inactive at the time, there's nothing wrong with this). Once these ground rules are in place, it will ensure that future scenarios like this are handled smoothly, and it will ALSO give the admins more accountability, as the decision to make these subverse changes will be primarily in the hands of the users of said community. Sure, it ends up being you guys who actually make the transfer, but if we have another case like this, and it meets these established conditions (that need to be crowdsourced), we as the users can rest easy knowing that you will make the required leadership change, while, at the same time, not being able to make a change purely for your personal ideological reasons without raising a SERIOUS red flag and having another /v/videos situation that ISN'T someone crying wolf.
7553549? ago
yeah like whenthis happened last time and they fixt v/niggers for us.
fuckyou
option1.
7556857? ago
And you didn't learn a single thing… just like niggers.
7553481? ago
THE CANARY IS NOT PRESSED. IT WAS NOT PRESSED IN THE WORLD-WIDE STANDARD 30 DAYS. (the user claiming to be puttitout subtly has stated that they press when they fucking feel like it with annoucements ((which renders canaries useless anyway)))
THIS ISN'T JESUS CANARY. DIES AND COMES BACK 3 DAYS LATER.
voat is served, our admins gagged
AND WORSE
NOW THEY'RE FORCING THEM TO LIE
which means only one thing goats: it's a National Security Letter forcing Voat's Admins to lie.* :(
@puttitout go make an annoucement thread about this PUBLICLY WITH YOUR NAME ON IT and i will remain open minded to your reasons that you present clearly and openly for missing the deadline when you and atko were on the day of and the day before the 30 days.
7554907? ago
If you truly believe the canary is dead fucking leave. I don't so I won't.
7555584? ago
I HAVE REPEATEDLY STATED THAT THIS IS ONE SMALL PART OF A LARGE ATTACK ON FREE SPEECH WORLD WIDE. ALL THE NET IS CENSORED ALL THEW ORLD IS CENSORED. WHY NOT VOAT? THEY CAN TRY BUT WE WILL NOT LET THEM. DO NOT LISTEN TO THESE SHILLS ATTEMPTING TO MAKE IT LOOK LIKE I HAVE SAID IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM RUN AWAAAAY! no. YOU STAND AND FIGHT AGAINST THE CENSORSHIP. RIGHT HERE. ON VOAT.
I AIN'T GOIN ANYWHERE, YOU FUCKING SHILLY NIGGERFAGGOT ROTTEN NIGGER TITTY.
7555955? ago
See I tend to not take seriously anyone who calls me a shill so readily. I wouldn't be so fucking poor if I was being paid.
7556126? ago
shills are those promoting an agenda in this sense. they do not need to be paid, nor be part of nor associated with an organization.
if i thought you were a paid shill you would see the word paid before the word shill.
you are shilling.
7560285? ago
Everyone promotes their own agenda and if you don't think so you're a dumbass. If that's how you define shill you're in fact right, everyone's a shill.
7554317? ago
Sanegoatiswear BTFO. You got told by the admins you fucking clown. Just give it a rest, you act like you're some sort of legal expert, there is no fucking standard on a canary you jerk off.
If you want to be taken seriously fucking post actual case studies and/or court cases where a canary was relevant (protip: you won't post it because you're talking out your ass and haven't found any actual legal precedent).
Go fly a kite.
7554031? ago
People are caling Sanegoat crazy but this man dedicates his time to protect Voats integrity and make users question everything. He go my support.
7553705? ago
>tfw even in anon mode SaneGoat will always be recognized at a single glance
7553720? ago
ayyyyyyyyyyy laughing my branding off
GOATKU COMES SOOONETH
7555024? ago
Goatku cometh soon*
7553655? ago
Sane, kindly fuck off
7553669? ago
BUAUAHAAHHAHAHAHHA DIS NIGGA THINKS TELLINGME WHAT TO DO WORKS.*
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
TELL ME MORE ABOUT HOW YOU THINK YOU CONTROLME
7553691? ago
No, I think you are great entertainment a good portion of the time. I simply request that annoying children leave the room while the adults are talking about important things. Seems reasonable to me.
7553722? ago
7553737? ago
If I'm shilling, I'd really like to know where my check is, I'd love to get paid to fuck with you. Its always so entertaining.
7554028? ago
Everyone is a shill to insane or spreading disinfo tactics or fallacies if insane decides what you have to say doesn't specifically conform to exactly what he wants you to think. All of Voat are shills apparently. No one is real if insane is to be believed.
7553766? ago
anyone can use disinformation tactics and fallacies.
not just people paid for it
literally
fucking shill.
7553787? ago
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/shill
7553949? ago
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/shill
noun. def 2. faggot. you're "promoting" things with fallacious text filled with disinformation tactics.
no requirement to receive compensation in the def.
look at dis nigga
fuckyou shill.
7554658? ago
7553537? ago
We never agreed to a 30 day deadline, we always said we'd update it on announcements only. There is no standard either.
You hijacking top comments ensures that I will not take you seriously. If you want respect, be respectful.
7555698? ago
oh p.s. if you are @Puttitout whom you seem to be suggesting you are on this anon thread
you areletting clear defamation per se posts remain on voat.
clear defamation per se. delaware law breaking content.
and you've done nothing for over a week.
i consider your user agreement to be worth less than toilet paper at this point because you representatives of voat inc don't uphold the user agreement you wrote.
what say you, supposed-admin?
7555772? ago
So, you are for taking someone to court for defamation for spouting on a free speech forum their opinion of what you have to say and the way you act? They said mean things, admins please do something about it they're not presenting an accurate viewpoint of me.
7555821? ago
you are too stupid to breathe.
read the user agreement. law breaking content is not allowed on voat.
there are civil defamy laws in delaware where voat is registered as a corporation.
no not mean things
they stated things as fact they knew not to be true to maliciously defame my reputation in public.
they don't need to use my name under delaware law.
literally too stupid to breathe.
7555880? ago
Read what you wrote. Read what I wrote. If you think I'm being intellectually dishonest, I can't help you. What if that someone lives in a foreign country? Would you extradite them to delaware? What if they're in another state? You can't be serious mate. This is not what the law was meant to be used for.
7556132? ago
i'll wait.
7556418? ago
You made the claim you link to it I'm not going to waste my time looking something up for the likes of you.
So you want to silence and censor me is that it? Yeah I'm one of the people that replied to you earlier in this thread. You proclaim to be for free speech and no censorship while hypocritically turning the cheek and spreading bullshit about how you want the admins to deal with people for "defamation and libel"?
Wow you're so right, you go protect your "image" on the internet by prosecuting anyone who speaks negatively of you or says something untrue on the internet you're the hero we deserve keep fighting the good fight against censorship! (As you fucking advocate censoring people and being intellectually dishonest about it while projecting your attributes onto me).. Is that enough of the validation you seek? All the while you're a snake with your words deceiving people into thinking it's for a good and just cause.
7556652? ago
get out of anon and shill all this disinfo and fallacy again.
i dare you.
7556685? ago
And that's why I'm doing it in anon. Because if I were to try to say these truths and not be anonymous you and others like you would target me. You can't have someone pointing you out so you must identify and destroy them. This is really helping your cause.
7556734? ago
i don't target shit. i speak freely and defend freedom of speech.
lol
no
i'm making the point that you're shilling anon because you're afraid to do it publicly
i'm welcoming you to have this conversation openly.
you have proven my point
7554101? ago
SEE THAT FOLKS, THE FAKE ADMIN JUST DID A
DISINFO TACTIC!!!!
WHAT A FUCKING LOAD OF BOLLOCKS.
7553605? ago
who is we?
who are you?
prove you are justin or atif.
there is a worldwide standard of 30 days on warrant canaries..
frankly there's been talk of those that be in power adding a "kill the canary" clause to gags.
so how do i know you're not some 3-letter controlling this admin account or have granted your 3-letter account access to annoucements and convieniently put in the anony feature??
(THIS IS A DISINFO TACTIC)
and
(MORE OF IT)
LISTEN HERE NIGGER
IF I WANTED RESPECT I WOULDN'T ACT THE WAY I DO
NO ONE WITH A REASONABLE BRAIN COULD REASONABLY EXPECT TO BELIEVE SANEGOAT WANTS OTHERS' RESPECT.
TRUTH SHALL SET US FREE.
YOU CANNOT STOP THE FUCKING WATER FROM ROLLING DOWN THE HILL FOREVER, 3-LETTER.
PROVE YOU'RE PUTT
IN AN OPEN POST
OR FUCK OFF BACK TO REDDIT
7553968? ago
You must really be new around here. When they have an announcement to make, they update the canary. Once this situation gets resolved, the canary will be updated. They have always done this in the past, so why would they change it? I didn't know there was a world standard that they had to adhere to. I guess the UN resolution on cyber bullying should be the norm here?
You sounding like your overcompensating there buddy. Turn the words in to Trump and you sound just like a fuckwit SJW. So are you playing the long con here by trying to make it seem like you're full ant-SJW, when in fact you have done the same things as SJWs do and pointlessly remove shit from subs you mod?
7554152? ago
aylmao
i am sanegoat.
you are an idiot or a shill
7554656? ago
you're using voating bots now? why are you so anti-voat?
7554807? ago
He's playing the long con. I can see that shit from a mile away. I have been at the forefront of voat wading head on to keep the ping spammers at bay for a time. I also kept up on the various spammers form time to time. My operations on another site have been mostly fruitful. I will post a dump on protectvoat when it's completed.
7554852? ago
Sane is probably just Amalek's new main account and all the upvoats he gets and all the downvoats his opposition gets are just the army of bots to bring down voat he was always on about
7556634? ago
It's a rabbit hole. I have my assumptions about him and I will keep it to myself. All I can say is that a lot of things around here isn't as it seems.
7554415? ago
I really don't know who the fuck sane goat is. I guess your not important enough for me to remember. Well that, and I have been doing things on reddit for a while. I'm the former user notdobbler. /u/puttitout knows how I am, after all they do have the tools to see who is who here. I really enjoy an internet slap fight every once in a while but dude, tone it down a bit. Your meth intake needs to be brought down a notch or 10.
If you really knew what I was up to, you would see how fucking idiotic that shill statement was for me on here. The trick to being something you're not is to honestly believe your own lies. I read that same book as well there friend. Shills will always accuse others of being a shill first, or did you skip that part?
7553967? ago
So hysterical. This is why you don't get taken seriously most of the time. You can't accept an answer given to you if it is not the answer you like or want. Get over yourself. If I were the admins I'd be ignoring you too. Inb4 disinfo tactic criminal shilling fallacy quotes from insane.
7554160? ago
7554582? ago
I see you got some fellow retards following you around defending everything you do. If we go by the votes, they agree everyone who doesn't think like you is a shill.
7554249? ago
Everyone who doesn't conform or accept what you want them to think is a shill. InsaneGoatiSwear is a confirmed shill using disinfo tactics and character assassination attempts and fallacies. Logged and archived for criminal shilling Kappa.
7554649? ago
he's just amalek I think (at least I saw other people pointed that out) and he seems to be using downvoat bots to shut up people who disagree with him
7554707? ago
Either Amalek or someone like him but with differing views/convictions. Idk those downvotes are a little suspicious but then again there are plenty of easily lead sheep on here. There are also a whole lot more intelligent goats who can think for themselves.
Also the second part was sarcasm playing back to insane what he says about others when he wants to end the discussion and declare victory. The Kappa was meant to show that. Funny how what he says about others so perfectly at times describes him.
7554773? ago
probably just amalek and the bot army he was always talking about, Sane and Amalek are both anti-voat and not a lot of people on here are so they're probably the same person
7553502? ago
we always know when its goatku ...at least I think
7553477? ago
I also agree with option 1. If we start censoring things just because we don't like them, nothing is safe.
7553475? ago
You talk of investors. We appreciate all that you do and know this site sucks up a lot of your time. How much money would we have to throw at you to make many of your problems go away but be able to keep the site free as ever? Are you looking for someone to buy this site from you?
7553468? ago
Let the sub die naturally if it will die. users shape the board. If they stop using that sub due to the shit mods so be it
Find alternate subs that aren't controlled by Reddit mods. Don't give traffic to Reddit-controlled cancer subs
7554016? ago
Like coat tailing the highest rated comment with an opposite opinion vote to garner more exposure instead of posting your vote off the OP and allowing the voaters to decide? That kind of natural?
7554054? ago
Is opposite opinions something you find unnatural? Buttplugs aren't natural either but you have one in right now
7554130? ago
Yeah. you just invalidated any future chance of having your actual opinions respected.
7554394? ago
I dont have anything to prove. Your respect doesnt matter to me
7553676? ago
Death by rogue mod is not a "natural" way for a sub to die. The users clearly want the sub the way it was.
The problem, now and in the future, is where to draw the line. Admins can't just ban every mod who intends to change a sub's content... But admins making calls like that is exactly what got Reddit in trouble (nothing personal Atko/Put, I'm just talking about the principle).
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
7553491? ago
no. 1. you're wrong.
that's letting the muslims take france.
fuck you, sjw cuck. i hopeyou get raped by your invaders.
7553554? ago
If you are a user of that sub, it's your own fault for letting your sub be modded by a dumb fuck. You can go fuck yourself ignint degenerate. My point is if you want something done right, do it yourself or don't do it at all. There should be no moderators before there should be little bitch fights over stupid moderated subs. Kill yourself braindead asshole
You listed number 1... only one point? Good job
7555423? ago
You are user /u/jerry. He is the only person on voat who uses the term "ignint", and he also has a habit of omitting punctuation marks at the end of paragraphs.
Easy doxing.
7555533? ago
Thats the most flattering thing someone has cared to notice about me <3
7554689? ago
ignint. he sho is ignint.
7553688? ago
7553745? ago
Retard confirmed. You are incapable. KYS
7553466? ago
We never wanted to make a v/Niggers, we wanted our original v/CoonTown, but that was not an option do to another rogue mod. If possible, I believe the best option would be to move all subs to /v/CoonTown an give the mod privelages to @adhdferret and @Cancel-Cat-Facts. After that's done, there's no need to keep /v/niggers.
7560807? ago
^
I can feel comfortable saying "CoonTown" out loud. Not so with the current sub.
7553456? ago
Option 1. Letting v/niggers fall is a loss for free speech and will see many users losing faith in what we are doing here at voat.
7560630? ago
Letting it fail freely is a win for free speech. If their message is so compelling it should be able to endure on its own without someone propping it up. If it isn't then it'll die.
7560794? ago
The message itself is what's being attacked. Someone wants to control the narrative and they'll do whatever it takes to nudge us even a tiny fraction towards submission and censorship. We cannot provide them that fraction.
7560837? ago
Don't really care. It's not a system sub. Let it devolve any way it chooses.
7560912? ago
It's not devolving, it's been subverted. That's the problem. The subscribers have no say in the destruction of their sub and we cannot abide.
7560949? ago
It's not a problem. It's not a system sub. Nobody is required to babysit it. If people don't like what it happening there they're free to create a different sub. The strict moderator policies should only ever apply to system subs. Unless Voat wants to take them in to that context (and they really, really don't) they need to let whoever is large and in charge there do his thing.
7553443? ago
i prefer option #4 where there is an electoral system put into place that makes it possible for established users with a min. membership period and which are known to be active in the sub, to vote out a mod, thereby allowing the community to police itself while avoiding administrator interference which, down the road, could become very problematic if it persists
as for potential investors, personally i think that should have precisely zero bearing
7553439? ago
I'm new here. I came to study/ help with Pizzagate. I ventured to other subverse to take a break and encountered the variety of opinion. I am cool with it, I believe in free speech. I don't see v/niggers or any of the other subverse as a personal attack - its just people voicing there thoughts. To oppose that would be me being the Authoritarian.
I like this site. I've learn some things.
7566392? ago
"study pizzagate" lol
7553430? ago
Sounds good to me. It's the only way to keep the freedom here. Deputize a new person, and hope they don't fuck it up. If they do, rinse and repeat. Eventually there will be a perfect fit found.
I don't agree with /v/niggers, but the freedom that allows them to have that, also allows me to have what I want, so I accept that.
7553428? ago
Disagree an old user could take the lead and it wouldn't hurt as much as letting it die
Option 1 should be applied
7553424? ago
So...the same as a quarantine on Eddit then? Fuck off with that bullshit. I smell a nigger.
7558056? ago
You mean an ad-free experience? Because that's basically what quarantining subs does: it rewards hate subs by giving them an ad-free experience. And the retards can't appreciate it?
7558069? ago
Fuck off, kike.
7553937? ago
It would be a subverse setting the owner chooses himself, not a status imposed by the admins. Big difference to Plebbit quarantine.
Most old Voaters would opt to globally see NSFP content anyway.
7554043? ago
Users can block subs they don't like. Giving tools like these to mods only sets up more room for abuse. What better way to kill a sub than to make it invisible against the users wishes? Fuck that.
7553412? ago
This is a systematic problem which will repeat.
You need big changes which remove power from the mods as well as automatically de-modding accounts which seem to have been hacked or sold (e.g. requiring anonymous 2FA for mods and de-modding when it's removed).
7553404? ago
I vote 1. Its kind of fucked up but free speech must be defended. Its a slippery slope and if niggers is taken out, where is the line in the sand going to be drawn after? Reddit did this, and then took out more innocent subs like fatpeoplehate.
7561726? ago
That is my concern however my concern is option 1. Where is the line drawn for admin intervention?
7554236? ago
> fatpeoplehate
> innocent
pick one. nah jk. they good people fighting against ogres and whales.
7566332? ago
They're morons who know nothing about obesity.
7569506? ago
how fat are you?
7569687? ago
Not fat at all. Fat people hate has no understanding of obesity. Why is that always the first thing you idiots say? Let's say I was fat: does that take away the truth about what I say?
Can you have a serious scientific conversation about something or can you only say hurrr dur da fattees?
7575682? ago
Seriously how fucking obese are you?
7576041? ago
Less than ten percent body fat. Wilks score over 300. What's your Wilks?
Seriously, can you have an adult conversation?
7553755? ago
This is my concern, where does it end?
ProTip: It doesn't.
7555144? ago
I had a suspicion that you guys knew Option 1 was the only truly feasible one. Still, it's always good to see what the community thinks.
Good on you guys. Thanks for addressing this and again thank you for updating the canary.
7554168? ago
Option 1 seems immediately better out of a list of ungreat choices.
7553400? ago
I can't tell if voats count in an anomymous theads... so I've voating fof #2. as @7553271 survival of the fittest. Darwinian Free Speech.
if the /v/niggers mod can't keep his subscribers, then he deserves to lose them. If he create more engaging dialog than his predecessors, we would all profit.
once he loses all his subscribers he may get bored & move on... if that happens then execute option 1 under the normal transfer of ownership rules.
7553398? ago
Purge the moderator if it's obviously somebody who's been camping otherwise just let it die I mean there's a hundred million characters that we can use to form words to make another sub
7553397? ago
Hand it off to someone who can verify that they are not jewish
7553396? ago
Option 1. Mods should be janitors, even for non-default subs.
Same with /v/Chicago in my opinion. If a mod suddenly decides that only feel-good articles should be posted, he should be the one who has to make a new subverse, not change an obviously catch-all subverse into one that has a scope more limited than the name implies.
Option 1 sends a very clear message that the site is for freedom of speech, even if someone may personally find the content abhorrent. (As long as it's legal.)
7553875? ago
See this I disagree with. Some communities might appreciate more heavy handed curation. The defaults need to remain janitorial only, but after that, I maintain it should be up to the particular sub. There should be a way to badge a subverse, though, to mark it publicly as "Our moderators agree to janitorial only moderation."
7553394? ago
Option 1.
But don't forget about v/Chicago. Same situation, to the letter.
7563118? ago
v/pizzagate pretty similar too
7558950? ago
While we're at it. Can we please do something about @henrycorp. He's been doing the same exact thing as v/niggers and v/Chicago for months
7553390? ago
This website has already lost its way; and this particular sub-drama is merely a symptom and not the cause.
There are dedicated teams whose job it is to identify "potent" posters to humiliate in real life. These teams follow potential targets and document everything while also trying to bait the targets into saying something "beyond the pale".
This particular sub-drama is one manifestation of the strategy, although it's aimed perhaps at low-hanging fruit rather than a truly "potent" target.
Voat is already compromised. I don't think we can fix it, unfortunately. We can only mitigate the damage by switching users or going anon; and even this is only a temporary solution - as deep analysis can identify the same user under different aliases.
I say purge the mods and make it an anon sub. But in the long term, start planning to move.
7553383? ago
Option 1
The other options give these jobless SJW-Powermods too much of a victory.
7558990? ago
Please use option 1 for v/Chicago and all the @henrycorp subverses.
7564649? ago
Seconded. henrycorp needs attention please
7553376? ago
Option 1. "I may hate what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."
7553371? ago
What do the majority of the users of the sub want?
I never go there and shouldn't have any input on what happens to that place.
7553365? ago
I would vote for option 1.
I dislike the subverse, I think the content is shit. However, content ain't illegal. And that should be the only concern. If we start applying things like selective banning of subs, eventually we will become reddit.
Another important thing is that as hateful as it is, the users that enjoy it are focused there. Remove this space from them and they will sparse to other subs. Same way FPH did on reddit when it was closed.
7553418? ago
I feel the same about fatpeoplehate. I just don't go there.
7566395? ago
It's full of morons with no understanding of obesity.
7553489? ago
Yeap, freedom of speach stops existing when we selective choose what other are allowed to say.
We are grown ups, block a subverse is quite easy.
7553358? ago
I don't really care what happens to that verse, but it does affect voat. Is there some way through html to hide it from search bots? And use some seo techniques to promote the more acceptable verses? You don't have to censor things like that, but you don't have to show them to the world.
7553345? ago
option 2
7553331? ago
If you choose option 2, this will only spread to other subverses. As painful as it may be, I believe that the least-bad option is to step in and remove the problems manually. This may have to be repeated in different subverses in the coming years, but it is something that must be done since it's not as bad as the alternative of letting these issues fester and grow.
7553329? ago
@adhdferret should be new owner. he defends it quite a bit.
7553513? ago
adhdferret is a decent mod but has so many clear emotional problems, it's a danger giving him any power.
7553846? ago
He called the FBI on a user. That's alarming.
7555637? ago
Link?
7555966? ago
Here.
7553583? ago
running that sub would take someone with emotional problems anyway
7553638? ago
that... is a character attack on all woke red pills.
FUCK YOU
7553324? ago
Option 2. No intervention
7553534? ago
you have to go back
7553321? ago
Voat is still acquiring its own public image. v/niggers does more than tarnish Voat. It's a defining characteristic of Voat's 'No Censorship and Freedom of Speech Model' and, by extension, Voat Inc.
7557774? ago
muh PR
Concern troll elsewhere.
7557886? ago
Dumbass, I didn't bring up the PR bullshit because it's a non-reason. Stupid shill go post in v/politics
7558255? ago
What is with no censorship do you not get? We will not compromise our values.
7558319? ago
I get it. Just stating a fact that v/niggers doesn't tarnish Voat. It helps to define Voat.
Delete or rename it and it will still be in the Wikipedia entry.
7555868? ago
It's definitely keeping voat from growing. Whether you think that's good or bad is up to you.
FWIW I support option 1 and simply blocked the sub.
7556475? ago
Growing into what? A site with a bunch of cunts from bullshit liberal personality cults running it like reddit? Look at reddit just 2-3 years ago. It isn't fun anymore it's too fucking safe. Voat is where you can get a taste of some raw fucking internet and let it know exactly what's on your mind. Using reddit feel's like a fucking human resources panel is watching you. The fags/niggers/pussies/edgelibs on reddit are extra bold knowing your tongue is tied and it amplifies their voice to the point where you can only go to your subs and talk about your specific things. All just incase some fucking pussie post history checker decides they want to go run and tell because you were being whatever the fuck you decided to be, Reddit is fucking itself Voat isn't reddit don't try to be reddit
7558166? ago
A platform with millions of daily users and tangible influence in the world. WIth meetups, and popularity, and getting share links on other popular platforms. In short, powerful. LIke reddit was before the fattening.
I don't support site-wide censorship or coddling, but you're delusional if you think the toxic bigotry is helping voat grow. On reddit it was a minority and easily ignored. On voat it infests /v/funny and /v/whatever and it's making voat feel like a niche sight for the ignorant and the bigots.
If it weren't for /r/HistoryAnecdotes and /r/interestingasfuck I would think voat was made for racists by racists and populated exclusively by racists.
If we want to keep voat small and weak (I don't), we should keep doing exactly what we're doing.
7555984? ago
Currently, v/niggers may be keeping Voat from growing. But it may also prove to be Voat's true canary, as has been said many times before.
I think option 1 is best, option 2 has some merit, and option 3 is interesting, but only if that's what the v/niggers crowd wants.
This anonymous posting format will not be able to demonstrate the will of the minority/majority core of v/niggers.
7553678? ago
There's this strange desire among some members on voat to become "respected" and they think to do that we need a good public image. The only way voat ever would have a "good public image" is to be completely cucked. To start with, if you want to be respectable in the eyes of the establishment (e.g. liberals) a good place to start is by ignoring what niggers do to our society.
Niggers destroy our cities, they violently attack whites, they vote for destructive liberals who raise our taxes to pay for niggers to breed without working. With affirmative action they push more qualified students out of college, force more qualified workers out of jobs, force more qualified contractors out of government contracts. Niggers are the reason your wife needs to feel anxiety when walking home in a major city. Niggers are the reason you need to pay 200% more for a house to put your kids into a non-nigger infested school.
Now if voat is willing to ignore all of that, they're on the road to being respectable in the eyes of the globalists who are rubbing their hands at the goyim's naivety.
7560595? ago
There's a big difference between between supporting free speech and supporting hate speech. subs like /v/niggers and /v/fatpeoplehate should be allowed, but they should not in any way be supported by the site. This means the only time you see them is if you're in the sub. They should never be featured anywhere else.
7561723? ago
No there isn't. Hate speech isn't a real thing. It all is just free speech.
~HomerSimpson
7562711? ago
Let me put it another way - there's a big difference between allowing hate speech and supporting it. The way they try to discuss racial problems doesn't help anything, and it makes voat look like shit. Sooner or later the money is going to run out, and this place will cease to exist. It's something to think about. The problems with racism against whites by blacks won't be solved with racism from whites against blacks. It's time to grow up, or vanish. Your choice.
7560728? ago
People say that use it to censor opinions they don't like even though it harms no one.
Who said they had to be supported? Voat is just a platform, like Reddit once claimed to be.
7560856? ago
Both those subs are hate speech, there's no other way to describe them. I think voat HAS to allow hate speech in order to continue being a free speech haven. It just doesn't need to pay any real attention to it.
7554602? ago
I'd prefer to be feared more than seen as a "respectable", I don't mean feared in the menacing, truly scary meaning, I mean feared because you can't lie to me. We've all had that teacher, parent, or boss that's heard it all before that only a moron would try lying, that's what I mean.
7554009? ago
I think the standard Voat sets is that you should be completely free to say what you just said, so long as your community isn't doing anything illegal.
I think there is a market growing for Voat and tolerance for freedom of expression.
7553499? ago
fuck you.
freedom over image.
take your fallacious niggerdy shit elsewhere. it doesn't work here.
7554075? ago
I stuck with the facts instead of injecting personal feeling. But since you asked:
I don't decry Voat. I love Voat. For better or for worse, v/niggers is inextricably part of what makes Voat Voat. It's part of what defines Voat and will continue to be part of the life story.
7554203? ago
fact
they pressed the canary every few days to under a couple weeks
more frequently than announcements
never have they gone past 30 days.
7555438? ago
7566355? ago
You're such a faggot sane goat.
7566415? ago
:D
7555492? ago
7555510? ago
7553319? ago
Number 1
7553307? ago
YES.
7553306? ago
Rinse and repeat.
7553338? ago
This one.
7557106? ago
shut up nigger
7553302? ago
Voat is built of communities. Those communities grow organically over time because of the structure in place by the rules laid out by the community and codified by the mod. When a mod takes a community and drastically changes this structure it is a huge disruption, and most of the time the community will never recover.
If a sub goes through a bait-and-switch then the mod should be removed.
If you look at reddit, the r/politics community never recovered; they were fragmented to r/libertarian (which also attracted power-mods and has itself fragmented), etc. and now there is not a good place that everyone goes to for politics.
I'm not saying that nothing can ever change, but it needs to be clear that the new direction is desired by the community. A good example is the banning of memes, the sub might not have started with a rule against them, but if it is a factual sub, like /v/news or something, then it might be a rule that the community would get behind.
lastly, if you start doing things for investors then it will never stop, and you (or the investors) will be left with a pile of poo.
7556579? ago
You are so right about investors. Fuck them. Guess what Voat is selling... Real shit. Not a bunch of self censoring half truths carefully worded like PR so some fag mod wont ban you because it's fucking reddit. The unfiltered truth is hard to find and terrifying to some. But if you create an environment where it exists it's priceless.
7553543? ago
Great point. A mod who requests and is granted a sub should never be permitted to change the rules within that sub, without a consensus of the subscriber base. I'm not saying a sub can't change it's direction, or what is or isn't permitted, just that if it already has a subscriber base, they should have an input in any changes. A mod, in my opinion, doesn't 'own' the sub, nor can they dictate, when a request sub is granted, he is simply agreeing to take it on as it is for the Voat community, not as his own personal realm. If they want to do that, create your own new sub, with the rules they want, and then get your own subscriber base. Otherwise, before changing rules, make very, very sure that your subscriber base is up to the changes.
7556601? ago
If they let little bitches start pulling this shit everything will turn into r/punchablefaces
7560695? ago
I really miss that sub. FeelsBadMan
7566097? ago
So it now seems to be filled with people posting Minion stuff and saying how great the sub is in a invasion of the body snatchers type of way (hard to parse in text). Does anon have further explanation?
7566850? ago
SRS hostile takeover. That's why it went from real people to cartoon characters, because SRS is pro-bowdlerization.
7553274? ago
Do whatever you need to do--efficiently and effectively--to safeguard the existence and future of Voat overall. If need be, then make like a surgeon treating a gangrenous finger. The existence and future of the overall community shouldn’t be jeopardized for the sake of one small part of it or for the benefit of a small number of individuals.
7553392? ago
To others the whole of voat is a gangrenous finger. Where does it end? What you are talking about is censorship. Let's just lop of one kind of speech on a site, let's lop off another. That's not even a reduced form of censorship. That's the whole point of censorship.
7553423? ago
Yeah---you’re right. Let the whole thing run rampant until it causes the implosion and death of Voat.
7553480? ago
Fuck off, reddit faggot.
7557432? ago
Awww... What’s the matter, little one? Can’t take it when anybody has thoughts that don’t run with your sheeple groupthink so you have to start spitting venom?
7557630? ago
Typical condescending response for a typical reddit faggot. I can't wait until we start putting you kikes back into the ovens where you belong.
7558107? ago
I never did Reddit and I’m not Jewish. Still---it’s good to see you soaring at the zenith of your intellectual capability. Please do keep on with your tough guy horseshit talk, though. I know it must help you feel like you’re a real adult--especially since mommy and daddy don’t let you use language like that around their house. Maybe you should go kick daddy’s dog for a while when mommy and daddy are out of the house. It’d probably also help you feel like a tough guy.
7558171? ago
Classic kikery. Shut up you stupid fuck. Nobody cares about your fee-fees.
7565154? ago
Excellent work! It’s good to know that we can always look to you for superb wit, profound insights and legndary high-quality analytical abilities. You’re a really great example for others to emulate and I’m sure you have a gigantic following.
7553271? ago
I block shit I don't want to see... it's pretty simple. Option 2 makes the most sense to me, survival of the fittest and the least amount of admin intervention.
7553270? ago
Rogue mod @whitesoimustberacist openly declared that he was taking the subverse and steering it away from its specifically stated purpose just to suit his own agenda.
This Reddit cancer mod did not want to start his own subverse because nobody would be interested -- so he instead specifically stole a subverse with over 6000 subscribers.
If you have been banned from v/niggers, then I am respectfully asking you to ping @atko and @puttitout in this post so that we can work together to have our voices heard and 'have our say.'
Thanks.
7553446? ago
Exactly,
atko,
then the users,
then to the mods.
But atko has chosen to give the site to the users so by his accounting it's (users -> atko -> moderators). The users would like to use the subverse.
You should be able to type in just about anything in /v/... and see something useful, or make something useful if it's empty.
7553269? ago
i like option 2. if people want to make a new subverse that is called something similar, they can do that. if this was a very old site and all the words have been used up than i could see a reason for not doing that. but it is easy enough to make a site called v-nignogs or something to that effect and simply use that new subverse. people are being lazy. free speech isn't protected by passive people. those on voat who want free speech should develop the habit of having to do something about it.
7553536? ago
niggers go home.
7553589? ago
wait, let me make sure i got you right here. i advocate that free speech requires work, and that people shouldn't be lazy. you don't seem to agree, and you want people to assume that i am the nigger and not you? who is the type of person that hates having to do work? who is the type of person that wants everyone else to do the work for them? i agree, niggers go home. this site is for people who aren't afraid of a little work.
7553631? ago
7553244? ago
7553237? ago
This problem will arise repeatedly with multiple subverses. Without knowing a lot on how it all works, option 1 seems sustainable, reasonable, and in the spirit of free speech.
7553230? ago
New mod
7553228? ago
Option 1 seems like the only reasonable action for promoting free speech and not bowing down to hostile takeovers.
7553219? ago
OPTION 1 NIGGER
7553218? ago
Ok. You putitout are an sjw and atko should get rid of you.
7553342? ago
It's "PuttItOut"
And blasphemy! Putt is a god; justify your slander or be gone.
7559609? ago
*takes a shit on your face.
7553217? ago
Replace mods. These jerks are here to shit on people. If you let them, they'll keep taking over every sub they consider 'problematic' with the sole purpose of killing voat on sub at a time.
7555032? ago
Good viewpoint. Also, don't let anyone fool you into thinking "investors" interested in a free speech forum will be deterred by certain subs. They are not trying to invest in free speech if they are not interested in free speech. This should be simple, but the OP thinks it is a valid viewpoint. It is not.
7553215? ago
Option 2. It avoids any accusations of this site becoming another Reddit since the subverse will just do itself in. Everybody wins.
7553320? ago
NO. ......I
7556145? ago
boobs
7553210? ago
Option 1 seems good. Could discourage future attempts if they know it won't last.
7554262? ago
Especially if they bought the account.
7553207? ago
If there is a tangible financial impact of keeping that subverse in place, can you post proof of it?
For example, "here's an offer from investor for $18,000 if we nuke that subverse." Then nuke it unless we can raise $18,000 to keep it.
Sell out, selectively.
7553249? ago
fallacy
free speech not speech that is profitable fuck off shill.
7553604? ago
Wow! We're so much better than that other site...
Like a bunch of liberals, we've abused a word so that it no longer has meaning. It's like "fake news". Get a more interesting insult.
I'm just a guy with an idea. Maybe it's a terrible idea, but you haven't convinced me.
Free speech isn't free. There are bills to pay. How should we keep this site going?
7553635? ago
7553201? ago
I'd say go with option 2. That way it becomes self regulating and requires less intervention from the admins. If you go with option 1 people will expect you to step up again in the future. This way you can only lose in the long term as your decisions are sure to piss of at least one group of people. Basically: let this shit sort itself out.
7553239? ago
they did 1. already with this exact same sub before.
7553337? ago
Which I think was a mistake. These are not decisions to make lightly and if it becomes common to solve these problems like this the admins will have to spend more and more time on this in the future (time which I think they don't have and can spend much better).
7553386? ago
@atko @puttitout you should hire my ass for no pay as a independent pro-bono contractor for public relations.
this is where i and my friends stand for free speech.
7553187? ago
I would say please remove all mods from the subverse and leave it be. There are a tonne of successful modless subverses at this point. The fuck would /v/niggers need a mod for?
7553923? ago
I like this just install one or two L3 janitors to remove spam. If they do anything other then remove spam it will be quickly reported and they can be removed.
7553185? ago
Option 2: We can do nothing and let this particular subverse die.
7553234? ago
Option two is the best for this particular situation, but we shouldn't make this a precedent.
7553233? ago
no.
7553171? ago
you WERE THREE DAYS LATE
AND YOU HAVE CLAIMED TO ANONY. PRESS THE CANARY
THIS CANNOT AND WILL NOT BE SEEN AS A CANARY PRESS.
ONLY TWO MOTHERFUCKERS CAN POST IN HERE.
ATKO PUTT CANARY
REE.
you have been reed.
we know you're gagged
don't say anything
make it standard. HEAR ME? make it standard
and add an ADMIN deletion/ sub save log.
1. handle it like last time.
someone wants to make a v/niggerapologist sub they can, but maliciously coming in and taking an existing sub and turning it into the opposite AGAINST the sub's community's wishes is not free speech, t hat's an overt attack on free speech.
(i'm not afraid to speak freely, justin)
7553243? ago
I know this number is some sanegoat dude
Doxxed you bro
7553615? ago
beat me to it!
7553276? ago
HARRANGMENT THIS COMMENT IS HARRANGMEUEMENT HUE HUE HUE
7553166? ago
The Canary! Thank you so much I was getting worried.
7553224? ago
it's too late.
the canary is void.
7553318? ago
Says who?
7553311? ago
Hey Sane ;) I don't think you ever linked me to the instance where they agreed that the 30 day void would be a thing? As far as I know the admins consider the Canary to be valid as far back as the last edit.
7553344? ago
how do you know that's putt up there?
it's an anony post.
7554815? ago
I don't think anyone besides the admins are able to post in /v/announcements, though I haven't tested it. I do know that only they can sticky /v/announcements posts, though. Based on the tone (and the fact that Putt historically is the one to edit the canary) I'd say it's the One True Putt, but I admit it could be Atko.
Regardless of worldwide standards (of which previous to your mentioning them I was not familiar) the way the admins have set up the Voat canary is that it holds true up to the last edit. Canaries are hardly meaningful in the first place so I see no reason to be concerned now that it has been updated.
7555597? ago
HEY PEACESEEKER
7553290? ago
It says last edit time is 14 minutes ago?
7553360? ago
3 days after the 30 day standard worldwide warrant canary press time.
no it's void.
SOMEONE pressed it but we have no proof it was putt or atko
even this annoucement is a fucking anony post.
this could be
the work of an NS letter.