Very concerning the amount of discussion in this thread related specifically about sexualization of minors and ow close one can get to illegal content before it's banned. While I've not read through all 850 comments thus far, I've read about 1/4 of them and this seems to be the rule of contention. I don't care about your free speech. Period. Go to 4chan or some dark corner of the web to jack off to that shit. Or better yet, stick your dick in a light socket and do the world a favor.
The point is that, if its NOT illegal, and it's banned, then you now have a precedent of "We will ban things that are not illegal, but are highly distasteful." A week later, /v/niggers is gone, well no big deal there, /v/niggers is pretty disgusting. Then you ban /v/fatpeoplehate, because hey, being mean to black people and being mean to fat people are basically the same thing, and you see where this is going. I find the content posted to subs like /v/youngladies wholly disgusting, but since it is legal, we must keep it up to avoid censorship creeping in.
I'm not talking about setting any precedent. Post all the highly "distasteful" things a user wants and let people decide whether to participate in the forum/thread. Sexualized images of children in any form should be banned. If there is one rule that is not up for discussion or voat, that would be the one.
It does't matter if you WANT it to be a precedent or not, you aren't the supreme court, and this isn't bush v. gore. Any action the admins take can and will be recorded, remembered, and used against them if someone else wants something done with the site. This is why the banning of /r/creepshot was so significant, why Spez editing comments was so significant. If we ban these abhorrent but legal communities, people will say "well, you did it to /v/youngladies, what's wrong with doing it to x." In fact, that's what you're doing right now: "Well we banned illegal content, so what's wrong with banning stuff that isn't illegal, but what I, user 7600909, personally feel should be illegal." Voat doesn't cater specifically to you, or to me, or to anyone but the admins (and relevant law) in regards to what we want on this site. If it were otherwise, I'm sure people in conservative countries would have had us shut down long ago because of the existence of /v/boobies4atko. As it stands right now, the admins have proven to care very much about freedom of expression, and that means protecting these communities, much as we might not like them (in fact, I know atko has publicly stated that he detests /v/niggers, and its presence on the site; he allows it to continue not because he agrees with it, but because if he did not, he could no longer say that this place stands for free speech). Laws protecting free speech aren't important because they allow the popular speech, that stuff would be allowed anyways, Free speech protections exist specifically for the controversial stuff.
If you don't want to be part of a site that harbors this kind of content, then, congrats, you can go to, as you put it, 4chan, or some dark corner of the web, or even back to reddit. Just know that no place that won't at least tolerate these things that you hate will EVER be able to call itself a bastion of free speech, and not be lying to the users and to itself.
If you DO like free speech, my advice is to block it and move on with your life. Was that so hard?
If a forum decides to define free speech as the having the right to engage in child sexual exploitation, then yes. I will move on and it won't be hard. I've spent enough time in the sick world of /v/pizzagate research everyday and the shocking number of internet pedophiles you will find daily barking about their "rights" because it's "no different than LGBT". You're lecture to me about the free speech, as though I've somehow blurred the lines, is falling on deaf ears. I no not now, nor will I ever, equate the right of free speech with the right to sexually exploit children. Voat does not cater to me, that is correct. They asked for input and I offered mine. Time to move on.
view the rest of the comments →
7595691? ago
Very concerning the amount of discussion in this thread related specifically about sexualization of minors and ow close one can get to illegal content before it's banned. While I've not read through all 850 comments thus far, I've read about 1/4 of them and this seems to be the rule of contention. I don't care about your free speech. Period. Go to 4chan or some dark corner of the web to jack off to that shit. Or better yet, stick your dick in a light socket and do the world a favor.
7597052? ago
The point is that, if its NOT illegal, and it's banned, then you now have a precedent of "We will ban things that are not illegal, but are highly distasteful." A week later, /v/niggers is gone, well no big deal there, /v/niggers is pretty disgusting. Then you ban /v/fatpeoplehate, because hey, being mean to black people and being mean to fat people are basically the same thing, and you see where this is going. I find the content posted to subs like /v/youngladies wholly disgusting, but since it is legal, we must keep it up to avoid censorship creeping in.
7600909? ago
I'm not talking about setting any precedent. Post all the highly "distasteful" things a user wants and let people decide whether to participate in the forum/thread. Sexualized images of children in any form should be banned. If there is one rule that is not up for discussion or voat, that would be the one.
7601552? ago
It does't matter if you WANT it to be a precedent or not, you aren't the supreme court, and this isn't bush v. gore. Any action the admins take can and will be recorded, remembered, and used against them if someone else wants something done with the site. This is why the banning of /r/creepshot was so significant, why Spez editing comments was so significant. If we ban these abhorrent but legal communities, people will say "well, you did it to /v/youngladies, what's wrong with doing it to x." In fact, that's what you're doing right now: "Well we banned illegal content, so what's wrong with banning stuff that isn't illegal, but what I, user 7600909, personally feel should be illegal." Voat doesn't cater specifically to you, or to me, or to anyone but the admins (and relevant law) in regards to what we want on this site. If it were otherwise, I'm sure people in conservative countries would have had us shut down long ago because of the existence of /v/boobies4atko. As it stands right now, the admins have proven to care very much about freedom of expression, and that means protecting these communities, much as we might not like them (in fact, I know atko has publicly stated that he detests /v/niggers, and its presence on the site; he allows it to continue not because he agrees with it, but because if he did not, he could no longer say that this place stands for free speech). Laws protecting free speech aren't important because they allow the popular speech, that stuff would be allowed anyways, Free speech protections exist specifically for the controversial stuff.
If you don't want to be part of a site that harbors this kind of content, then, congrats, you can go to, as you put it, 4chan, or some dark corner of the web, or even back to reddit. Just know that no place that won't at least tolerate these things that you hate will EVER be able to call itself a bastion of free speech, and not be lying to the users and to itself.
If you DO like free speech, my advice is to block it and move on with your life. Was that so hard?
7602652? ago
If a forum decides to define free speech as the having the right to engage in child sexual exploitation, then yes. I will move on and it won't be hard. I've spent enough time in the sick world of /v/pizzagate research everyday and the shocking number of internet pedophiles you will find daily barking about their "rights" because it's "no different than LGBT". You're lecture to me about the free speech, as though I've somehow blurred the lines, is falling on deaf ears. I no not now, nor will I ever, equate the right of free speech with the right to sexually exploit children. Voat does not cater to me, that is correct. They asked for input and I offered mine. Time to move on.