You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

Michael_Obama ago

I still see the dire need for Free Speech in this world

Pretty ironic considering what's been implemented and who it has benefited.

and I still will do anything I can to continue providing it.

Not being ungrateful but this doesn't match reality.

Voat needs funding. Without it, Voat will be no more.

Where did the initial funding come from? That is an interesting question.

9138736? ago

I've debunked these points before and I'm tired of humouring you. These times are too trying for me to bother with your nonsense. You've benefited enough from Voat to spend thousands hours spreading disinformation to slander its name and the admins' goals, and yet not a single of your countless accounts has donated a penny.

You have the time, but not the dime, despite the use you've taken from Voat.

Grifter42 ago

You debunk points like an extremely constipated man shits: Poorly.

You give half-measure answers, and the leadership here are the kings of half measures.

9139061? ago

You give half-measure answers, and the leadership here are the kings of half measures.

This is your line and you stick to it, regardless of what logical and rational explanations are handed your way.

It is not my ability to explain and debunk, but your willingness to accept reality that is so poor.

Grifter42 ago

Why should Voat have to deal with someone who has already posted child pornography on the site, and is a known pedophile? I don't give a fuck if there wasn't a rule against it at the time, it's common sense. Any sensible person would have banned him long ago. And Beatle conspiring to have him flood my inbox with CP is something that should warrant a ban too. It's a federal fuckin' crime to conspire to distribute child pornography, and could get the site itself in serious hot water.

9139307? ago

Obviously my explanations are not the formal explanations but there are legal and reputational concerns Voat must contend with. CP is removed, but until we had in the rules that users posting CP would be banned entirely, it might not be in Voat's best interests publicity-wise to do so. That of course has changed, it is not in the rules, and if, now, someone were to post CP we have the codified statement to act on it in the way you'd desire. Why so concerned with the failings of then when we have the state of Voat now to hold a torch to?

Grifter42 ago

Because I don't think you folks are acting in good faith. I think you're being intellectually dishonest.

"Not in Voat's best interests publicity-wise"?

You've gotta be fucking kidding me. It's not in Voat's best interest to ban someone for posting child pornography?

Don't act like I'm fucking stupid, PS.

9139643? ago

hecho has come out in this thread to say that "conspiring to post CP" was in fact a "conspiring to post gay porn" so you don't even have ground to stand on with this.

Grifter42 ago

You know he had posted CP before, you know he's a pedophile, and you know what they were threatening to do.

I'm not a fucking idiot, PS.

9139843? ago

I know he's harassed many subverses, like /v/offgridders with porn before, but I'm not certain it was CP. I won't deny that it may have happened though, but I won't confirm that it has either as I do not know.

He has admitted to being a pedophile in the past but I don't think that's grounds for banning an account. Voat is concerned with the content posted here, not its users disgusting and immoral personal lives.

I don't think you're an idiot, I just think you're pressing an issue without paying heed to the state of affairs, to the actual information Putt has access to and how he has reacted to it.