SCP and CCP no longer play any role in your ability do submit links/start discussions or vote. You can now downvote as soon as you create an account. Please note that you can only vote once from a single IP address (voting IP addresses are stored encrypted and we have no way to reverse this encryption). We are still tweaking this so please report if you notice anything unusual about voting.
Edit: The biggest reason for this change is that I noticed how multiple subverses had "please upvote me" threads where their members were able to gain 300+ CCP in matter of minutes. At the same time, regular users would need weeks or even months to reach this level. That essentially broke the old system and we need something new. Perhaps requiring new accounts to create 100 comments in 100 different subs before being able to vote 100 times? If you have an idea, please feel free to share it, I'm all ears.
Edit 2: Here is an example of the problem I am trying to tackle:
- a large corporation which has hundreds or thousands of employees, comes over to Voat and pushes their advertising links to the frontpage because upvotes are not restricted for new accounts as much as downvotes
- at the same time, majority of Voat users today does not have the ability to downvote or has restricted downvotes
Edit 3: This is now reverted to the way it was. I need to think this through.
view the rest of the comments →
NapoleonComplex ago
Out of curiosity, what's the reasoning for the change?
ExtremeSquared ago
I think some of the "fringe communities" here have been gaming the system to ensure every member had downvoat power.
Vloorshad ago
Let's not kid ourselves and think that anybody we're worried about brigading wouldn't do this to make sure any of their members and alts could downvoat.
I'm with @EugeneNix in that the ability to turn off downvoats for specific subs is a good idea. However, that could also be abused to hell and back by undesirable subs, possibly even worse than CCP requirements. So maybe less "with", and more "I think we might need to get the mods something other than CCP requirements to manage downvoats in their subs".
SpaceRosa ago
How so? They could stop people from downvoting, but right now they can effectively stop that anyway by turning up the CCP needed to an absurd level like 5000. The price is to be removed from /v/all.
Vloorshad ago
I'm currently working some mental gymnastics to keep a sub on /v/all while mitigating the damage a brigade can do.
I don't have the time to think too deeply on it, but the more I think about it, the worse of an idea I think it is to allow a sub that blocks/limits downvoats on /v/all.
SpaceRosa ago
That's the point of it. If you alter the CCP needed in a subverse to downvote, it's removed from /v/all. Early on, some (white genocide, I think it was?) subverse was using an absurdly high threshold. It couldn't be downvotes, so it would keep hitting the front page. That feature was added in to put them on a more even playing field.
Vloorshad ago
Yeah, I figured it was for things like this. Despite this, I don't know that I want subs with downvoat restrictions being entirely excluded from the front page, either. Maybe subtract the required CCP from its upvoats? Thus a sub like your example would need 5000 upvoats just to be at 0.
SpaceRosa ago
Someone suggested a "True All" that would display all subverses, including those with a downvote restriction. I can't remember if it was noticed or not, but that might be good.
Vloorshad ago
That would actually probably be both an easier and better solution. /v/all could be the default like it is, and /v/trueall (or maybe /v/unfilteredall or /v/rawall)could be one that you subscribe to.