Downvoting restrictions are back (announcements)

submitted ago by Atko

100 CCP is yet again a requirement to downvote and changes I pushed yesterday are now reverted. I spent about 6 hours yesterday reading your comments on my announcement and I think it's pretty clear that majority of you had concerns with removing restrictions. Back to the drawing board I guess. Please accept my apologies for causing the mess.

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

fightforthehive ago

Thank you for listening to community. It gives me great hope about the future of the site.

Arotaes_Forgehammer ago

I feel like we have a chance to break the endless cycle of corporitization and sanitization constructed by Digg and Reddit. Atko and Puttitout are very strong tools for building the social network that we want.

We love you, guys.

ThizzBoss ago

eventually he's going to want to get paid. Everyone wants to make money off their work and get rich young.

Arotaes_Forgehammer ago

Maybe we can pay him rather than the advertisers.

CowWithBeef ago

It would be nice if we could all invest in restricted shares. Community ownership could preserve the spirit of free speech.

NeedleInAHaystack ago

That's a good idea, maybe submit that to /v/ideasforvoat. I would consider it, but I could also see why @atko might want to retain a majority.

CowWithBeef ago

100 ccp you can downvoat, 10,000 ccp you can invest. I think the legal system is entirely unprepared for something like this though.

TIGpro ago

The boardroom would give new meaning to the term "circlejerk".

AtheistComic ago

I would not invest in voat because it is a reddit clone. They would need to change and grow a new delivery method before I invest. I might donate or buy something though.

Tynach ago

Understandable. People forget that investors will only invest if they are reasonably sure that their investment will return more than they put into it, and Voat isn't quite at that stage yet.

They either need to either grow to a fairly large size (perhaps not as large as Reddit, but at least as big as Google+ was before Google forced it on everyone), or create a new, novel system that hasn't been done before (at least, not successfully - as long as the lack of success wasn't directly due to the type of website to begin with).

I say that as a jobless college student who lives with his parents, so perhaps I'm not the best person to give such a statement. However, I have met with business people (and various investor-like people) in the past, and I'd like to think I know roughly how they think.

AtheistComic ago

I think we were mostly looking for something better in policy... And design while important is not critical to policy successes.

Tynach ago

I was thinking not in terms of design, but more in terms of how the website functions. For example, Facebook, Twitter, and Reddit are all considered 'social media' - but how each is used is fundamentally different for each one. From the user interface to the basic database structure, down to what it's used for.