PS. [SUGGESTION] - like in the other thread, recommend that you an an edit to note that RULE3 has already been deleted :)

Pinging @Atko and @PuttItOut to keep you guys in the loop. Sorry for the kerfuffle; I know you guys have been pinged a lot in the past 24 hours.

That would probably work best. Thanks Reacher!

AlphaWookie isn't so bad, all-in-all: https://voat.co/v/ProtectVoat/comments/1211404/5987617

I'm enormously put off by having public discussion about individual proposed bans. I don't know if you've ever seen a wikipedia arbcom drama, but it's probably the most neurotic, cringy, spergy drama you can imagine.

1. you rock. epic modding.

2. thank you.

3. no fuck blocking. it's single-serve reverse user-user shadowbanning and that's a form of censorship, thus it's only PARTIALLY freeze peach, not freeze peach, which means no freeze peach which means there would be no reason to stay on voat. freeze peach or nuthin'.

edit: on rule 3: whatever the community consensus is is what it ought be. it's a default sub. a community thing, just like you said :)

Haha! You Dick!1!! Too funny, Reacher :D, lmao

I sincerely appreciate the positive feedback :) waking up to an inbox full of hate was a shock, and my only thought at the time was how it might affect the /v/gaming community. It's a lousy feeling to feel like I've simultaneously let people down and put the community I love in the line of fire. /v/gaming has always been great to me, and I will continue to do all I can to respect each and every one of you.

You've channeled my thoughts on brigading to a T. And you're right that doxxing is already in the TOS. The TOS does expressly require mods to enforce the site-wide rules (including doxxing), but that's no reason for us to double-cover a site-wide rule in the sidebar.

I personally think while we can get rid of the doxing and brigading sections (Only the admins can really prove that inconclusively, anyways), the harrassment section should stay. Obviously, my opinion seems to be in the minority, but if it is obvious a particular user is following around another particular user for the sole purpose of griefing that particular user, that the mods should be able to step in and do something about it. In that vein, I think the harrassment rule should stay...with the caveat that the mod team and community formulate a specific definition of "harrassment".

That's just my $0.02

I do, but I'm adament about going through each comment and replying personally. It's taking a long time, and I apologize if I miss a few.

I had noticed the comments in the last couple of weeks and was ok with the ban at first. I got involved in the discussion thread and had my mind changed.

That whole thread was great and full of people with totally different opinions talking through the issue, not being dicks about it and generally acting like adults.

Then we get this, a mod modding the way it should be done.

Its so refreshing and great to see happening.

I love Voat.

Gaming has mods? Why?

I think that's an excellent suggestion!

Edit: You've inspired me: https://voat.co/v/ideasforvoat/comments/1211887

We all have our own point of view. I understand that some times mods, just like everyone else, can be shitty people. I watch PV, pulse of the users and all that. I generally stay out of it because it rarely has much effect on me. My feelings are that everyone has free speech down in the sewers, but no one likes to wade through knee deep shit rivers to hear them. If a tree falls in a forest of trolls...

Don't worry, when I feel that I have something to add and that it might be heard, I will, and do, speak out.

I appreciate the feedback! Part of rule 3 was mainly not wanting people to have an inbox flooded with comments if they pick up a stalker - that's why "sustained" is in the criteria, so collapsing the comment or downvoating it doesn't resolve that issue. But it's also a situation that happens fairly infrequently since I've been here.

I think that's a good perspective to have. I don't expect the community to have to vote on every rule violation (that's what moderators are for) but if the community decides that harassment isn't a big deal, we can strike that rule asap and play it by ear. /v/gaming's rules evolve with the community and are regularly put up for review. I appreciate you and everyone who chooses to weigh in as a part of the community's decisions.

It is an interesting idea but I don't see it working well. using myself as an example, if someone wants to argue with me I'm happy to do so (some days more then others) but if they are so into an internet argument that they create a specific post to continue it or insult me or even go on a downvoating campaign against me I'm just going to laugh to myself and go on with my day.

I do not disagree with your goal, simply the way in which you go about it.

Your opinion just as good as anyone else around here bud. Don't think otherwise

Awesome. Baby sitter mods are the worst.

I take back my hateful remarks.

If only some people would stop holding them up as such...

That is an old idea it is called the free market place of ideas.

We wouldnt even need the rule if the block feature was implemented. We've been asking for it for a year at least T_T

AGREE, Rule 3 should be removed.

_{And thank you for the ban removals and the open discussion :)}

Feelings have no part of it. It's the discussion of a thread being filled with comments not related at all to the topic. When it gets to a point where its basically spam, there is a problem that needs to be addressed. This is why it was brought to us in the first place, because of the constant sustained harassment in several of our threads.

Good job reversing. I say keep the rule but get some community feedback first? Only thing I can think of right now. Spam will happen more and more as Voat grows so there needs to be guidelines. I like this sub. Not very active but I voat a lot.

OP it depend. If you want to referee personal disagreement with users and think you can do so in a way that result in both users staying and both sides agreeing to apologize and sticking with there apology then rule 3 should stay. If you do not want the work let it go and the community do its thing.

Testing to see if I am still censored.

Somehow I missed everything that happened.

Maybe all that's really needed is a clear example on the rules page about what specifically falls under sustained and abusive messages. I mean, it's the internet. Shit gets salty. If two people are really having at it over PM, or contained to a single post, let them at it. To me it only crosses a line when one of them follows the other everywhere else on voat, and starts getting into crazy arguments everywhere. You get into an argument on /v/politics, and they follow you into /v/games calling you a filthy Trump/Hillary supporter while you're trying to talk about how much you hate DLC.

I do not agree with removing or suspending rule 3. There are occasions, rare as they may be, that we need to enforce this rule. We have a large subverse and it will happen. Harrassing commenters does not add anything to /v/gaming discussion in most cases and should be warned and/or removed.

While I disagree with the reversal I applaud your actions and responsible disposition.

I would agree that if you feel doxxing/brigading are fully covered without rule #3 and you (the mods of v/gaming) are trying to step back from the "harassment" restrictions, then the rule doesn't make sense.

Fuck'em, let the trolls get downvoated to hell for not adding anything to the discussion and keep your hands clean/head off the witchhunt lists.