Yes like if they could give a real reason listed in their sidebar that would be justifiable.
The real reason is they spammed and intentionally antagonized the moderator out of nowhere. You are right that "Attitude" isn't a good description. But you are wrong about the ban being a bad move.
now hen you are doing it by breaking sub rules just to cause drama no one wanted to begin with except flaming faggots because only faggots like drama, like you OP.
That's your SUBJECTIVE judgement that he was breaking rules to cause drama, he coulda just been having a laugh. Maybe if it had been ignored he would get tired of poking the sub and move on to the next giggle.
Some subs have standards, it's up to the mods and the actual community to run it as they see fit, which seemed like no one had a problem until an SBBH user started spamming trying to get banned.
I agree the ban description should be changed, but the ban itself is good protection for their sub, although ExpertShitposter has a few more confirmed alts (that I can name) and she can evade it with ease.
Now i'd argue that a ban is unneeded when circumvention is so easy, since the only people a ban would work on are those willing to abide a ban in the first place; which then starts to turn the whole situation into a gun-law analogue.
overall you are correct but what we are dealing with right now is the perception of the sub in question, and it's mods. The same thing will happen whether they gain control of the sub or the sub remains intact as is. They will shitpost on alts making the mods have to over-work hoping to spam them to much they just leave. If they get the sub, it will be spun as "community supported" when they shitpost. We need to make sure SRS/SBBH/PV do not get a hold of yet another high-subscriber subverse so you can see for yourself how they troll when they lose.
The point is Expert sees herself to be a prolific voater and speak for all goats on any manner. She earned the ban and keeping her banned hurts her "ego" if you can even call it that since it's all fake only personas.
view the rest of the comments →
weezkitty ago
Agreed. Banning someone for "attitude" has no place on Voat. Especially not a perma ban. There is no rule on /v/gaming that says "no attitude"
It should be reversed ASAP.
PoetryPete ago
Yes like if they could give a real reason listed in their sidebar that would be justifiable. Spam? Memes? whatever but not attitude.
freshmeat ago
So you agree that the ban was earned, but the reason doesn't sit right with you?
Take your concern trolling back to Reddit and /r/Politics
PoetryPete ago
I do not agree. Where did I agree that the ban was earned?
freshmeat ago
The real reason is they spammed and intentionally antagonized the moderator out of nowhere. You are right that "Attitude" isn't a good description. But you are wrong about the ban being a bad move.
PoetryPete ago
Not intentionally antagonizing the mods is a rule now?! Fuck me I'm in trouble then aren't i?
freshmeat ago
now hen you are doing it by breaking sub rules just to cause drama no one wanted to begin with except flaming faggots because only faggots like drama, like you OP.
PoetryPete ago
That's your SUBJECTIVE judgement that he was breaking rules to cause drama, he coulda just been having a laugh. Maybe if it had been ignored he would get tired of poking the sub and move on to the next giggle.
freshmeat ago
Nah, I don;t think the majority of Voaters want to entertain this sort of faggotry by users like you and Expert.
PoetryPete ago
Faggotry is not against 'The Rules' faggot
freshmeat ago
Some subs have standards, it's up to the mods and the actual community to run it as they see fit, which seemed like no one had a problem until an SBBH user started spamming trying to get banned.
unclejimbo ago
justifiable =/= justified. As it stands the ban is neither of these two things.
freshmeat ago
I agree the ban description should be changed, but the ban itself is good protection for their sub, although ExpertShitposter has a few more confirmed alts (that I can name) and she can evade it with ease.
unclejimbo ago
Now i'd argue that a ban is unneeded when circumvention is so easy, since the only people a ban would work on are those willing to abide a ban in the first place; which then starts to turn the whole situation into a gun-law analogue.
freshmeat ago
overall you are correct but what we are dealing with right now is the perception of the sub in question, and it's mods. The same thing will happen whether they gain control of the sub or the sub remains intact as is. They will shitpost on alts making the mods have to over-work hoping to spam them to much they just leave. If they get the sub, it will be spun as "community supported" when they shitpost. We need to make sure SRS/SBBH/PV do not get a hold of yet another high-subscriber subverse so you can see for yourself how they troll when they lose.
The point is Expert sees herself to be a prolific voater and speak for all goats on any manner. She earned the ban and keeping her banned hurts her "ego" if you can even call it that since it's all fake only personas.