The fact that @puttitout banned aged based purely on a brigaded request thread by people who themselves are spammers (and unlike aged their 'spam' wasn't even relevant to the subverse).
Like it's very hard to feel sympathy for someone like /u/aged, but this uneven enforcement is ridiculous, why is /u/theoldones not banned when he spammed /v/gaming constantly with self posts reqursting /u/aged to be banned? Are these relevant to gaming but lewd fanart of adult female game characters is not?
If puttitout can give an explanation of which rule was broken I'd be ok with it, but as it stands "im a dictator lmao" is not an excuse to ban a user.
view the rest of the comments →
PuttItOut ago
I'm glad you made this post now. Because we do need to work to define a new rule about people who disrupt things on purpose.
They abuse the mere fact that we don't typically ban and then shit on everything. Think about the v/aww thing a few months back. That was complete BS.
So how do we phrase this rule?
Octocopter ago
Banning a user out of the blue after listening to a post where the user referred to it as a "subreddit" then making up a reason after that fact. What a joke.
PuttItOut ago
You're a joke. That isn't what happened. I have way more information than you and I chose descretion on openness for discussion purposes. Not a joke.
Octocopter ago
Got your attention enough to trigger you over it, my bet is you are second guessing the way you handled it. So a discussion about changes to the way rules are being applied happening after a ban took place is not how it happened?
How about the Noids like Ghostskin and his alts that spam and shit across multiple subs with post that have fuck all relation to the subs they are posted in? You cant tell me they are less of a Noid than Aged posting tangentially related content to one sub.
You want my input on it? reverse the ban and issue a warning to the rule change and add the side bar to force all remotely possible NSFW content to be flagged as such. IF he breaks any rules after it being updated no one has any right to complain about him being banned.
PuttItOut ago
Well this is a better expression of communication.
Octocopter ago
I am sure you understand mine and others frustration about this well enough.
PuttItOut ago
It's the purpose of the sticky. To facilitate communication about a rather complex subject.
SearchVoatBot ago
This comment was linked from this v/OneTruePutt submission by @PeaceSeeker.
Posted automatically (#29050) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here.
Octocopter ago
Aged should have been banned for posting real children long before this became an issue. All around the world people get banned and even arrested for sharing pictures from those [eastern European modeling agencies] Hell even 4chan in the old days would ban IPs for posting that and they were pretty hardcore in to the freedom of what could be shared and said.
My concern is that the ban was made for a rule not clearly defined. Was it not flagging all his moderately NSFW posts as NSFW, the number of posts made, is 3rd party fan art and other content to be counted as spam, is it some concept that he was doing to target the users of the sub.
Any choice you make on how you define that ruling will impact Voat and I don't like how you did that this time. I have a lot of faith and support for what you have provided for us this just really irks me.
carlip ago
You phrase it as "degree of separation".
A post about a game is 1 degree of separation. A post about a 3rd party game character is 2 degrees of separation.
So just decide how many degrees of separation you want to allow.
Also fuck down vote meanie.
ex-redd ago
I respect you greatly, but I am not a fan of any subjective ban system.
we are all wrong from time to time, and have biases we ourselves are blind to. I like hard-nosed principles, e.g. US constitution, and am less of a fan of more impermanent/less-universal rule making (but such is nessecitated by practicality at times).
I guess you are saying this generally falls under spam, but "spam" has a wide definition.
What were the motivations of u/Aged and v/aww. I know they were karma whores, but Aged did it like a full time job.
I have noticed some users with a lot of CCP, but otherwise very "shill-like" behavior.
Broc_Lia ago
I've finally gotten around to having a look at the stuff he posted and honestly I'm wondering what the fuss is all about. They're not even lolis, unless prepubescent girls have D cup breasts now. Also, the only character I actually recognise is an adult ingame.
Was there more stuff that was so bad it had to be deleted and not even show up in the removed submissions log?
Anyhow, at the very most a new sub specific spam rule might be appropriate. Something like "Users may not make more than five posts of the same type per day, with the exception of news articles."
ex-redd ago
not too much or too bad on v/gaming to my knowledge or in my opinion.
The guy used to post normal ass-and-titty stuff-- I remember something from years ago (a gif of woman jumping/tit-bouncing--it was an enjoyable, not really even NSFW, thing to see [by all accounts normal]).
Then, all of a sudden loli shit starts showing up on v/all en masse. u/Aged posting to the loli sub. I really don't get it.
Broc_Lia ago
Like I said, if there were a "no loli shit" rule for /v/gaming then I wouldn't mind that. Just saying that what I've seen of his posting here so far is pretty mild.
frenemy ago
the problem with this is who decides if it's sexualised? what if it's original game art that depicts a young looking girl in a skin tight suit? is it porn then? i would point at skullgirls as an example. that rule would make the entire game persona non grata in v/gaming.
Broc_Lia ago
That doesn't look sexualised to me, but I acknowledge that it's a subjective term. I don't think there's a perfectly objective solution here, that one's just a reasonably good one that seems to work well for a lot of other online art communities.
frenemy ago
haha you didn't see the screenshot did you. here you go
that's a bannable offense now.
Broc_Lia ago
Imgoat's cert is expired. Do you still have it saved somewhere?
Talc ago
The answer to HOW should be to invite community input, try make rules without loopholes and without overreach, same as any other rule.
More important than HOW, is WHEN do we phrase this rule.
phrase it BEFORE you use it. At worst this would mean putting up with the miscreants for a day or two longer. The opposite will cause pointed fingers of mistrust which will last years. There's plenty of people queueing up for the first opportunity to wave a finger at voat. Perhaps you should "mea culpa" and undo any pre-emptive bans you made under a rule which did not exist. Make the rule, give the miscreants the opportunity to obey it, also gives them enough rope to hang themselves under the new rule. Pretty sure you'll be re-doing the same bans within days, but at least it's all documented above board and beyond suspicion.
Wahaha ago
Just unban him. The content was fine and ontopic. There doesn't need to be another rule. But maybe consider banning the niggerfaggots complaining all day about this. They are kind of obnoxious with their spamming.
frenemy ago
the problem is that you took action before a rule was in place. now it looks like you will do whatever you want, regardless of any free speech ideology the site may have had, then make up reasons for doing so after the fact. it's perceived as being really slimy. at least from where i sit.
frenemy ago
i think we should ban people i don't like too.
Podd ago
Voat is the free speech place on the internet. So I can understand Laurentius viewpoint. However, if I were in your shoes Putt i'd have done the same thing. Maybe the solution is adding an option to block a user and their submissions right next to the option to save a post or thread.
Having to click someones name and then opening a new page and then clicking block is too much work for most people. lol.
TopShelfPrivilege ago
I don't know specifically about the rule regarding aged, but I propose another new rule against being intentionally obtuse in bad faith and banning Laurentius_the_pyro under that rule.
Laurentius_the_pyro ago
If you really can't stand alone disagreeing with you on the internet then maybe you should go back to Reddit.
TopShelfPrivilege ago
I've been here longer than you have you whiny little bitch. You failing to see the difference between aged, who was participating in bad faith (similar to how you're being a fucking retard in bad faith right now) and something that actually matters just proves my point. Kindly choke on a dick and die.
TheBuddha ago
If you're going to be that subjective, and you may need to, then I'd suggest an entirely new rule.
"Making Putt clean up after you."
I may be drinking, but right now that idea seems pretty good. Don't cause drama by doing stupid shit that makes the admin have to pay attention. Ideally, the admin shouldn't even know most usernames. If you know their username, they're probably a problem.
Granted, I much prefer a hands off/minimal approach, but I'm not the one that gets hundreds of retarded pings every day.
I wish you luck! If you need a picture of a middle finger and help burning the place to the ground, let me know!
Broc_Lia ago
Two problems:
Putt's intervention arguably wasn't necessary here
That effectively makes it ok for putt to delete anything then ban the user because he had to clean up after them. The whole point of this is to have clear rules about what kind of content should be removed and under what circumstances users can be banned.
TheBuddha ago
Also, I responded twice. Now three times!
I do what I want!
Broc_Lia ago
None of your purple-glitter-shitposts here Buddha :P
TheBuddha ago
Yeah, but he does have a great deal of history of making good choices.
This is one that I can't agree with, but I doubt it is a trend or slippery slope. I have pretty good expectations from Putt and he hasn't failed much.
I really, really don't agree with his choice this time. Calling it spam really bends those rules.
Broc_Lia ago
I'm not ragging on putt too much, I don't think it was a disasterously bad decision or anything, just don't personally disagree with it. In fairness he's acknowledged that there's controversy and he's trying to put solid rules in place. That's more than any reddit shitmin would do.
TheBuddha ago
Absolutely. I don't think it's the start of a new trend or anything.
frenemy ago
the first time is the hardest. i would suggest a reread of animal farm. this never goes well.
'some animals are more equal than others.'
TheBuddha ago
I'm well aware. I am, for example, pretty much above rules and law. It's just reality and I don't try to abuse my privilege. (I have a few bucks and am devilishly handsome!)
But...
@PuttItOut has a history of making good choices and working his ass off for this site. So, I doubt it's a slippery slope.
Again, I don't agree with this decision - for the reasons I've made clear in my other posts. But, it's not my job to agree, nor is it his job to care what I think.
Finally, this is Putt. He's a grown adult male. He will think about this. If he changes his mind, he will do so openly and let folks know he felt his decision was made in haste/whatever. He's been pretty fucking good at being an admin on a site filled with idiots. I have some trust in his decision making skills and a great deal of trust in his openness. He'll man up, if he needs to change it. I'm nearly positive of this.
Hell, you've been here longer than I have! (I just hovered over your username!) You know damned well that he has a good history AND that he's able to change his mind. I have some trust in him.
frenemy ago
so i have a second hand promise that things won't get worse. excuse me if i don't take you at your word.
even if he does change his mind, at this point a lot of damage has already been done. free speech is not a guiding principle here while this happens. that's stealing trust from a subset of users. it didn't have to go that way.
i truly hope you are right. there aren't many places for people like me to speak our minds. it would be a true loss if this one was no longer trustworthy.
TheBuddha ago
You don't have my promise of anything. You do have my expectations explained. It's just that, and nothing more.
Don't get me wrong, I absolutely don't agree with Putt's decision here. As much as I'm not really happy with @aged's content, my view is that he violated no specific rules. To me, it seems like folks finally got what they wanted and 'spam' is just the justification used after the fact.
"Let's hang him now. We'll find him guilty of something tomorrow."
That's what it seems like to me.
I think it was a bad action. I don't think it sets a bad precedent, because history shows us Putt makes good choices the overwhelming majority of the time. I think it's a singular error, but I could be wrong. I'd like to think Putt has been a pretty good defender of the liberty of free speech. At the end of the day, he's still human and mistakes will be made.
I guess I'm suggesting we sharpen our pitchforks, but not yet openly brandish them. We could maybe sit on the porch and sharpen them where we can be observed, just to make sure we know they know our intentions!
frenemy ago
well, we agree it's a bad action now. maybe that's good enough for this situation.
TheBuddha ago
If we use that link, it wasn't spam,
Laurentius_the_pyro ago
Maybe an announcement or stick post would be a good idea to get the communities input on this?
PuttItOut ago
No Noids. Lol, since nulls are... Well... null, the term noid sounds funny. It's something I could hear a first year com science student call a null.
Noid: Repetitive, low value, low effort submissions that do not get much interaction.
But aren't we back at Spam now?
White_pride_cis ago
Yeah, I have to agree with OP on this one. But, there needs to be a clear definition of what spam is. Go to QRV, and the whole place is literally verbal diarrhea, caps lock, and non-weaponized autism. It fits your definition to a “T”, so are you going to ban that whole sub?
Laurentius_the_pyro ago
maybe... but at the same time aren't 'noids' the kind of thing that would be handled via downvoats in a system sub? (as some/many of aged's posts were, while others were popular).
PuttItOut ago
Aged is a mild example of this, v/aww was the extreme side of it.
Even heavily down voted content is a nuiciance, especially on subs people often sort by new.
AR47 ago
Then here is a real idea.
Make each sub have a threshold limit of downvotes before a user is extremely limited to submit content. Sure they can comment, but ain’t that the freedom of speech aspect?
This way you can also see who is brigading posts as well from your admin side somehow? I don’t know how your technical shit works or even the terminology really, but I do know people, and they will use this feature to eventually try to get specific users from posting within their subverses.
Honestly it is a good way that allows the subverse to decide who gets what.
Obrez ago
I'm not sure I'm up to speed with what happened over at v/aww, (gore spam getting banned/removed for unrelated?) anyway I think it sucks but case by case is how such rules against low effort content aught to go and "low effort" should be defined somewhere in detail for each sub, I'd be wary of banning "subversive" content though as tempting as that is it could back fire easily.
I don't think it's going to cause a real stink if users doing some fucky shit, like aged exploiting the lax rules of v/gaming, for whatever ends, require implementation of new, reasonable rules designed to prevent their fuckery, but even still there is some satisfaction in seeing aged getting downvoated for his narrowly related smut.
You do a fine job at all of this, us niggers are just jumpy like battered wives.
Schreiber ago
Those aww faggots like gabara and co were forum sliding and using gore as an excuse.
The whole aww subverse should just be made private. It's a retarded circle jerk garbage that is exact same shit as reddit version and has no purpose whatsoever but for fags to farm votes by reposting aww shit from other place.
Laurentius_the_pyro ago
I'd argue that aged posts and the /v/aww situation aren't really that similar, otherthan "lots of posts people don't like".
In the /v/aww situation the posts were antithetical to the purpose of the sub, nobody thinks a severed head is "cute".
While in aged's case the posts were technically on-topic as they were of video game characters and the sidebar/rules didn't say anything to exempt this from being on topic.
Fair point. I was initially thinking of auto minimizing posts below below a certain amount of SCP like how comments work but with how little space any specific post takes up on a page already It probably wouldn't make a big difference to just ignoring posts you don't like.
Perhaps if there was the optional (opt-in on the users part?) to completely hide posts below a certain amount of SCP, possibly with a button on the page to reveal all the hidden posts? maybe it's worthy of putting up for discussion so the community can look for any flaws in the idea I may have missed?
TheUltimateQuakerII ago
Aged posts belong in v/TheAnimeReich not here. Loli shit isn't "gaming".
theoldones ago
i can think of about ten ways to abuse that rule for shilling against a target, immediately.
UsedToBeCujoQuarrel ago
I'd like to point out that one of the big abusers of this board is the idiot GhostSkin and his alts. He goes in fits shitting all over the place with spam. Then he changes his user name.
Would banning his IP work?
Laurentius_the_pyro ago
IP bans are a meme, anyone over the age of 9 can evade one.
UsedToBeCujoQuarrel ago
Yeah. But GhostSkin appears to be so stupid he might not be able.
Itty-bitty_Tity-trap ago
IP bans don't work.
UsedToBeCujoQuarrel ago
Ninja Assassins then
theoldones ago
amend the spam rule to cover obvious trolling, as well as commercial interests?
Laurentius_the_pyro ago
you mean like Valve changing their polciy to only ban games that were "outright trolling" but then became even more arbitrary with their bans?
PuttItOut ago
This is a very good point.
Laurentius_the_pyro ago
I know this isn't a situation that's easy to figure out.
theoldones ago
i'm hearing a lot of complaints out of your mouth but zero counter-suggestions.