You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

frenemy ago

i disagree. it was a bad move down a slippery slope. censorship is censorship.

you have had a justice boner for aged for months. last time you did this shit, putt said it was allowed even if he didn't like it. then you had a nervous breakdown. now it seems that it just takes is putt agreeing that he doesn't like content to get a user banned from a system sub. i think that's a huge step backwards. definitely not in line with the spirit of the site. not unless we are no longer about free speech.

honestly, this whole thing was badly handled.

sguevar ago

Unfortunately I disagree with your position.

The reason why I say this is because even if the posts are about gaming characters it is not related to gaming because it is not about the games perse but the "art" (quotes are because the known pedophile u/Aged is just posting images that are in ost of them sexualized kid characters) work of those games.

Said user can go ahead and post his degenerate content on the subverse that is for posting lolicom.

Rule 1 - Submissions must be related to gaming.

Art work is not related to gaming.

What you're encouraged to post: Games! We should talk about games more than anything! New releases, old favorites, Speed Runs, Let's Play's, development news, what we love, what we hate and so on and so forth.

Try to post things that create discussion. We want people to feel engaged and feel their voices are heard, rather than to be a place of disposable content.

u/Aged was spamming continuous lolicom images without generating discussion at all about a game in specific. He was in fact posting disposable content.

frenemy ago

all the content you don't like is disposable. to you.

what we love, what we hate and so on and so forth.

how on earth are his posts not covered by that blanket statement? how much are you willing to twist words instead of just making up a new rule? why is that so hard to admit? maybe v/gaming needs a new rule.... but banning a user for not really doing anything other than be mildly annoying is a shitty precedent.

sguevar ago

all the content you don't like is disposable. to you.

No discussion generated by the user that was spamming pictures of lolicom and were not gaming related.

how on earth are his posts not covered by that blanket statement?

Art work is not related to gaming. Why is it so hard for you to understand?

how much are you willing to twist words instead of just making up a new rule?

Nobody is twisting words here. I basing my entire premise on the rules of the subverse. Art doesn't equate to gaming.

why is that so hard to admit?

Why are you projecting your stubbornness to others? How is art work related to gaming?

but banning a user for not really doing anything other than be mildly annoying is a shitty precedent.

The user was spamming. All subverses are to respect the Voat global rules. The user wasn't respecting the spam rule. Got banned for spamming. You can check the ban log and see the reason.

frenemy ago

the artwork was of gaming characters. it was relevant to the sub. you can complain he was spamming but it doesn't hold a lot of water. i've seen no proof the v/gaming has suffered at all for it... other than this shit, obviously. i think we should err on the side of free speech here. all that requires is making a rule that fixes the problem without specifically targeting that one user. if fan art isn't wanted in v/gaming then make that a rule. done. no free speech issues, no complaints. it's like people are trying to make this hard on purpose.

sguevar ago

the artwork was of gaming characters.

Still not gaming related.

it was relevant to the sub.

No it wasn't. If the sub had the rule specifying that art work is included then yes. Gaming is about playing games, describing the games, the updates of said games, news about the games, espors, new techs to play the game, etc.

Art work is not about gaming.

Now had the user initiated a discussion like how is art work related to gaming or something like that one could argue that the discussion is related to gaming because of the fact that is expressing the relevance of the art work in the game development. But what the user was doing wasn't related to gaming at all and it was spamming.

you can complain he was spamming but it doesn't hold a lot of water.

According to your perception of the matter but a majority of the sub users do not agree with you.

i've seen no proof the v/gaming has suffered at all for it

Spamming doesn't necessarily means it hurts the sub but it can be as you stated middly annoying.

other than this shit, obviously. i think we should err on the side of free speech here.

We do. I do personally defend the fact that as his posts are legal he is more than welcome to post them on the lolicom subs. Even if I dislike his degenerate nature, he has specifics subs to post that shit there. Why coming here to take advantage of a sub that has a lot of users if not to create discord amongst the users?

all that requires is making a rule that fixes the problem without specifically targeting that one user.

The user didn't respect neither rule 1 nor spam global rule. Additionally he never generated any discussion thread in here. He simply was spamming pictures all over the place, because that is what he does.

if fan art isn't wanted in v/gaming then make that a rule.

Fan art doesn't equate to gaming. Fan art = art work, have the user create a subverse about fan art and so on and so forth.

it's like people are trying to make this hard on purpose.

Actually the one making it complicated is you. I don't see why is it so hard to understand that the content the user was posting wasn't gaming related as well as I don't see why they user doesn't create a sub for fan art. The fact that you defend a known pedophile here at Voat to allow hiim to spam a subverse with his degenerate content just because he is posting lolicom pictures of game related characters is beyond me.

He never addresses for example why those characters are his favorites or why he prefers them to play with. He simply spams pictures without generating discussion besides the fact that we don't appreciate his degeneracy here.

frenemy ago

Art work is not about gaming.

obviously this is an opinion. so fuck your opinion. i think it is. there's no rule that says different.

According to your perception of the matter but a majority of the sub users do not agree with you.

so you've asked all of them? counted votes maybe... no? didn't think so. also, when was it that we made our standard 'what the majority wants' for banning a user?

Spamming doesn't necessarily means it hurts the sub but it can be as you stated middly annoying.

i think we agree on that.

The user didn't respect neither rule 1 nor spam global rule. Additionally he never generated any discussion thread in here. He simply was spamming pictures all over the place, because that is what he does.

i say he did respect rule 1. art of gaming characters is gaming related. obviously this is opinion again. i have a different one than you. that makes the rules the final arbiter. there is no rule against fan art or limiting the sub away from it.

Fan art doesn't equate to gaming. Fan art = art work, have the user create a subverse about fan art and so on and so forth.

i don't agree with you. you don't get to classify everything you don't like as off topic.

He never addresses for example why those characters are his favorites or why he prefers them to play with.

is that required on voat now? do i have to give a statement of intent when i post so as not to offend you?

The fact that you defend a known pedophile here at Voat to allow hiim to spam a subverse with his degenerate content just because he is posting lolicom pictures of game related characters is beyond me.

and fuck you for making me do it. i don't care for it, but i have to stick by what i think is right, not what is easy.

sguevar ago

obviously this is an opinion. so fuck your opinion. i think it is. there's no rule that says different.

I should argue the same about yours which is why I am wrecking your entire justification of artwork being related to gaming.

so you've asked all of them? counted votes maybe... no? didn't think so. also, when was it that we made our standard 'what the majority wants' for banning a user?

Why don't you do a poll then. Link it to the subverse and give an specific time frame for the poll to be active. Then share your results. How about that?

i think we agree on that.

Glad to hear.

i say he did respect rule 1. art of gaming characters is gaming related. obviously this is opinion again. i have a different one than you. that makes the rules the final arbiter. there is no rule against fan art or limiting the sub away from it.

Then I can argue there isn't one arguing in favour of fanart or artwork on a gaming subverse just because of the mere fact that is about a game character.

is that required on voat now? do i have to give a statement of intent when i post so as not to offend you?

On the what do we encourage you to post it specifies that discussion is the reason of the posts here. He never generated any discussion about any game which leads me to believe he doesn't even play games besides the lolicom games he finds online. He is more than welcome to post discussion about those games but he doesn't even do that.

Offend me? Do I look like a triggered sjw to you when I am arguing with you rationally and objectively. I clearly stated that despite the fact that I don't like the nature of the posts he makes he is more than welcome to post them in the lolicom subs because they are legal.

But his posts are not gaming related.

and fuck you for making me do it. i don't care for it, but i have to stick by what i think is right, not what is easy.

Again I will argue that to you for not recognizing what is gaming and what is not. artwork is not gaming. Why don't you define then what is gaming?

frenemy ago

I should argue the same about yours which is why I am wrecking your entire justification of artwork being related to gaming.

the simple fact that we have to argue it should give you a hint as to who is right. game art. think about it for a second.

Again I will argue that to you for not recognizing what is gaming and what is not. artwork is not gaming. Why don't you define then what is gaming?

anything related to gaming. that seems like a good start. that includes photos of cosplay game characters, game figurines, game videos, game screenshots game reviews and yes, drawn game characters. easy. unless it obviously has nothing to do with gaming, no one should have a say in what another speaks.

you're not going to convince me that game art isn't gaming related. plenty of other users would agree with that statement i think.

sguevar ago

he simple fact that we have to argue it should give you a hint as to who is right. game art. think about it for a second.

what is gaming?

Rule 1 states content has to be gaming related not game related.

you're not going to convince me that game art isn't gaming related. plenty of other users would agree with that statement i think.

Not most of them.

I answered this to another user:

I am a gamer. As a gamer I know gaming is about the functionality of the games, the updates, the bugs, game strategies, characters profiles/abilities, esports, computer specs to support a specific game, game consoles, game storylines, etc.

frenemy ago

Rule 1 states content has to be gaming related not game related.

that's semantics and you know it. i'll call it 'gaming art' then.

Not most of them.

again, that is not the standard we use on this site. 'most people' don't matter when it comes to our main principle. some things are sacred.

sguevar ago

again, that is not the standard we use on this site.

Well I will address it in this way: both of the posts made on v/gaming front page https://voat.co/v/gaming/3104140 and https://voat.co/v/gaming/3104737 have a higher voting ration than this one: https://voat.co/v/gaming/3104703

Also the upvote and downvote ratio is way higher on the first two than the third one.

So as you can see I am basing my statements on quantifiable evidence. But if you want make a poll for an specific amount of time and then post the results.

frenemy ago

you're missing the point. there's contention about the posts. some people think they are good and should be there. who are you to tell them different?

sguevar ago

No but I will base my opinion on my own experience as a gamer and the fact that the majority of the community find the user's posts as spamming.

Laurentius_the_pyro ago

Tyranny of the majority isn't a good argument.

You can't redefine the wording of the rules to target a specific user.

The only way to ban aged would be to amend the rules to ban fanart posts or nsfw posts, and that would need to be done BEFORE a ban.

under the current rules his posts are objectively not rule breaking.

sguevar ago

You can't redefine the wording of the rules to target a specific user.

You are doing just that to defend the user's spamming. Artwork and fanart is not gaming.

under the current rules his posts are objectively not rule breaking.

I beg to differ. Artwork and fanart is not gaming related. Rule 1 was broken and he engaged zero times with the gaming community on any discussion and spammed the sub around.

But I think we have reached another impasse here.

Laurentius_the_pyro ago

Artwork and fanart is not gaming.

fanart of games is gaming related.

frenemy ago

again, a majority doesn't matter. that's not how free speech works.