I notice over and over articles coming up that you can look at the title an guess that the user is altering them. The recent one today spawning this was "Religion of Peace strikes again as 16 year old girl is burned to death in Pakistan" the actual title of the article is "16-yo girl burnt alive in Pakistan for helping couple elope". This item was 8 hours old when I saw it. I never see a note from the mods on these I have even made a point to alert the mods then check back later and nothing, so I decided to do some looking at the mods comment history for the last week in /v/news
amyacker - 0
forksandgusy - 0
system - 0
Typo - 20
So among them they spend enough time in the sub they mod for one of them to make 20 comments. In 7 days
This was even brought up 6 days ago in /v/newsmods by @unruly https://voat.co/v/newsmods/comments/1013254 and only typo responded.So I have to ask why have the rule about "User-editorialized titles are subject to deletion. State only the facts, not opinions or speculation." if it is never enforced?
Edit: I think I will partly take Typo's advice and just un sub /v/news Do I want heavy modding I'm not sure but I do want the ones that are written to be enforced especially when the mods know the rule is wanted.
view the rest of the comments →
guinness2 ago
Would you @thrus be willing to help as a /v/news mod?
Is there anyone else here that wants to volunteer as a /v/mod?
That's a sincere question: perhaps the four current mods are insufficient because they all have other demands on their time?
That said, I do agree with you: I believe the recent spate of abortion pill advertisement posts is an indication that the current mods are failing to maintain a minimum quality for this sub... which is important to Voat because /v/news is one of the most popular subs!
thrus ago
I don't think I would be a good pick as a mod mainly due to the fact that I browse in my spare time and if something comes up I stay off Voat I also ignore the site on the weekends entirely. being a mod is a commitment and I don't believe that I could hold up my end of it to do an acceptable job.
You may be right and if that is the case they should look for people that are interested in helping out, and look at their history to decide if they are active and post rational comments to try and avoid anyone that will abuse the position. They may have posted elsewhere but I haven't seen them asking for help. Needing help isn't a weakness, ask if it is needed those of us in the community can even help by calling attention to things same as you called me here but when we do that and still get no response or can't see anything happening many hours later we get disillusioned and stop as it seems pointless. I'm more then happy to help out that way but in the past no comment to the OP or response to me either just nothing over and over, so I stopped what felt like wasting my time calling them.
But making a comment a week or so total and holding a mod position (amy 3 comments in the last month, forksandguys the same, system 2 comments total both 10 months ago not sure if this is a person or voat system account through) if that is the time put in is anything gained by having them there vs no one?
guinness2 ago
I absolutely agree!
We need mods who are reliable. I already mod a smaller sub and it does take a lot of thankless time: mostly in keeping up with evens and research.
My question was directed towards you personally but intended to possibly motivate other Voaters to consider the same question of themselves.
Thank you for raising this issue and creating this post because remaining silent won't achieve anything!