You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

6941586? ago

  1. Title/picture only posts with no explanation

This is an investigation, explain how your submission is linked in. Dont be lazy.

This is fine.

  1. Zero tolerance for spam

Spam posts will be deleted and users banned.

This is weird. And is one of a couple of ways cancer mods on reddit spread, and started to justify abuse with automod.

Define spam. Generally speaking, copypasta, where the same text body or comments can be identified, and be a true/false value that either readers or other mods can easily verify. If an antisemitic user is actually engaging in debate, on topic with #pizzagate, and not just copy/pasting arguments, if it is unwanted by the community, they should be downvoted by the community.

AKA you should be able to identify "amalek" spam on sight, but if amalek is actually on one of his medicated days, he should not be banned until he starts acting up with multiple links/copy comments.

  1. Concern trolling posts will be deleted unless substantiated or adding significant value

This is weird. Because precisely a mod can go "this one this week adds enough value" and "this one this week does not". And honestly, if it gets upvoted, it should by definition, be adding value, and if it is downvoted, not adding value, so it doesn't need to be a rule by itself.

Crensch ago

https://voat.co/v/ProtectVoat/1438543/6941681

I think things will be just fine.

6942654? ago

Haha, the fact that your link can pretty much be used as a shit/spam litmus test moving forward is great.

In a sub called "pizzagate" about discovering things about the pedophile ring, submissions not about the pedophile ring are being removed.

Or put another way, I like your edit of ""Posts not about PIZZAGATE specifically will be removed. Unfounded, outlandish connections will be removed. EVERY new claim needs a valid, clear source. While some hypothesis and guesses are good to have, things about races, religions, (besides possibly satanic stuff,) and other unfounded or non-useful generalizations are not relevant to this investigation."".

kingkongwaswrong ago

Thanks for thought out feedback, I appreciate it.

I think we're gonna make some modifications to the concern trolling one, and make a single thread for concerns. That means people can discuss and voice concerns and we can address them, but they don't clutter the sub with duplicates. Thoughts?

6941957? ago

they don't clutter the sub with duplicates

If that's something you want, then define something like a timeframe/user posts/and it kind of goes back to defining spam.

I also really like /v/gaming way of handling their own rules. Their own post. But what sets them up to be decent voaters is that they have one pretty harsh rule, which is that titles are defined in a specific way, but @ChillyHellion, and others on their team, have always kept an internal method of if they miss a post in a time period/it gets a certain amount of upvotes, they just comment as a mod, restating the rule, but not touching the post itself. It means that if you have a spam rule of "no duplicate posts, and that include text posts with no further information, new links, then a previous post within the same hour/whatever", it means that pretty much all mods can be consistent in their janitorial roles.

That being said, each verse is different. /v/fatpeoplehate for instance is harsh on its draconian rules, and they have set themselves up as an exception on how mods operate on voat, as opposed to the rule. There are also some pretty old communities that are +1.4 years old, that still have "no bigotry" rules, and had to clarify themselves to /v/whatever or /v/protectvoat. This shit has been going on for some time. However, one of the most defining moments in the past with mods on voat was the "cupcake" incident, where one mod got called out for being a cupcake/special snowflake, and then went on a banning spree. The reason why even /v/android has gotten rid of its "be nice to eachother" rule.

End of the day, you're going have to justify when you use your rules, and the more hand-wavey, open to interpretation they are, the more likely they are to be abused. EDIT: Words.

kingkongwaswrong ago

true. The current set of rules are a draft I guess, they need to be further defined and locked down. We'll iterate on them and continue to open them up to feedback so we can get to a good place. Thanks for your thought out comment.