You'll soon realize that the new mod @kwijibo is brain dead. He hasn't made a meaningful post on this investigation in 2 months since being here and doesn't investigate, so he doesn't really understand where the investigation has gone. Not sure where they got him from. Other mods are good though.
But yeah, check out the Pizzagate.Wiki' s pages on the Panama Papers and the Swiss Leaks. There's some good info in there.
I can't find it now - but when we had that post that would setup the moderation rules I specifically asked about allowing money laundering posts, as it shows evidence of crimes. The mods on that post assured me money laundering by actors implicated here would be allowed. You banned one specifically tying the Podestas - the prime focus of this investigation - to the world's largest money laundering scandal - the Panama Papers - committed by Panamanian law firm, Mossack Fonseca.
You also banned a verified article by Snopes about Mel Reynolds - a statutory rapist that Bill Clinton pardoned and Jesse Jackson hired.
This is a simply resolved issue - if you don't know why something is relevant, just ask people to edit their post to state why the post is relevant to the investigation. If they don't respond in a few hours - delete it.
Unfortunately, leaving posts up waiting for editing by OPs will bring down the wrath of Kevdude, who set up the rules. I almost was demodded for doing that -- was told it undermines the rules and the other mods, since the policy is remove the post and let the user repost with the proper explanation. One of the most frustrating parts of this job is having to remove posts that cover topics that are probably legit, but the user hasn't taken the time to explain such that the fulfill the submission guidelines. :-/
The user I banned last night who posted about Fonseca wasn't banned to prevent him from posting about that subject. He kept reposting the same non-compliant post which was filled with 50% mod-bashing, instead of adding the couple of sentences that would have allowed me to leave the post up. You are welcome to look in the removed submissions area to see for yourself.
The reality is, if we do not consistently apply the rules, we will not be able to remove the true shitposts, due to Voat sitewide rules. I tried in my comment the first time I removed his post to explain what he needed to do to make it fulfill the rules, but he was only interested in trying to have his way and call me a shill. Not much I can do about that.
view the rest of the comments →
JrSlimss ago
You'll soon realize that the new mod @kwijibo is brain dead. He hasn't made a meaningful post on this investigation in 2 months since being here and doesn't investigate, so he doesn't really understand where the investigation has gone. Not sure where they got him from. Other mods are good though.
But yeah, check out the Pizzagate.Wiki' s pages on the Panama Papers and the Swiss Leaks. There's some good info in there.
http://pizzagate.wiki/Panama_Papers http://pizzagate.wiki/Swiss_Leaks
Edit: Need to fix your links though - they came out messed up in that post.
Kwijibo ago
@jrSlimss can you point to one post in the "Removed Submissions" (other than your own) that you think is important and should not have been removed?
JrSlimss ago
I can't find it now - but when we had that post that would setup the moderation rules I specifically asked about allowing money laundering posts, as it shows evidence of crimes. The mods on that post assured me money laundering by actors implicated here would be allowed. You banned one specifically tying the Podestas - the prime focus of this investigation - to the world's largest money laundering scandal - the Panama Papers - committed by Panamanian law firm, Mossack Fonseca.
You also banned a verified article by Snopes about Mel Reynolds - a statutory rapist that Bill Clinton pardoned and Jesse Jackson hired.
This is a simply resolved issue - if you don't know why something is relevant, just ask people to edit their post to state why the post is relevant to the investigation. If they don't respond in a few hours - delete it.
@Vindicator
Vindicator ago
Unfortunately, leaving posts up waiting for editing by OPs will bring down the wrath of Kevdude, who set up the rules. I almost was demodded for doing that -- was told it undermines the rules and the other mods, since the policy is remove the post and let the user repost with the proper explanation. One of the most frustrating parts of this job is having to remove posts that cover topics that are probably legit, but the user hasn't taken the time to explain such that the fulfill the submission guidelines. :-/
The user I banned last night who posted about Fonseca wasn't banned to prevent him from posting about that subject. He kept reposting the same non-compliant post which was filled with 50% mod-bashing, instead of adding the couple of sentences that would have allowed me to leave the post up. You are welcome to look in the removed submissions area to see for yourself.
The reality is, if we do not consistently apply the rules, we will not be able to remove the true shitposts, due to Voat sitewide rules. I tried in my comment the first time I removed his post to explain what he needed to do to make it fulfill the rules, but he was only interested in trying to have his way and call me a shill. Not much I can do about that.