I agree, and this is pretty much what I said myself yesterday in a group PM regarding the issue. I can't stand behind policing the sub, and I think enforcing the Voat User Agreement is the job of Voat ownership; we're mods, and our job is to enforce rules agreed on by our community.
With that being said, while I will not support banning @PizzagateBot for violating the Voat User Agreement, I will support banning him for spamming if he keeps this copypaste vigilantism up. There's a difference between wanting to provide information for the citizen investigation, and aggressively pushing your own narrative.
Just to make it crystal clear, since my main purpose here is archiving content, I will not have my comments removed, nor be banned, for providing archive/screenshot links to user deleted content?
Using an archival bot account will not grant you special privileges in this sub, especially seeing how you use said bot account for slipping in your own normative opinions, essentially hijacking the unique visibility of your account and misusing community trust.
I would like to ask you to refrain from using the bot for anything that's not the bot's business, and also from spamming the same information over and over again. If you can properly source it, post and discuss it once, and then move on. I do understand that you tried doing that and your submission was removed, however, it is my understanding that it was removed for insufficient sourcing as opposed to a violation of the Voat User Agreement. You received your warnings for violating the Voat User Agreement, this was, in my opinion, incorrect. You should have received the warnings for spamming.
I don't pretend to understand the whole of this dispute, but Bot seems to provide a useful service for anyone who wants to deep mine a submission, providing related links - possibly the same as may be found from a search.
Also the links are archived so "preserving history" although some folks might want bits to disappear.
You might consider stepping back from what appears to be heavy handedness on a "free speech" site, I myself frequently archive submission threads - usually to preserve any information there rather than particular comments that might later be deleted, but I have on one occasion that I recall done it to preserve someone's comment. Comment deleted sets one wondering sometimes.
view the rest of the comments →
wecanhelp ago
I agree, and this is pretty much what I said myself yesterday in a group PM regarding the issue. I can't stand behind policing the sub, and I think enforcing the Voat User Agreement is the job of Voat ownership; we're mods, and our job is to enforce rules agreed on by our community.
With that being said, while I will not support banning @PizzagateBot for violating the Voat User Agreement, I will support banning him for spamming if he keeps this copypaste vigilantism up. There's a difference between wanting to provide information for the citizen investigation, and aggressively pushing your own narrative.
Using an archival bot account will not grant you special privileges in this sub, especially seeing how you use said bot account for slipping in your own normative opinions, essentially hijacking the unique visibility of your account and misusing community trust.
I would like to ask you to refrain from using the bot for anything that's not the bot's business, and also from spamming the same information over and over again. If you can properly source it, post and discuss it once, and then move on. I do understand that you tried doing that and your submission was removed, however, it is my understanding that it was removed for insufficient sourcing as opposed to a violation of the Voat User Agreement. You received your warnings for violating the Voat User Agreement, this was, in my opinion, incorrect. You should have received the warnings for spamming.
My views and interpretation are open to be challenged, @Vindicator, @Crensch, @Millennial_Falcon, @sensitive, @nnfx.
Silverlining ago
I don't pretend to understand the whole of this dispute, but Bot seems to provide a useful service for anyone who wants to deep mine a submission, providing related links - possibly the same as may be found from a search.
Also the links are archived so "preserving history" although some folks might want bits to disappear.
You might consider stepping back from what appears to be heavy handedness on a "free speech" site, I myself frequently archive submission threads - usually to preserve any information there rather than particular comments that might later be deleted, but I have on one occasion that I recall done it to preserve someone's comment. Comment deleted sets one wondering sometimes.
@Vindicator, @Crensch, @Millennial_Falcon, @sensitive, @PizzagateBot