@kevdude @Vindicator @VictorSteinerDavion
Post in question
@Millennial_Falcon cited rule 3 for removal, so I'm going to operate as if that's the litmus test here.
All titles must adequately describe post content and must establish direct relevance to pizzagate.
All the title does is list 4 things, one being pizzagate. It insinuates a link, but does not say for sure, or how, or through what new source or info.
Still, possibly acceptable on its own merits if we take the insinuation into account.
EACH link in your post must include a description of content and how the link relates to the post
I rest my case.
view the rest of the comments →
letsdothis1 ago
Order, order !
In that case, I better go and sort out the title of my latest post :-)
Crensch ago
If that's all you got from my OP, you have bigger issues than how you format your post.
letsdothis1 ago
First, let me just say that I appreciate that you guys are looking into this.
I thought that if you read through my threads it should be clear how it fits together. I appreciate sometimes though that the linking may be not too obvious if you don't follow this forum closely. I'm always happy to clarify if that is the case. However to delete an entire post without the opportunity makes it difficult to bring it back.
Also, summarizing a complicated thread can be very difficult - personally I think it's unnecessary and just creates a 'dumbing down' effect. Also, sometimes it is not possible for a researcher to weave a whole story together and that's the whole point of posting on here, to crowdsource information. It's usually quite obvious which posters are genuinely trying to pull information together as opposed to the posters who are here to clutter up the forum with rubbish.
My 2 cents.
Crensch ago
It is not my, or anyone else's, job to read through all your threads in order to make sense of your most recent one. That's the whole point of the rules of this subverse - that anyone can pick up the torch with minimal starting effort and confusion.
New people, battle-fatigued-but-returning, casual observers... you claim Voat looks awful for deleted threads getting linked elsewhere on the net, but you appeal to such a small group that require a very esoteric knowledge of the subject. How do you reconcile that?
Copy -> Paste -> Edit -> Submit.
How difficult is that?
How much more difficult is it for a mod to coddle rulebreakers and "warn" then "check back" on them later? What is this, preschool?
So you like it when most people can't follow your work. Good to know.
THE WHOLE POINT OF THIS SUBVERSE IS TO WEAVE THAT WEB TOGETHER SO PEOPLE CAN READ AND UNDERSTAND IT AND MAKE CONNECTIONS AND INVESTIGATE WHATEVER PART INTERESTS THEM.
YOU have your own specific lead trail you're following, and it's up to YOU to make your case that it is RELEVANT to PG.
... for a very small, finite, vanishing group of people that understand your connections. Top notch.
Step 1) Post your findings to crowdsource information
Step 2) Do so in a way that very, very few will even know what the hell you're talking about.
Step 3) ???
Seems to me that the rules were put there because the community wanted anyone to be able to pick up the torch at any time, and be able to follow the narrative, fact check it with links, and pursue their area of interest.
If that's no longer the case. If that's not what the users want anymore, we can just go freestyle and let anyone and everyone post however, and you esoteric folks can sift through it all in your ivory towers of knowledge while Voat gets a reputation of leaving up whatever horseshit someone wants to post about PG.
letsdothis1 ago
When a post is deleted can I still access the source code? Due to the number of links in my posts that would be necessary for me.
Voat has already acquired another reputation.
But impossible to please everybody, aye?
Crensch ago
Voat goes down sometimes. What do you do then?
Why wouldn't you back up your work locally? Isn't this stuff important?
More of your cryptic bullshit. Acting like others can read your mind.
Voat is the only solid place to post PG stuff, no?
Going to switch gears here:
@kevdude
There are already other subverses for unrestricted PG stuff. If the real researchers found our rules and deletions limiting, why would they not happily go there?
This particular one, @letsdothis1 claims that his research isn't for the lowest-common-denominator anyway. Why wouldn't they take their ball and go elsewhere to play?
Would the real research not attract the real PG people? If they did that, this subverse would be a husk of shills trying to convince the massive, mostly-inactive user number that their false information was the real deal.
Sometimes I really fucking hate this place.
ESOTERICshade ago
People have been saying its the mod but nobody will listen.
Crensch ago
Because there is no evidence, tard.
ESOTERICshade ago
Its your sub. If you don't want to solve its problems then you won't. Its pretty simple.
Crensch ago
It's the user's sub. And every time M_F is accused, IT IS A BUNCH OF BULLSHIT - the deletions SHOULD have happened regardless.
ESOTERICshade ago
Is that why you rigged this sub so that only people with 10 CPP points can down vote? You know, that small select group that got those points before the limit was set? Most users don't realize that no matter how many up votes they get they will never gain down vote points. But I do...
Crensch ago
@Codewow did that so it's not on the front page, faggot.
ESOTERICshade ago
No need to ping @codewow. I know how it works very well.