I've added a new rule to reflect the Voat User Agreement. Please share your thoughts. (pizzagatemods)

submitted ago by Vindicator

Yesterday, after this debacle, I added a rule about Comment Abuse for the sake of clarity.

The Voat User Agreement requires us all to Respect Other Users, both their privacy and their freedom of speech. People who work hard on their research submissions shouldn't have their work overshadowed, their free speech suppressed, and the discussion of their submission derailed by off-topic rants, flame wars or copypasta spam in the Comment section. It's not right.

This has actually been in place for several months under Voat's Sitewide Rules. If you check the banlog, you will see that Putt added the Voat User Agreement to the rule violations list moderators can cite some time ago, and Donkey and his many alts were banned for comment abuse under that -- at the request of multiple users -- after he impersonated another user to discredit her research. TrustTheTruth was also banned for comment abuse under the Voat UA spam clause because he spammed the same longwinded, evidence-free rants over and over again, regardless of the submission topic.

It's now spelled out in our sidebar. Thoughts?

Edit: Link to banlog fixed.

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

NOMOCHOMO ago

https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/3289546/20563449

Shall the good news about Donkey getting purged be made public yet (like in a sticky post)?

https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/3289546/20566542

I've tried to keep the focus on research and drama to a minimum. This sticky is obnoxious enough, IMO. Do you see an upside?

@shewhomustbeobeyed @heygeorge @kevdude More publically referenced examples of Secret Moderation w/out general-user input/discussion

I just found this.... I was banned for a "Rule 1: relevancy" violation for my comment in @darkknight111 's post.

A few days earlier, darkknight was talking with Mods about a user being "purged"

Darkknight has still not commented on my ban.

shewhomustbeobeyed ago

I saw those comments shortly after they were made, nomo. What's the problem? Donqi was banned for using an alt that imitated a PG researcher. It wasn't hidden that I'm aware of.

dk111 has always hated donqi. Common knowledge.

I wish you weren't banned, things could be so much better if you could get back to researching. But now you're just being an ass.

NOMOCHOMO ago

I saw those comments shortly after they were made, nomo

The comments are from 19 days ago. The Ban was 2 months ago. When was it announced publically?

It shows a pattern of Mods taking action, and justifying it after the fact. Rather than presenting a case to the community first.

Donqi was banned for using an alt that imitated a PG researcher. It wasn't hidden that I'm aware of.

"User Agreement" violation.... I wasn't fooled by the alt. I read Ender's Game. It's kiddy level hacking...

But once again, Mods have to protect users from using their own discernment.

Sadly, the longer I'm banned, the more I doubt the moderator intentions.

I've been banned for 2 weeks, and have desperately been trying to get it reversed. /ass

shewhomustbeobeyed ago

The comments are from 19 days ago. The Ban was 2 months ago. When was it announced publically?

As far as I know there has never been a policy to announce bans.

I understood dk111s comment to mean that he wanted to make a submission alerting everyone to his victory over donqi. Then have @Vindicator sticky it.

Did I mention that @darkknight111 REALLY HATES @Don-Keyhote.

I wasn't fooled by the alt. I read Ender's Game. It's kiddy level hacking...

No one is fooled by Donqi's alts. Although, we did have a cancer mod here who loved making alts that abused donqi, and other PG users. She's supposedly gone now.

 

@heygeorge - in case you're bored.

NOMOCHOMO ago

his victory over donqi

letsdothisl: Rule Violation: User Agreement; Description: Failure to Respect other Users

So Darkknight convinced Vindicator to go beyond Voat's definition of "respect" in the UA

Respect other users

You may not purposefully negate any user's actions to delete or edit their content on Voat. This is intended to respect the privacy of Voat users who delete or edit their content, and is not intended to abridge the fair use or the expressive rights shared by us all.

I fucking hate donkey. But "respect" appears to only cover not reposting another users edited/deleted submissions.

We all post each others comments/archives trying to catch each other in fuckery..... that appears to violate UA...crensch makes entire stickied posts about an edit.

I kinda think the banning of obvious trolls TTT and Donkey is facilitating more legit users to get banned in the future.

think- ago

So Darkknight convinced Vindicator to go beyond Voat's definition of "respect" in the UA

@darkknight111 didn't convince @Vindicator of anything. Funny how you assume that @darkknight111 had anything to do with the ban. That's your usual game, isn't it. Sad.

We had a precedent for banning a user for impersonating another user, that was about two years ago when someone created an account that looked similar to @EricKaliberhalls's.

And TTT was banned for comment spam. That is in fact a rule that has existed for years on Voat.

But "respect" appears to only cover not reposting another users edited/deleted submissions.

No.

NOMOCHOMO ago

Edit: I stand to be corrected after reading the TOS again - it really seems to pertain to other users' edited and deleted submissions.

Thanks for correcting :)

NOMOCHOMO ago

Respect Trumps Free Speech

think- ago

brilliant argument "think-"

Interesting that you ninja edited your comment after I had already edited my comment, and explained that I stand to be corrected. Final proof that you are only here to stir up shit.

@shewhomustbeobeyed called it "his victory over donqi"...not me

You wrote:

Funny how you assume that @darkknight111 had anything to do with the ban.

That's why I wrote

@darkknight111 didn't convince @Vindicator of anything. Funny how you assume that @darkknight111 had anything to do with the ban. That's your usual game, isn't it. Sad.

as everybody is able to read can see. You are intentionally twisting what I wrote.

I'm just putting this here for the other users, don't intend to have a convo with you. I just chimed in to defend @darkknight111 against your allegations.

NOMOCHOMO ago

My "Ninja Edit" was adding

(Respect Trump's Free Speech?)

You wrote:

Funny how you assume that @darkknight111 had anything to do with the ban.

I didn't...you're quoting yourself.

NOMOCHOMO ago

HOLY SHIT...DID YOU JUST REVEAL YOURSELF TO BE OPERATING ALTS...while accusing me of a "ninja edit"?

@heygeorge @shewhomustbeobeyed @kevdude

think- ago

I am repeatedly being falsely accused of "stirring up shit" and "twisting"

That's exactly what you do. You are randomly attacking users like @darkknight111 or me, accusing us of stuff we never did.

HOLY SHIT...DID YOU JUST REVEAL YOURSELF TO BE OPERATING ALTS.

I don't operate alts -.just for the record.

while accusing me of a "ninja edit"?

Adding content after someone has replied is ninja editing. Fyi.

@darkknight111

NOMOCHOMO ago

You just accused me of adding content to disparage you and "twist" words which I havent.

Adding content after someone has replied is ninja editing. Fyi.

You could stand to be corrected on this as well.

A Ninja edit is an edit b4 anyone responds, usually w/in minutes

alele-opathic ago

I know this is old, but just thought I'd leave you a helpful note: Voat doesn't support ninja editing. All edits, even in a private sub that you own, are recorded, even if you make them seconds later.

I have been accused of ninja editing by a number of people I suspect are bots/shills (and one I believe I satisfactorily proved), including a guy who Putt later deleted for manipulation. They just reuse the same bots from Reddit which reveals their ignorance of the platform differences.

NOMOCHOMO ago

I appreciate the note!