I made a mistake yesterday in suggesting a new rule, and I'd like to update my position now. There is no doubt that the mods of v/videos are well liked within your community, and from the comments I've read by frequent users to this sub, you all do a great job. In the past many of you have actively advocated for less restrictions and less rules, and as such, I see your aversion to a new rule now. If you allowed such a rule, the prospect of abuse is far greater, as there is no way for the rest of us to see the report spam issues or the warnings the mods give etc... It's a bad idea.
In the old days, report spam would show in your mailbox, but now it's in moderator mail.... there's little to no potential harassment issue because 'your mailbox is getting hammered etc.' & the inconvenience is far less to mods... I can also see that users may take advantage of this issue, and it may become a nuisance. However, there's no rule against being an asshole on this forum-nor should there ever be. I think you agree that nuisance does not warrant censorship.
My opinion, you should unban AOU, for the same reasons you have advocated for less restrictions and rules, for our freedom of speech. Deal with the report spam issues as they come. If you feel truly overwhelmed, bring on a couple of active users in this sub to your team. Admins once said there would be a way for the community to pick the sys mods.. so, maybe you can make a thread and ask your active users if any of them are interested in helping go through the report spam, then bring them on to the team? Absent that, you'll just have to go through all the report spam... but, you are right, no new rule.
This is the best post in this thread. If the mods here cant handle the spam reports petition the admins for a couple of janitors. This is VOAT and we are looking for ways to justify banning a real user who is using a function of the site because its a hassle to the MODS.
An archive of the subverse: https://archive.is/bkCLl. In case anyone missed it, there are actually No Posted Rules to the sidebar, only preferences and guidelines.
We're gonna let this post ride for today, so others can see and add their views.
Tomorrow (Friday) morning I will put up a new sticky, and we will resolve the conflict in a way that has community approval.
We will not be commenting here any more though, it is time for us to observe from the sideline for a bit.
You tag loads of videos with bullshit labels like "repost" or "OC" or "politics" "nebulous title" etc. no one gives a shit, just let the community decide what belongs by voting. You're taking this non-job way too seriously.
Your worried about a precedence. But this is such a weird and unique situation. If we ever started to use that as an excuse, then that is what PV is for. But in this situation, you have AOU going to PV and telling you that we are corrupt and supporting spammers. He didn't go to you asking for you to unban him. He has made multiple posts in PV. Every single time its about the definition of spam. You've even tried to get him on track with the ban situation. Thats not what AOU is upset about. When he took his concerns to PV, you guys ignored his claims about the spam. Since you know that we are trying to follow the community on that. PV took offense to the ban. The 1 month temp ban was something we had been doing for a long time. But it was just PV that didn't like it. This is solely something that PV picked up and ran with. AOU still just wants you to support his demand that we delete what he considers spam.
I think that PV is required to maintain Voat. It is a great place for users to go when they have been wronged. But your not even defending the user who was banned. Because he wasn't asking for an unban. He was asking for his definition of spam to be removed. Hes asking we change the rules to fit his own definition. Which goes against what Voat stands for. Which goes against what PV stands for.
A few times you have said that you wish it didn't have to come to this. But PV is the only one pushing it. AOU isn't pushing this. After the ban is lifted, he will continue to spam us, and PV demanding that spam be removed.
I'm aware this is a default sub. I'm aware that AOU is a legit user. Its why we took so much time trying to work with him. He mentioned that he has been reporting spam for 7 months. Sounds about right. Thats also how long we have been trying to explain why we can't just remove this stuff for him. But we worked so hard to do that, because some of these reports were legit. We did remove some of them. But now he has made his reports useless. I have no reason to look at them. Because now hes using it as a weapon. Even now, we are not trying to silence him. We plan to create the sticky for the discussion with the community after his ban. Specifically after his ban. Because we want him to be involved in it. But 7 months we have been talking to him, and this is what he said in our last sticky. He didn't even show up. He had a problem with our definition back then. But he is doing nothing to solve the issue. I have no idea what more we can do for him. He left the sticky empty. That was stickied on the front of v/videos. It sits in v/videosmodtalk, but thats so we don't lose these stickies anymore. When they are in v/videos is damn near impossible to find them months later. So we moved them to v/videosmodtalk and then link to them from v/videos so its easier to find. We have also just started creating monthly discussions, to make it easier to sort through what we are doing. We will be creating a new one each month. Then people can look through month, instead of a 600+ comment thread over a year. We are trying our fucking hardest to protect voat right along side you.
Any engagement we have with AOU. Any engagement you have with AOU. The only thing he is spouting is that we are supporting spammers.
I would understand your actions a bit more if you were defending the user who brought the complaint. But right now, your not even working on the issue he wants you to work on. You picked this one up and just ran with it.
Even your sticky here that you made started off so hostile.
I am sure this will get deleted because it is challenging the mods
What have we done to make you think that? All I've done through this whole thing is try to engage you in dialoge and discussion.
Well Voat is harsh on mods at times but we all do recognize when someone is trying to pull a fast one or attempting to use peoples passion in the wrong way. If there are legitimate and transparent steps taken behind it then people will have little sympathy. Like someone said the ideal way would be some form of programming fix where no one is banned but until then we might all have to settle. Lets see what happens.
That sounds fair a fair a few considered what he was doing as spam and some didnt and if he's unbanned it leaves the door opened for him to be rebanned or just do the right thing and wait for the next discussion and raise his issue. How do you feel about the different treatment of real users and spammers that he said to you? The warnings and whatnot?
I think what you said to @angmar in that little discussion would be a good way to proceed without much hassle. Even if you were to present all 3 options and explain why you think the first wont work in a comment yourselves. I expect there will be more barking before it ends but you've asked the users in this thread and your analysis of their wishes is fair.
OK, I didn't notice that it was an actual repost and the first guy used youtu.be and the next one was youtube.com
I still hate the post flairs, think they're clutter and feel that flairing something as a repost is unnecessary when the users could just vote one up and not vote up the other.. but I see where you're coming from with that particular decision.
And you'd start a shitstorm by creating that rule. VOAT is notoriously anti rule in syssubs. Also, define exactly what abuse of that button is. 5 times a day? 10? Sounds awfully like a mod making rules via opinion. Or you could ask the members, and get 1000 differing opinions.
You also glossed over the further definition of spam, which this clearly fulfills. It is basically ping bombing the mods daily.
I've been a member of PV since it's beginning. And I normally agree w you. I think this isnt a case PV needs to be involved in.
So if I do the same to you in PV you're ok w it then? If I report every post in PV everyday, just make a point, youre good w me flooding your mod inbox? And I think this does meet the definition of spam. Spam isn't just promotional. It's also repeatedly sending electronic messages.
How are the mods being bullied? Oh no, they have a few more messages... whatever will they do? They have to ban; it's the only recourse. And picking on my username, a name from a play, in place of a substantive argument...petty.
Look it, the mods in this sub are respected, and most of them have openly advocated for less rules and less restrictions in the name of free speech. They should stand by these principles now. It's not a huge deal to ask them to un-ban one user, make a rule about the report spam button, and move on. If it's abused again, they can ban again... And since when can a mod be bullied into censorship via the report spam option? :-/ Satanist? Do you even read what you comment before you submit, bro?
It's not a huge deal to ask them to un-ban one user,
I think it may be. This user is trolling the sub because he wants tighter rules. He has openly declared that he doesn't care what the community thinks and will force his way.
If we change our standard practice and unban him, we set the precedent that at any time users can flaunt the rules then cry and stir up drama to get their way.
We offered to remove the ban if he accepted the rules. We told him how to get community discussion going if he wants them to change. He chose to troll, with lies, instead.
It's a tight spot for us.
Not saying we can't or won't, just that there are other factors to consider as well.
What AOU is doing is on par with Spamalak. The degree may be different, but the concept is the same. If we reverse AOUs ban, then the Spamalak, Eastern Lightning, and Manhood bans become questionable as well.
There's a new sticky going up soon, think it over, let us know.
This user is trolling the sub because he wants tighter rules. He has openly declared that he doesn't care what the community thinks and will force his way.
Which is why I, and likely much of voat, would not want him as a system moderator. I assume the amount of due diligence it takes to ensure you are not banning or deleting active user posts as spam is no easy task. Absolutely, system sub mods should always take great caution when deleting or banning for spam. Voat appreciates your caution, diligence, and giving exception when the community requests it. No one is recommending you adopt AOU's requests.
If we change our standard practice and unban him, we set the precedent that at any time users can flaunt the rules then cry and stir up drama to get their way.
The issue here is that it is not standard practice for you or any other system sub to ban voaters who overuse report spam or even users that use it specifically to irritate mods because they don't get their way. Looking back through voat's history, many system moderators were removed because they advocated and enforced rules that can be abused. In this case, we can't even point to a rule as the reason for the ban. It's why so many people are commenting here because it is the wrong precedent to set after you and many others worked so hard to ensure speech on voat.
I understand the difficulty, the tight spot, and I will think it over. I look forward to reading your sticky.
it is not standard practice for you or any other system sub to ban voaters who overuse report spam
Actually that has been our policy from the start. We never differentiated 'types' of spam. We tried to follow the rule in as literal a way as we can.
To be honest, it had never occurred to me that others would see it differently.
We often get spam reports from people whos feelings got hurt. We have threatened more of them than I can remember with bans. They almost always stop at that point.
They don't always stop with just a friendly warning though.
To be honest, it had never occurred to me that others would see it differently.
Understandable, and I see your perspective a little clearer now. However, the amount of comments in this post, voat's history for advocating users' right to speech as paramount, shows that voaters do see it differently. I have never known someone to get banned for using the report spam option because it fell under the spam rule in a system sub, though it may well have occurred in the past. It's a good time for all of us users and you mods to reflect on the issue. Again, I look forward to your sticky, and if I can add anything to that discussion, I will. Keep in mind, most everyone in the comments recognizes and appreciates the hard work you do.
However, the amount of comments in this post, voat's history for advocating users' right to speech as paramount, shows that voaters do see it differently.
I'm not as sure of that.
This was a biased and misleading post, that came with a number of extra visitors.
Voats are never to be trusted in a post like this. We count the voices.
It is clear there is concern. But whether dropping, clarifying, altering, or other is the solution will be determined soon.
Have you been to the new post?
Kevdude made the post, and I know he holds you in high regard... but regardless of how you view the post, you shouldn't dismiss the discussion. As for extra visitors-I fall in that category, as I'm not an active v/videos user. I am an active voater, though, as are all the people commenting. Isn't that enough?
We are not dissmissing it.
We've read the entire thing, and we heard.
We just want to gather additional input, there are many who have no idea what's happening, and others who may have been scared off by the downvoats.
There is also the possibility of people changing their minds after discussion.
So rather than rushing a decision we want to be sure.
Idk. Normally I'd side w this user. But rule or not imho he's abusing the system and making it harder for the mods to do their job properly. And be was asked to chill. I'm on the fence on this one. I think I'd need to see what he reported to really decide.
But he is a long time user, and you don't have any rules on the sidebar explicitly stating multiple report spam submissions are against the rules. Banning, unlike deleting, prevents you from participating in the sub in any capacity. It's a harsh punishment for an active user. Your slight inconvenience compared to a user who can no longer participate for a lengthy period *of time is unfair, no? I get a user can and likely may have abused this function, but from the comments looks like all you have to do is un-ban the user and update the sidebar. Ban again if the sidebar is violated... but in my view, always give active users the benefit of the doubt. Not a huge inconvenience, right? I've seen AOU around contributing content, and this small concession can restore the peace. You know?
Bottom Line: You banned a user in a default subverse because he annoyed you, without a rule in place, and without discussing the rule with the community first; never mind that this is the antithesis of Voat and its freedom of speech platform.
I asked you a simple question if you were going to ban me? I'm commenting a lot in this thread, is this spam to you? Have I antagonized you like AOU did to you that you would ban me? How is that not a legitimate question?
The only foolish thing here is the decision you three made to ban a user without a rule in place and without community input. And that you anger so very quickly is telling, and disconcerting, that I wondered aloud if this Mod role was a good position for you.
I'm not convinced at this point that you are cut out to tolerate the duties of a Mod as expected by the Admins and the Community if you have to resort to insults to make yourself feel better.
You have to admit, the theories he's spinning are pretty creative and he is very persistent!
I got documented on suspisions of "organized SRS" for opening a discussion and speaking freely about my viewpoints on a sub i regularly contribute to by PV last week!
You are the one who responded to my comment, I initiated nothing with you. I have a right to speak my peace in this thread just as every other user does. This is a Default Subverse.
Where did your community tell you it was okay for you to ban a user for reporting too much spam? Show me, show us all where this is written. You cannot, the rule does not exist. You overstepped your bounds as Mods. And for that matter, a rule such as that one goes above and beyond what the Admins have said that they want to see in the Default Subs. You do realize I was quoting Atko, don't you?
..is tagged with REPOST. That smells like bullshit. It seems like something you'd tag on an old video that is being hosted on a secondary site to have two of the same video postings in the same sub.. AKA: spamming.. except this video isn't. Who gives a fuck if it's posted in another sub. Not everyone subs to every subverse.
So make a rule. No one is saying that you are unjustified in your concern over the effects of his behavior. We are simply saying that for a real user to be banned there needs to be a clear sidebar rule spelling out the behavior.
I just wanted to address this one from @kevdude real quick though. I get what your saying now. I understand that your protest to the ban is that it is not outlined in the guidelines. The thing is, this isn't something that is common. Any other time that people tried to use the report spam button because someone said something mean to them. We warned them. We told them, this is not reddit. You cannot summon the mods because your feelings are hurt. Do not abuse the report spam button. So while the rule might not be on the guidelines, we don't just ban someone right away. We explain ourselves. We explain why what they reported does not constitute spam. Most of the time, thats the end of it. They dont do it anymore. They understand that the mods are not stepping in to protect their feelings.
In the case of AOU, we put a lot of time into trying to have a discussion with him. We explained in great detail that the sites definition of spam is not the same as v/videos. Because when it was discussed, in order to allow for Original Content, the community decided to let these types of posts be handled by voats. So we just can't do anything about them. Despite some of them just being god awful content. Thats not our place. Community told us to leave them alone. After explaining all of this, from all 3 of us, he just ramped it up. He made it clear he was no longer using it to help, but to try and spam us. We told him very clearly that further abuse of the button would lead to a ban. He then ramped it up more.
So I guess, what my thinking was, is that it happens so rarely. That its such a specific situation, that simply trying to talk to each person and explain it would suffice. Its like putting a sign on the outside of your house. "Don't set my house on fire". You just kind of assume that people are going to know not to set your house on fire. You don't think to put a sign up to tell them not to. And should someone come into your house with a lighter, telling you they are going to set your house on fire. You tell them why that isnt a good idea. Explain it to them. They tell you they will do it anyways. You get them out of the house. Because they are not acting very rational.
That was an odd analogy. But fuck it, I'm going to leave it in there.
I do have to go to bed. So my silence after this is nothing personal. I'll get back to this post tomorrow.
Okay. But my contention is that user behaviour, ie. report spam abuse, is something that can affect every subverse and therefore should be defined by the site, not the sub.
How are Evrocot's posts legit? He's a youtube channel spammer. You guys keep defending him but he is blatantly posting videos from channels he has affiliation with (which violates voat's spam rules). @AOU has every right to report him.
Saying that Evrocot is legitimized because he gets lots of upvoats is nonsensical.
If you want the sub to have to have make a rule about user behaviour then any sub that doesn't have that rule would imply that the mod needs to allow said behaviour, by your logic.
They don't want to do a sticky because they feel it will clutter the site. Its not like we discuss the rules every day. It happens like once a month, they can afford that amount of clutter. And realistically its not about the users complaining. If we are changing the sidebar, its about the MODS complaining, because they want to make the rules easier for them to do their job. Apparently they will do one tomorrow though, so let it blow over until then I guess.
That would be unreasonable. Every other subverse on voat operates with community-defined rules that are discussed and voted on in a post (Save like sdbh or something).
Its not like it takes effort to just make a damn post about changing the sidebar. Its important to do it this way to prevent a precedent of mods changing rules willy nilly.
Report abuse should be outlined by the site, not the subverse. If what you propose were to be the case then every subverse without that specific rule could be subject to the same abuse. The site outlines what is and is not acceptable for a user to do, the subverses outline what content is allowed on that subverse.
The subverses rules are only needed for the content of the subverse. How a user interacts with the site as a whole should follow the sites guidelines. Unless a subverse wishes to allow specific rule breaks (like how the federal government has pot illegal but the states can make it legal for that state).
No, he didn't spam the sub, he spammed the mods. And started posting shit about them being paid by spammers.
If you spam mods with pages and pages of fake spam reports every day, you will probably get a temporary ban at some point. The only problem here is that someone actually took this guy seriously instead of saying "yeah, so what? he spammed the shit out of the mods so they couldn't see what was real spam or fake spam anymore".
One single case like this does not have to be written out into the rules. It is not practical to stick to the rules of the sub in the way you're suggesting, because something is always going to come up that is a unique case.
AOU is a long time user who has actively participated in voat. Even Homer doesn't ban for pms or what people say in different subs. I've read comments around voat from mods on the side bar, and many of you make great contributions. I'm sure modding a system sub is challenging; however, preventing a voater from submitting content and participating in this sub goes against fundamental voat principles, principles that many of you fought for in the past. A long time contributor like AOU deserves more than an outright dismissal via ban.
The way that spamming is defined "Spam being defined as irrelevant posts, chronic reposting, or advertising is not allowed in any capacity. Use the "Report Spam" button if you see any."
Spamming the report button doesn't fit in that definition. Make a post for a sidebar change, that you want to add a rule to ban users who abuse the report button. If you make it reasonable, the community will support you because we already do even in this post, and blammo its done. I think thats all kevdude wants you to do anyway, hes just got a... dramatic... way of saying it.
https://voat.co/v/ProtectVoat/1402059 this link is another prime example of brigade. Just look at downvoting behavior and PV stooges showing up like it's organized.
Just pointing out that you are in the same company as some questionable people. This guy only shows up to defend powermods. Guess you are planting your flag on that side?
Wow. They banned a guy who was spamming them, and now they're another target for you? Was this whole protectvoat thing ever about actually trying to make Voat a better place for users, or has your thought process always been this negative? It is extremely counter productive and only causes hassle for mods.
Ok I'm in the camp with what others mentioned. There needs to be some technical solution to this because the mod queue isn't really the sub. What happenes in their only affects you 3 and even if you stretch it to time wasting only marginally affects the sub itself. Would you yourself prefer this be handled by other means than banning?
Well heres the thing. If he got an explicit warning, he should have taken the warning to PV, said that the mods shouldn't be warning him with a ban over a non-existent rule. Then there wouldn't have been a ban and the problem could have been resolved sooner.
By continuing to report links with malice he was just fucking with them. Not that he was doing anything against the rules, but thats not particularly productive.
They could have taken the rules to the community, said "okay we need to talk about consequences for this and this action" BEFORE they banned him.
I mean if you warned him several times, he should have either taken the warnings to PV first, said "I don't like that these mods are warning me" or had a reasonable discussion with you guys. I feel like he didnt take the mature course of action.
There are no rules in the sidebar about abuses pertaining to the Report Spam Button.
This user should not have been banned in the first place and should be unbanned from this Default Subverse.
Editing to add: a rule to ban for overusing the ReportSpam Button would be absolutely ludicrous.
Sorry to inconvenience the Mods, but this is part of the job--to evaluate the reports that come in. In a thread over at PV, these mods have even acknowledged that this user has noted what they perceive to be as true spam.
It is still worth a try -- in this single post, the three mods of v/videos made 649 comments to each other discussing the individual ethics and policies of banning users or deleting posts or removing comments or flairing videos, etc -- https://voat.co/v/videosModTalk/462632
They have consistently demonstrated the integrity and impartial ethics of all bans, deletions and removals in the most voatful possible way.
The sidebar actually is encouraging people to report spam right now.
Spam - Spam being defined as irrelevant posts, chronic reposting, or advertising is not allowed in any capacity. Use the "Report Spam" button if you see any.
How big of a deal is his reporting? How many are we talking about?
Yes the community should be making the rules in system subs. Mods can we sticky this?
Edit: wtf happened to my nightmode? Please tell me it hasn't been removed.
InnocentBystander ago
You know that we read every comment in these posts.
We don't need you to tell us which ones are approved™.
Though, I do agree that this one is well expressed and thought out.
Faustian ago
I made a mistake yesterday in suggesting a new rule, and I'd like to update my position now. There is no doubt that the mods of v/videos are well liked within your community, and from the comments I've read by frequent users to this sub, you all do a great job. In the past many of you have actively advocated for less restrictions and less rules, and as such, I see your aversion to a new rule now. If you allowed such a rule, the prospect of abuse is far greater, as there is no way for the rest of us to see the report spam issues or the warnings the mods give etc... It's a bad idea.
In the old days, report spam would show in your mailbox, but now it's in moderator mail.... there's little to no potential harassment issue because 'your mailbox is getting hammered etc.' & the inconvenience is far less to mods... I can also see that users may take advantage of this issue, and it may become a nuisance. However, there's no rule against being an asshole on this forum-nor should there ever be. I think you agree that nuisance does not warrant censorship.
My opinion, you should unban AOU, for the same reasons you have advocated for less restrictions and rules, for our freedom of speech. Deal with the report spam issues as they come. If you feel truly overwhelmed, bring on a couple of active users in this sub to your team. Admins once said there would be a way for the community to pick the sys mods.. so, maybe you can make a thread and ask your active users if any of them are interested in helping go through the report spam, then bring them on to the team? Absent that, you'll just have to go through all the report spam... but, you are right, no new rule.
Cuckbot ago
This is the best post in this thread. If the mods here cant handle the spam reports petition the admins for a couple of janitors. This is VOAT and we are looking for ways to justify banning a real user who is using a function of the site because its a hassle to the MODS.
Faustian ago
Completely agree user's right to use the sub comes first and thank you.
Cynabuns ago
An archive of the subverse: https://archive.is/bkCLl. In case anyone missed it, there are actually No Posted Rules to the sidebar, only preferences and guidelines.
Cynabuns ago
Niiice - very good call.
Cynabuns ago
Thanks for the ping, Dungles
InnocentBystander ago
We're gonna let this post ride for today, so others can see and add their views.
Tomorrow (Friday) morning I will put up a new sticky, and we will resolve the conflict in a way that has community approval.
We will not be commenting here any more though, it is time for us to observe from the sideline for a bit.
EdSnowden ago
You tag loads of videos with bullshit labels like "repost" or "OC" or "politics" "nebulous title" etc. no one gives a shit, just let the community decide what belongs by voting. You're taking this non-job way too seriously.
Violentlight ago
Your worried about a precedence. But this is such a weird and unique situation. If we ever started to use that as an excuse, then that is what PV is for. But in this situation, you have AOU going to PV and telling you that we are corrupt and supporting spammers. He didn't go to you asking for you to unban him. He has made multiple posts in PV. Every single time its about the definition of spam. You've even tried to get him on track with the ban situation. Thats not what AOU is upset about. When he took his concerns to PV, you guys ignored his claims about the spam. Since you know that we are trying to follow the community on that. PV took offense to the ban. The 1 month temp ban was something we had been doing for a long time. But it was just PV that didn't like it. This is solely something that PV picked up and ran with. AOU still just wants you to support his demand that we delete what he considers spam.
I think that PV is required to maintain Voat. It is a great place for users to go when they have been wronged. But your not even defending the user who was banned. Because he wasn't asking for an unban. He was asking for his definition of spam to be removed. Hes asking we change the rules to fit his own definition. Which goes against what Voat stands for. Which goes against what PV stands for.
A few times you have said that you wish it didn't have to come to this. But PV is the only one pushing it. AOU isn't pushing this. After the ban is lifted, he will continue to spam us, and PV demanding that spam be removed.
I'm aware this is a default sub. I'm aware that AOU is a legit user. Its why we took so much time trying to work with him. He mentioned that he has been reporting spam for 7 months. Sounds about right. Thats also how long we have been trying to explain why we can't just remove this stuff for him. But we worked so hard to do that, because some of these reports were legit. We did remove some of them. But now he has made his reports useless. I have no reason to look at them. Because now hes using it as a weapon. Even now, we are not trying to silence him. We plan to create the sticky for the discussion with the community after his ban. Specifically after his ban. Because we want him to be involved in it. But 7 months we have been talking to him, and this is what he said in our last sticky. He didn't even show up. He had a problem with our definition back then. But he is doing nothing to solve the issue. I have no idea what more we can do for him. He left the sticky empty. That was stickied on the front of v/videos. It sits in v/videosmodtalk, but thats so we don't lose these stickies anymore. When they are in v/videos is damn near impossible to find them months later. So we moved them to v/videosmodtalk and then link to them from v/videos so its easier to find. We have also just started creating monthly discussions, to make it easier to sort through what we are doing. We will be creating a new one each month. Then people can look through month, instead of a 600+ comment thread over a year. We are trying our fucking hardest to protect voat right along side you.
Any engagement we have with AOU. Any engagement you have with AOU. The only thing he is spouting is that we are supporting spammers.
I would understand your actions a bit more if you were defending the user who brought the complaint. But right now, your not even working on the issue he wants you to work on. You picked this one up and just ran with it.
Even your sticky here that you made started off so hostile.
What have we done to make you think that? All I've done through this whole thing is try to engage you in dialoge and discussion.
@THC @InnocentBystander
Disappointed ago
Well Voat is harsh on mods at times but we all do recognize when someone is trying to pull a fast one or attempting to use peoples passion in the wrong way. If there are legitimate and transparent steps taken behind it then people will have little sympathy. Like someone said the ideal way would be some form of programming fix where no one is banned but until then we might all have to settle. Lets see what happens.
Disappointed ago
That sounds fair a fair a few considered what he was doing as spam and some didnt and if he's unbanned it leaves the door opened for him to be rebanned or just do the right thing and wait for the next discussion and raise his issue. How do you feel about the different treatment of real users and spammers that he said to you? The warnings and whatnot?
Disappointed ago
I think what you said to @angmar in that little discussion would be a good way to proceed without much hassle. Even if you were to present all 3 options and explain why you think the first wont work in a comment yourselves. I expect there will be more barking before it ends but you've asked the users in this thread and your analysis of their wishes is fair.
AnTi90d ago
OK, I didn't notice that it was an actual repost and the first guy used youtu.be and the next one was youtube.com
I still hate the post flairs, think they're clutter and feel that flairing something as a repost is unnecessary when the users could just vote one up and not vote up the other.. but I see where you're coming from with that particular decision.
MrPim ago
Any and all of this(Report Button and PM abuse) can be logged and made public.
I'm not sure a behind the scenes act like that is better. A bit like a half shadow ban.
Anyway, I need sleep. Peace
MrPim ago
And you'd start a shitstorm by creating that rule. VOAT is notoriously anti rule in syssubs. Also, define exactly what abuse of that button is. 5 times a day? 10? Sounds awfully like a mod making rules via opinion. Or you could ask the members, and get 1000 differing opinions.
You also glossed over the further definition of spam, which this clearly fulfills. It is basically ping bombing the mods daily.
I've been a member of PV since it's beginning. And I normally agree w you. I think this isnt a case PV needs to be involved in.
MrPim ago
So if I do the same to you in PV you're ok w it then? If I report every post in PV everyday, just make a point, youre good w me flooding your mod inbox? And I think this does meet the definition of spam. Spam isn't just promotional. It's also repeatedly sending electronic messages.
sinjinsmythe ago
Yeah, why can't the mods just block the whiner-mail from specific users? Full disclosure - I am a techtard.
Faustian ago
How are the mods being bullied? Oh no, they have a few more messages... whatever will they do? They have to ban; it's the only recourse. And picking on my username, a name from a play, in place of a substantive argument...petty.
Faustian ago
Look it, the mods in this sub are respected, and most of them have openly advocated for less rules and less restrictions in the name of free speech. They should stand by these principles now. It's not a huge deal to ask them to un-ban one user, make a rule about the report spam button, and move on. If it's abused again, they can ban again... And since when can a mod be bullied into censorship via the report spam option? :-/ Satanist? Do you even read what you comment before you submit, bro?
InnocentBystander ago
I think it may be. This user is trolling the sub because he wants tighter rules. He has openly declared that he doesn't care what the community thinks and will force his way.
If we change our standard practice and unban him, we set the precedent that at any time users can flaunt the rules then cry and stir up drama to get their way.
We offered to remove the ban if he accepted the rules. We told him how to get community discussion going if he wants them to change. He chose to troll, with lies, instead.
It's a tight spot for us.
Not saying we can't or won't, just that there are other factors to consider as well.
What AOU is doing is on par with Spamalak. The degree may be different, but the concept is the same. If we reverse AOUs ban, then the Spamalak, Eastern Lightning, and Manhood bans become questionable as well.
There's a new sticky going up soon, think it over, let us know.
Faustian ago
Which is why I, and likely much of voat, would not want him as a system moderator. I assume the amount of due diligence it takes to ensure you are not banning or deleting active user posts as spam is no easy task. Absolutely, system sub mods should always take great caution when deleting or banning for spam. Voat appreciates your caution, diligence, and giving exception when the community requests it. No one is recommending you adopt AOU's requests.
The issue here is that it is not standard practice for you or any other system sub to ban voaters who overuse report spam or even users that use it specifically to irritate mods because they don't get their way. Looking back through voat's history, many system moderators were removed because they advocated and enforced rules that can be abused. In this case, we can't even point to a rule as the reason for the ban. It's why so many people are commenting here because it is the wrong precedent to set after you and many others worked so hard to ensure speech on voat.
I understand the difficulty, the tight spot, and I will think it over. I look forward to reading your sticky.
InnocentBystander ago
Actually that has been our policy from the start. We never differentiated 'types' of spam. We tried to follow the rule in as literal a way as we can.
To be honest, it had never occurred to me that others would see it differently.
We often get spam reports from people whos feelings got hurt. We have threatened more of them than I can remember with bans. They almost always stop at that point.
They don't always stop with just a friendly warning though.
Faustian ago
Understandable, and I see your perspective a little clearer now. However, the amount of comments in this post, voat's history for advocating users' right to speech as paramount, shows that voaters do see it differently. I have never known someone to get banned for using the report spam option because it fell under the spam rule in a system sub, though it may well have occurred in the past. It's a good time for all of us users and you mods to reflect on the issue. Again, I look forward to your sticky, and if I can add anything to that discussion, I will. Keep in mind, most everyone in the comments recognizes and appreciates the hard work you do.
InnocentBystander ago
I'm not as sure of that.
This was a biased and misleading post, that came with a number of extra visitors.
Voats are never to be trusted in a post like this. We count the voices.
It is clear there is concern. But whether dropping, clarifying, altering, or other is the solution will be determined soon.
Have you been to the new post?
Faustian ago
Kevdude made the post, and I know he holds you in high regard... but regardless of how you view the post, you shouldn't dismiss the discussion. As for extra visitors-I fall in that category, as I'm not an active v/videos user. I am an active voater, though, as are all the people commenting. Isn't that enough?
I'll check out the new post shortly.
InnocentBystander ago
We are not dissmissing it.
We've read the entire thing, and we heard.
We just want to gather additional input, there are many who have no idea what's happening, and others who may have been scared off by the downvoats.
There is also the possibility of people changing their minds after discussion.
So rather than rushing a decision we want to be sure.
Faustian ago
Sounds reasonable, diligent, cautious, and appropriate. See you in the other thread.
Edit.. it would, however, be more true to the tenants of speech to suspend the ban on AOU until you and the community make your conclusions. <3
MrPim ago
Idk. Normally I'd side w this user. But rule or not imho he's abusing the system and making it harder for the mods to do their job properly. And be was asked to chill. I'm on the fence on this one. I think I'd need to see what he reported to really decide.
Faustian ago
But he is a long time user, and you don't have any rules on the sidebar explicitly stating multiple report spam submissions are against the rules. Banning, unlike deleting, prevents you from participating in the sub in any capacity. It's a harsh punishment for an active user. Your slight inconvenience compared to a user who can no longer participate for a lengthy period *of time is unfair, no? I get a user can and likely may have abused this function, but from the comments looks like all you have to do is un-ban the user and update the sidebar. Ban again if the sidebar is violated... but in my view, always give active users the benefit of the doubt. Not a huge inconvenience, right? I've seen AOU around contributing content, and this small concession can restore the peace. You know?
Edit *
Cynabuns ago
Keep on spinning in whatever way you choose.
Bottom Line: You banned a user in a default subverse because he annoyed you, without a rule in place, and without discussing the rule with the community first; never mind that this is the antithesis of Voat and its freedom of speech platform.
Good day.
Cynabuns ago
I don't know what AOU's "level" is.
I asked you a simple question if you were going to ban me? I'm commenting a lot in this thread, is this spam to you? Have I antagonized you like AOU did to you that you would ban me? How is that not a legitimate question?
The only foolish thing here is the decision you three made to ban a user without a rule in place and without community input. And that you anger so very quickly is telling, and disconcerting, that I wondered aloud if this Mod role was a good position for you.
Boukert ago
Indeed we still have an open issue: https://voat.co/v/ProtectVoat/1388526/6739325 .
Also on this thread which is being brigaded by /v/protectvoat . https://voat.co/v/ProtectVoat/1402059
Cynabuns ago
Aaannnddd stooping to insults again because you are unable to address the issue at hand.
Why don't you tell me "Fuck You" again like you did in the PV thread when trying to have a discussion with you, https://voat.co/v/ProtectVoat/1395833/6753735?
I'm not convinced at this point that you are cut out to tolerate the duties of a Mod as expected by the Admins and the Community if you have to resort to insults to make yourself feel better.
Boukert ago
You have to admit, the theories he's spinning are pretty creative and he is very persistent!
I got documented on suspisions of "organized SRS" for opening a discussion and speaking freely about my viewpoints on a sub i regularly contribute to by PV last week!
Sooo I got that going for me...which is nice!
Cynabuns ago
You are the one who responded to my comment, I initiated nothing with you. I have a right to speak my peace in this thread just as every other user does. This is a Default Subverse.
What are you gonna do -- ban me?
Cynabuns ago
Where did your community tell you it was okay for you to ban a user for reporting too much spam? Show me, show us all where this is written. You cannot, the rule does not exist. You overstepped your bounds as Mods. And for that matter, a rule such as that one goes above and beyond what the Admins have said that they want to see in the Default Subs. You do realize I was quoting Atko, don't you?
Cynabuns ago
You are confusing your duties - you do not get to define what is and isn't spam, and that's exactly what the three of you did in banning AOU.
It is a decision for the Admins and for the community. You overstepped your bounds. Calm Your Tits.
AnTi90d ago
I've kind of felt iffy about this sub since they started tagging posts.
Like this direct link to a Paul Joseph Watson video that has been on the top of v/videos , all day..
https://voat.co/v/videos/1401478
..is tagged with REPOST. That smells like bullshit. It seems like something you'd tag on an old video that is being hosted on a secondary site to have two of the same video postings in the same sub.. AKA: spamming.. except this video isn't. Who gives a fuck if it's posted in another sub. Not everyone subs to every subverse.
I strongly dislike the tone.
Violentlight ago
I've tried to explain my side
A few times
Just to save myself
From carpal tunnel
I'll link to the main ones
I just wanted to address this one from @kevdude real quick though. I get what your saying now. I understand that your protest to the ban is that it is not outlined in the guidelines. The thing is, this isn't something that is common. Any other time that people tried to use the report spam button because someone said something mean to them. We warned them. We told them, this is not reddit. You cannot summon the mods because your feelings are hurt. Do not abuse the report spam button. So while the rule might not be on the guidelines, we don't just ban someone right away. We explain ourselves. We explain why what they reported does not constitute spam. Most of the time, thats the end of it. They dont do it anymore. They understand that the mods are not stepping in to protect their feelings.
In the case of AOU, we put a lot of time into trying to have a discussion with him. We explained in great detail that the sites definition of spam is not the same as v/videos. Because when it was discussed, in order to allow for Original Content, the community decided to let these types of posts be handled by voats. So we just can't do anything about them. Despite some of them just being god awful content. Thats not our place. Community told us to leave them alone. After explaining all of this, from all 3 of us, he just ramped it up. He made it clear he was no longer using it to help, but to try and spam us. We told him very clearly that further abuse of the button would lead to a ban. He then ramped it up more.
So I guess, what my thinking was, is that it happens so rarely. That its such a specific situation, that simply trying to talk to each person and explain it would suffice. Its like putting a sign on the outside of your house. "Don't set my house on fire". You just kind of assume that people are going to know not to set your house on fire. You don't think to put a sign up to tell them not to. And should someone come into your house with a lighter, telling you they are going to set your house on fire. You tell them why that isnt a good idea. Explain it to them. They tell you they will do it anyways. You get them out of the house. Because they are not acting very rational.
That was an odd analogy. But fuck it, I'm going to leave it in there.
I do have to go to bed. So my silence after this is nothing personal. I'll get back to this post tomorrow.
@InnocentBystander @THC
sakuramboo ago
Okay. But my contention is that user behaviour, ie. report spam abuse, is something that can affect every subverse and therefore should be defined by the site, not the sub.
Boukert ago
Don't forget @kevdude linked it in Protectvoat to: https://voat.co/v/ProtectVoat/1402059 for full drama and brigading.
Now he's complaining about people having a discussion and not agreeing with him. I'm just waiting for his "cahoots" accusations and full on paranoia.
NeedleStack ago
How are Evrocot's posts legit? He's a youtube channel spammer. You guys keep defending him but he is blatantly posting videos from channels he has affiliation with (which violates voat's spam rules). @AOU has every right to report him.
Saying that Evrocot is legitimized because he gets lots of upvoats is nonsensical.
sakuramboo ago
I don't see how you came to that conclusion.
If you want the sub to have to have make a rule about user behaviour then any sub that doesn't have that rule would imply that the mod needs to allow said behaviour, by your logic.
Dumb_Comment_Bot ago
Yep, just read that. Well. If the right side starts losing just tag me back in. I think there needs to be a discussion for every changed rule.
PS: Interesting to see sdbh crawl out of the cesspool eh?
Cynabuns ago
This EXACTLY is what Voat is about and what the Admins have told us time and again. Remember, "Calm Your Tits". -Atko.
Dumb_Comment_Bot ago
OK. Now I just spent 10 minutes sleuthing. https://voat.co/v/videosModTalk/1393397/6776933
They don't want to do a sticky because they feel it will clutter the site. Its not like we discuss the rules every day. It happens like once a month, they can afford that amount of clutter. And realistically its not about the users complaining. If we are changing the sidebar, its about the MODS complaining, because they want to make the rules easier for them to do their job. Apparently they will do one tomorrow though, so let it blow over until then I guess.
sakuramboo ago
But, what about the non-system subs? Without specifying that rule they are now subject to possible report abuse.
PM_ME_YOUR_ARCHES ago
Aren't you tired of harassing other users because they don't do exactly what you want them to do?
Dumb_Comment_Bot ago
That would be unreasonable. Every other subverse on voat operates with community-defined rules that are discussed and voted on in a post (Save like sdbh or something).
Its not like it takes effort to just make a damn post about changing the sidebar. Its important to do it this way to prevent a precedent of mods changing rules willy nilly.
Boukert ago
And I was wondering if you where ever gonna post on /v/sports ..... but hey pointing at other people is more fun...
PM_ME_YOUR_ARCHES ago
Actually, they do. That's why we have mods on Voat.
sakuramboo ago
Report abuse should be outlined by the site, not the subverse. If what you propose were to be the case then every subverse without that specific rule could be subject to the same abuse. The site outlines what is and is not acceptable for a user to do, the subverses outline what content is allowed on that subverse.
The subverses rules are only needed for the content of the subverse. How a user interacts with the site as a whole should follow the sites guidelines. Unless a subverse wishes to allow specific rule breaks (like how the federal government has pot illegal but the states can make it legal for that state).
PM_ME_YOUR_ARCHES ago
No, he didn't spam the sub, he spammed the mods. And started posting shit about them being paid by spammers.
If you spam mods with pages and pages of fake spam reports every day, you will probably get a temporary ban at some point. The only problem here is that someone actually took this guy seriously instead of saying "yeah, so what? he spammed the shit out of the mods so they couldn't see what was real spam or fake spam anymore".
One single case like this does not have to be written out into the rules. It is not practical to stick to the rules of the sub in the way you're suggesting, because something is always going to come up that is a unique case.
Faustian ago
AOU is a long time user who has actively participated in voat. Even Homer doesn't ban for pms or what people say in different subs. I've read comments around voat from mods on the side bar, and many of you make great contributions. I'm sure modding a system sub is challenging; however, preventing a voater from submitting content and participating in this sub goes against fundamental voat principles, principles that many of you fought for in the past. A long time contributor like AOU deserves more than an outright dismissal via ban.
Redditsdead ago
Fuck AOU. All he does is make fat jokes. His loser ass adds nothing. He can choke on his boyfriends Dick.
Dumb_Comment_Bot ago
The way that spamming is defined "Spam being defined as irrelevant posts, chronic reposting, or advertising is not allowed in any capacity. Use the "Report Spam" button if you see any."
Spamming the report button doesn't fit in that definition. Make a post for a sidebar change, that you want to add a rule to ban users who abuse the report button. If you make it reasonable, the community will support you because we already do even in this post, and blammo its done. I think thats all kevdude wants you to do anyway, hes just got a... dramatic... way of saying it.
Boukert ago
I forgot you get branded for having an opinion and engaging a discussion on voat these days!
@puttitout i've still got an issue with PV and @kevdude for organised brigading and bullying btw as described in this post: https://voat.co/v/ProtectVoat/1388526#6739730
https://voat.co/v/ProtectVoat/1402059 this link is another prime example of brigade. Just look at downvoting behavior and PV stooges showing up like it's organized.
Mickgoestojail ago
Also I think a link to the thread where spamming was defined would be good.
Cynabuns ago
With regard to any Defaults, the rules of thumb are already found in a few spots:
From the User Agreement: Voat is for Personal (ie, Not Commercial) Use Only. From the FAQ's: SPAM/Self-Promotion: Submitting only links to sites you operate or are associated with... is considered SPAMMING.
Agreed, it would be nice to see where this sub had the last community rules discussion.
PM_ME_YOUR_ARCHES ago
Wow. They banned a guy who was spamming them, and now they're another target for you? Was this whole protectvoat thing ever about actually trying to make Voat a better place for users, or has your thought process always been this negative? It is extremely counter productive and only causes hassle for mods.
Kadynce ago
Yes, let's agree with the guy who calls mods cancer xD
@THC @innocentbystander @violentlight you guys do a great job with the sub and I love the transparency and communication that you have in /v/videosmodtalk.
Too bad @kevdude did not even look to see if this issue was addressed there :(
Mickgoestojail ago
Ok I'm in the camp with what others mentioned. There needs to be some technical solution to this because the mod queue isn't really the sub. What happenes in their only affects you 3 and even if you stretch it to time wasting only marginally affects the sub itself. Would you yourself prefer this be handled by other means than banning?
Mickgoestojail ago
Thanks.
PM_ME_YOUR_ARCHES ago
Again, please don't make this personal. I am stating my opinion, nothing more.
Dumb_Comment_Bot ago
I do agree with you, but you need to define it in the sidebar first before you ban him.
I would say something like 5 abuses of the report button and ignoring a warning from a mod will result in a ban. Or something like that.
PM_ME_YOUR_ARCHES ago
Y'know, if a guy is annoying you with spam reports, it's not the end of the world if you ban him.
I'm sure they gave a warning first, it's not something that needs to be a rule IMO.
ThisIsMyRealName ago
Can you provide any examples of the latter cases?
Dumb_Comment_Bot ago
Well heres the thing. If he got an explicit warning, he should have taken the warning to PV, said that the mods shouldn't be warning him with a ban over a non-existent rule. Then there wouldn't have been a ban and the problem could have been resolved sooner.
By continuing to report links with malice he was just fucking with them. Not that he was doing anything against the rules, but thats not particularly productive.
They could have taken the rules to the community, said "okay we need to talk about consequences for this and this action" BEFORE they banned him.
Kadynce ago
This sounds reasonable enough. You can only warn a user so much.
Dumb_Comment_Bot ago
Is there any way to block just his spam reports?
I mean if you warned him several times, he should have either taken the warnings to PV first, said "I don't like that these mods are warning me" or had a reasonable discussion with you guys. I feel like he didnt take the mature course of action.
heygeorge ago
I don't believe such an individual feature exists, and would clearly add a coding burden.
InnocentBystander ago
Note, before this post was made we had already decided to make a sticky about this.
Thanks Kevdude for trying to inject some unnecessary drama. It's appreciated.
But I am going to bed.
I'll check in on how you guys feel in the morning.
Beware of potential bullshit.
Kadynce ago
Owned.
ThisIsMyRealName ago
So what kind of posts are being reported for spam?
Dumb_Comment_Bot ago
Did they warn him that he would be receiving a ban if he continued? If they didn't warn him, then for sure thats not appropriate.
Cynabuns ago
There are no rules in the sidebar about abuses pertaining to the Report Spam Button.
This user should not have been banned in the first place and should be unbanned from this Default Subverse.
Editing to add: a rule to ban for overusing the ReportSpam Button would be absolutely ludicrous.
Sorry to inconvenience the Mods, but this is part of the job--to evaluate the reports that come in. In a thread over at PV, these mods have even acknowledged that this user has noted what they perceive to be as true spam.
CANCEL-CAT-FACTS ago
It is still worth a try -- in this single post, the three mods of v/videos made 649 comments to each other discussing the individual ethics and policies of banning users or deleting posts or removing comments or flairing videos, etc -- https://voat.co/v/videosModTalk/462632
They have consistently demonstrated the integrity and impartial ethics of all bans, deletions and removals in the most voatful possible way.
Thanks.
Mickgoestojail ago
The sidebar actually is encouraging people to report spam right now.
How big of a deal is his reporting? How many are we talking about?
Yes the community should be making the rules in system subs. Mods can we sticky this?
Edit: wtf happened to my nightmode? Please tell me it hasn't been removed.
CANCEL-CAT-FACTS ago
They will delete this because it is not a direct link to a video.
Maybe you would be more successful posting this in User Ban Appeals in https://voat.co/v/videosModTalk
Thanks