@THC was removed as moderator from v/videos for the following reasons:
-
Used a @system subverse as a personal platform
-
Defacing the subverse CSS
@InnocentBystander was removed as designer on v/videos for maliciously modifying the subverse CSS in response to @THC's removal.
We decided to leave the sticky up since @THC felt so strongly about this that he would consider using a @system sub as a soapbox an acceptable course of action.
@Cynabuns doesn't have the power or authority to remove moderators and neither did she request either of you to be removed.
Bottom line is you thought v/videos was your personal subverse to do with as you please. You had issues with Voat asking for Janitors on @system subs and had issues when admins stepped in due to poor handling in the past.
You forced us to remove you and I'm more confident than not that this is the outcome you desired and why you did what you did.
On the paging limitation for those interested:
https://voat.co/v/voatdev/1389285/6738688/10
view the rest of the comments →
SaneGoatiSwear ago
man it'd be nice if this was posted by atko or putt and not a 3rd perspective...
you've talked more about it in one comment than the devs ever did.
which is the problem.
not that they did it
read user agreement section 2. they can remove anything they want for any reason whenever they want.
but that they always discussed with us first
and now, multiple underhanded sjw-like actions taken without discussing anything
AND anyone speaking up about it is downvoat brigaded, shitposted, and attacked with disinformation campaigns against them... and de-modded from system subs
akuta ago
I can understand your concern. I can also understand the frustration. I'm also likely 10 years or so older than either of them... And have been in the game for a lot longer, so am able to try to convey a message across.
Yes, they can remove it if they like. That is their right as the site owners... But they didn't actually remove it. They just made it so you couldn't see it. Putt made it very clear about that.
Think of it this way:
Let's say I build a window for you to see through. Then I run into a problem where I have to make the window smaller for a while (maybe construction)... They didn't remove the outside. They just limited your ability to see it because they made the window smaller temporarily.
I suspect that there's more to the whole thing than has been made public, and I suspect that neither THC nor Innocent are actually innocent in this. THC violated the platform to push a personal agenda, targeting the admins, because he simply didn't understand the underlying issue... That said, this "ninja CSS edit" with "a gun in [Atko]'s face" seems a bit hyperbolic; however, Atko could expose what was actually done and lay everything to rest. The problem is that he has to choose whether he's going to set the precedent of exposing the shitty behavior of the users (which is a real Redditesque behavior) or whether or not he just takes control and cuts the cancer out with a pocket knife (another Redditesque behavior). The problem is that either way he loses... But this way he gets to allow the user to save some face.
And Atko isn't under any real requirement to discuss these things. Fuck, if they spent as much time as people expect telling them about every little ongoing issue/resolution with Voat, shit would never get done.
Personally, if it were me: I'd out the behavior in plain fashion and let the fucking community eat these two alive. They may have been great users before, but if their behavior is underhanded then they got too big for their britches and should be dealt with accordingly. No saving face, no apologies... "This is what they did, this is how they violated the terms, this is how they threatened me/you/voat, and this is why I took the action. Like it or not, this is in the best interest of the site."
akuta ago
Just to update anyone reading this subthread: My suggestion is exactly what Atko did in the end.