On Mod Removal from v/videos (videos)

submitted ago by PuttItOut

@THC was removed as moderator from v/videos for the following reasons:

  1. Used a @system subverse as a personal platform

  2. 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

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

Broc_Lia ago

You really don't see how putting up a banner to advertise videos is different to doing it to gripe about how the site is being run? In /v/videos?

Chiefpacman ago

Right.

But his point is that put acting like putting up a banner was "maliciously modifying CSS." When its always been fine before, but this time it was pointing out a disagreement with mods.

I'm on the fence about all this. How could THC have politely showcased disapproval? Or should he just have shut up and modded the sub?

I guess he should have brought the issue forward on another sub.

Broc_Lia ago

But his point is that put acting like putting up a banner was "maliciously modifying CSS." When its always been fine before, but this time it was pointing out a disagreement with mods.

It is maliciously modifying CSS to advertise your personal crusade. Doing it to highlight creative content is a completely different thing.

How could THC have politely showcased disapproval?

On /v/whatever, on /v/protectvoat, on /v/askvoat, on /v/voatdevs etc. And it's not that he wasn't aware of those options, he did voice dissent there, but it wasn't gathering the momentum he wanted so he started pushing it in /v/videos where it was off topic.

Chiefpacman ago

To be fair it gets buried everywhere.

Broc_Lia ago

Not if the community is genuinely interested, which they mostly weren't before he got de-modded. And he got a fair response from the admins explaining why it was necessary over a week ago.

Chiefpacman ago

Well they sent cyna to tell him to take down the banner. Cyna isn't an admin, and the reaction from THC was expected.

Not a very fair response I'd say. But its done, whatever

Broc_Lia ago

Well they sent cyna to tell him to take down the banner.

Not according to her, or them. THC jumped to this conclusion because he was demodded around the time she (as a user) asked him to unsticky it.

Chiefpacman ago

I would make the same conclusion. Cyna probably asked not to be attributed. Not that it mattes tho, who told who.

Put and atko arent active users by any means, idk how they'd notice without help

Broc_Lia ago

I would make the same conclusion.

I'd say it's a pretty strange conclusion to come to. If you're a system mod and do something to piss people off, expect a reaction from the userbase and the admins.

Put and atko arent active users by any means, idk how they'd notice without help

He had been griping about it non-stop for quite some time, so they might have been keeping an eye on him.

Chiefpacman ago

How is that strange to you? Imagine you and Atko's pet don't get along. Pet asks you to do something, you don't, Atko brings the hammer down. Not exactly confusing.

They were keeping an eye, thru Cyna.

I'm just saying. If you really think that cyna didn't say anything, THC could take a screenshot.

Buttttt the main issue is put had a personal problem with THC. Remember how long it took to remove @She? Huge community outcry for a week and the admins reluctantly let her go.

One tiny banner letting users know of a rule change thay admins had flat out forgot to tell anyone (not the first time); and they immediately remove him and drag name thru the mud. Fucking dumb.

Broc_Lia ago

How is that strange to you? Imagine you and Atko's pet don't get along. Pet asks you to do something, you don't, Atko brings the hammer down. Not exactly confusing.

It's not confusing, just a rather complex explanation when there's a much simpler one: THC acted like a diggit powermod and both users and admins responded.

I'm just saying. If you really think that cyna didn't say anything, THC could take a screenshot.

She did say something, that was never in question. If I had noticed I would have said something.

Remember how long it took to remove @She?

They have a full time job, this is a hobby. We have zero right to gripe about how quickly/slowly they get to this stuff.

Hue community outcry for a week and the admins reluctantly let her go.

Reluctantly? Ok, you're just inventing shit now. They publicly denounced her.

One tiny banner letting users know of a rule change thay admins had flat out forgot to tell anyone (not the first time);

He stickied a spam post in a sub where his sole function was cleaning up spam

and they immediately remove him and drag name thru the mud. Fucking dumb.

You mean "he made an absolute tit out of himself then blamed the admins"

Chiefpacman ago

I think you and I have at least a slight reason to gripe, seeing as we donated on the premise that this site would be different. Stay vigilant Broc, enjoy your week.