You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

Owlchemy ago

I guess I don't know enough about this whole idea to really comment intelligently, but I do have some concerns. I pretty much like Voat the way it is, otherwise I wouldn't have spent as much time here posting, so as with anything, change can be scary. My biggest concern is that I am in the vast majority here ... those who follow the Voat philosophy and have almost never banned or censored someone from any subs I mod. I've also spent a lot of time building up subs that I enjoy. So my concern is that it now sounds like in the interest of appeasing a few for the misdeeds of a tiny minority of mods like HenryCorp, I could be voted out of one of my own subs by a group which bands together for no other purpose but to take over a sub. Maybe I'm just reading more into this than there is ... but I don't get the point.

PuttItOut ago

Ok Owlchemy, let me try to take on a few points:

So my concern is ... I could be voted out of one of my own subs by a group which bands together for no other purpose but to take over a sub.

This is an issue I have given a lot of time thinking about. Part of sites like Voat is that a user can create their own unique eco-systems and I do not plan on abandoning this.

I do not want malicious take over of a sub by people that don't contribute to it.

So I've designed most of the infrastructure to give the "content producers" the power and to strip it from those who don't contribute. So if it is done right, a group of people who do not contribute to a sub will not be able to take it over. If you don't have skin in the game you have no power.

How this works: Votes with an outcome (mod removal for example) will have a restriction placed on it so that only contributors to that subverse can place votes. Just for simple purposes we can say that in order for a user to vote they would have to have say X comments in that subverse in the last Y days.

All these details are yet to be hammered out but I wanted to make sure you know that I am not enabling a mob here, I'm giving producers their voice back.

In addition, only certain subs will have these outcome votes allowed in them. I was thinking that once a sub gets to a certain size (posts per day, subscribers, etc) it then turns "public" and allows outcome votes.

AnTi90d ago

When I see:

I do not want malicious take over of a sub by people that don't contribute to it.

It seems more like:

a malicious take over of a sub by people that (pretend to) contribute to it.

-

We're a small community. Setting up a majority rule just lays us vulnerable for hostile takeover from a group larger than we are.. whether that group is made of organized individuals with a common, malicious goal or a handful of people with several alt accounts and VPN access.

We already have a malicious group here. Their current strategy is to spam shitposts on a subverse until they get a reaction and then cry wolf that they're being censored. They're motivated and have nothing else better to do with their lives. A system like you are proposing lends them a way to create more discord than they're already capable of.. they just have to change their attack strategy.

-

I do value that you still have a passion for making Voat better.. but I don't like where I feel this is headed.

BUTTHOLE__EMPRESS ago

Yeah they will do that, especially the shills. They'll just change the tone to make it seem legit. If I didn't have a daytime job I could just use some proxies and post safe posts (where I won't get downvoted) and farm my points and eventually take control. Get 10 more guys like me and we're really be smokin. it's incredibly easy. Think of v/TheDonald, all you have to do is post pro-Trump stuff or things related to Trump thta isn't spamming (easy to cross post with altright news, or even just RT or Breitbart and that won't get you downvoted (nor should it).

This update opens