You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

go1dfish ago

I strongly oppose this feature particularly for @system subs.

Freedom of speech should be the default.

If people want more heavily curated spaces they are welcome to create one.

I have no desire to vote to restrict what others are allowed to say and may well abstain from these votes on general principle.

Please reconsider the scope of this feature.

anti_pedo ago

Hi Pedo!

RedditisPropaganda31 ago

Give them an inch of censorship and this site becomes rddit

SegFault ago

They can simply have the rule "do not post actual illegal (according to the laws of <this particular country>) content here". Those were never allowed to begin with and the rules can omit all civility requirements, for instance.

anti_pedo ago

HI PEDO!!

Diggernicks ago

Take your witch hunt elsewhere nigger sperm enthusiast.

go1dfish ago

Do you have any evidence for this libelous claim?

PuttItOut ago

We won't be rolling out this feature without proper vetting. First we need to develop the feature and this feature is a big one, so we have a lot of testing yet to do.

Once we know it works and feel it's bugs are worked out we will decide how, where, and what to roll out.

I fully know that a feature such as this has to be used carefully.

What's that quote? With great ... comes great ... ?

BaneGhostiSwear ago

you have to be severely retarded... oh wait, you're a bunch of militant criminal SJWs hellbent on censoring voat users!!

no one in their right mind running a social network claiming it's for free speech would ever do such a stupid thing - - of course, i remember when you banned 100s of user accounts for upvoting me, even accounts that had only upvoted once, but when your criminal SJW shill buddies downvote brigaded me 20,000 points, you did nothing but ban more upvoters, and eventually even after claiming you wouldn't ban my @sanegoatiswear account, you did it anyway, and in a dirty way - - you derpy guy'd me so @sanegoatiswear doesn't show up in the banned users log.

"with great failure comes great suffering, @puttitout."

PuttItOut ago

I do love you trying to get to me. You're cute.

BaneGhostiSwear ago

we're talking about you. you should join. oh wait, you're shills.

BaneGhostiSwear ago

seriously. i would love to see voat free of censorship and shills and growing!

BaneGhostiSwear ago

want to have an actual discussion about voat or are you legally gagged from doing so?

allow me to comment freely on my original account (i wouldn't have this one if you didn't censor me.)

lol btw i'm not a group; i'm one person.

Disappointed ago

With great effort comes extra flushes?

lordbeatlejuicethe1 ago

beatle is the hero voat needs

Disappointed ago

You'll have to wash your undies more often since superheros wear them on the outside. No one likes a hero with skidmarks.

lordbeatlejuicethe1 ago

#me too

#never again

freshmeat ago

the people helping you vet it are the people who are going to abuse it. Stop thinking like a dev for a minute and be honest.

Samsquamch ago

You abuse alt accounts for upvoats and downvoats, not sure you should be telling others to be honest.

Pissant ago

Interesting, any proof? Or do you usually just regurgitate everything v/soapboxbanhammer claims?

Ever looked into @Fuzzywords the transsexual coder that has been working with Voat? Seems a lot like having a Jew coding for us, conflict of interest or something like that?

But yeah, what proof have you ever seen other than baseless accusations? Because I'm allegedly one of his alts. In fact anyone who disagrees with SBBH is an alt of SaneGoat, didnt you know that?

Just so you know Sam, those who are fooling you are laughing behind your back.

Califit ago

If you're right about him, if they dont abuse it, he will. So even if he does use alts is he is still right about it being open to abuse.

freshmeat ago

i don't use alts and I make my activity on this site very transparent, which I believe is why I haven't been banned because I haven't broken a single rule.

It will undoubtedly be abused and I'm against it's implementation

freshmeat ago

Bullshit, I've been against alts since my original account was brigaded into censorship. I would prefer the possibility of alts being used 0%

heygeorge ago

How many accounts have you made? How many accounts do you have right now? How many of them are moderating rPV?

freshmeat ago

how many are active?

Rotteuxx ago

I've been against alts since my original account was brigaded into censorship.

So you're full of shit since you just admitted to having sleeper alts

Pissant ago

I love how it's always the same group of people making these accusations.

Sbbh has no shame.

Samsquamch ago

When have I posted or been a part of sbbh?

Pissant ago

I already directly addressed you, Sam.

https://voat.co/v/voatdev/2424006/12076915

Samsquamch ago

That silly bait response?

Pissant ago

So you noticed Freshmeat using alt accounts? What are his alt accounts? Which threads did you notice them in?

Honestly man, correct me if I'm wrong; you're simply regurgitating the words that v/Soapboxbanhammer have put out there. Parroting their talking points.

Have an original thought, bud. I've specifically noticed you responding to SBBHs accusations, regurgitating their bullshit. I've actually called you out on it in the past. You gave me a hard time for naming ExpertShitposter as an instigator just last week? I notice you specifically because I'm also a fan of TPB, and there are very few people who parrot SBBHs talking points who aren't regular users of SBBH, so you stand out.

freshmeat ago

https://voat.co/v/realProtectVoat/2298942

Ended up not having to do that.

go1dfish ago

Power and responsibility.

I don’t trust the user base here with the power to add rules to system subs.

Democracy has the effect of eliminating any sense of personal responsibility.

HACKhalo2 ago

I completely agree. The rules of System Subs should only be managed by Voat, because they are core subverses to the site. Any other subverse should be fair game.

go1dfish ago

Indeed, I’d actually like to see more curated subverses created on Voat, I think it could help to grow the site into something more sustainable and interesting.

But I absolutely don’t want this to take over the site, freedom should be the default and if someone wants to control/curate a community they are welcome to create their own.

Voat must retain prominent public uncensored defaults for generic topics.

Or at a very minimum /v/whatever should remain radically free.

HACKhalo2 ago

I completely agree. I enjoy the anarchy of voat, but I also know that the current system for managing rouge mods (aka waiting for putt) isnt working. It's also why I think only Putt should manage @system subs, and the community manages all the other ones. It makes it fair in my eyes

germanshepherd ago

agreed

Dudicles ago

If people want more heavily curated spaces they are welcome to create one.

Even those would be subject to whatever rules Putt decides they have to follow when curating content/users. I see no other real reason for this action other than what I posted elsewhere: it sounds like it's designed to allow for the "legitimate" removal of mods from subverses.

go1dfish ago

To be clearer I don’t think the rule feature and tying mod actions to rules is bad.

What I’m concerned about is the longer term plan to allow users to vote in new rules in @system sub verses and especially /v/whatever

If the voting aspect is limited to non system subs, and system sub rules are only sitewide + off topic then that could be a very good feature IMO.

But if allowed to subsume the site we will end up where Reddit did.

Another feature that might mitigate this is if non global rule violations result in moving a post to /v/whatever or some other catch all rather than removing the post as happens now.

captainstrange ago

and if someone wants to control/curate a community they are welcome to create their own.

This is the answer. As it stands the whole 'bad mods crisis' is a small minority of individuals gaming the system. I didn't know why at the time. I thought they were just shit-stirrers. Now I understand: They wanted to bring their alt-brigade 'democracy' to all subs--so the 'free market' and creating new subs will be pointless.

They'll game this to death. It'll be the death of free speech on voat. I'm not shitting you.

ChillyHellion ago

@PuttItOut, I'm with go1dfish on this one. I think tying bans to rules by forcing moderators to cite an existing rule to ban someone is an excellent improvement with no apparent downsides. But I can't think of a way to implement purely democratic rule systems without the system falling victim to witch hunts or knee-jerk community reactions.

And how would you prevent larger communities from taking a sudden interest in smaller community's rule "elections" and establishing rules the community doesn't want for itself?

It's one of those ideas where the possibility of success is so slim and the potential for abuse is so high that I'm not confident it's a step in the right direction, despite the spirit of the change.


however, I do want to emphasize that I think tying moderators' ban function to existing rules is a masterstroke. And it would provide for future filtering options, make it easier for users to parse and audit public mod logs.

Womb_Raider ago

Frankly, fish, I think this marks the point where a new website must be considered. We cannot trust him to bear the torch if his judgment falters despite overwhelming criticism when this idea was first announced.

We are going the way of reddit.

go1dfish ago

Yeah I’ve always said that there is no fundamental difference between this place and Reddit and that it was only a matter of time before it fell victim to similar problems.

I didn’t expect it quite so soon though.

I don’t know of any better alternatives at this point either.

Sad

PuttItOut ago

We are going the way of reddit.

Actually, it is the exact opposite direction.

Womb_Raider ago

So you'll reply to this comment but not the one I made directly responding to you? Don't feel like answering challenging questions? I'm not trying to be as divisive as Grifter. My criticisms of this proposed system are as valid as anyone else's.

go1dfish ago

Reddit’s redesign is adding removal rules and reasons and I’ve also heard they are exploring public mod logs.

Not aware of any plans for rule/mod voting.

The opposite direction of Reddit would be to make censorship impossible rather than easy.

Focusing on democratic censorship seems much more parallel to Reddit than the opposite of it.

Same destination, different path.

PuttItOut ago

Reddit has on more than one occasion implemented a current Voat feature so this doesn't surprise me.

We are viewing things from different perspectives concerning the vote code. Have you spent any time at the beta site and investigated this feature and it's capabilities?

Grifter42 ago

Hey, why'd you shut down Chat when your friend Beatle spammed it to death? Why didn't you just tell him to knock it the fuck off?

Oh, was it that you wanted an excuse to shut it down?

PuttItOut ago

I told you chat was dropped when we did the port because the socket libraries were not available. It will be back soon as their port is nearing completion.

Grifter42 ago

Bullshit. You shut down chat when it was spammed by Beatle, who was doing his fucking thing where he would make a name that was one letter off of other people, and use scripts to flood the chat with fucked up fetish shit. You said you were going to look into the people who did it, and then surprise surprise, you didn't. You entered into your absentee landlord mode, and fucked off for two whole months. What were you doing in those months? Are you even the same fucking person? I doubt it.

PuttItOut ago

I can't believe I don't block you... I don't have time to investigate like I'm the fbi. Chat was being raped, so I had to turn it off when it was being abused.

We tried to manage it and couldn't.

BaneGhostiSwear ago

lol screencap this voat! @puttitout just gave one reason

"socket libraries"

then changed the reason to

"chat was being raped, so i had to turn it off when it was being abused"

LOLOL @grifter42 you are wrecking this sjw nigger!

Grifter42 ago

It was your people that were flooding the chat! Also, what was it, chat being flooded, or the socket libraries? You're contradicting yourself.

You know what I think? I think you didn't like chat because people were asking too many questions.

PuttItOut ago

I have no people here any more. All my people left when r/niggles migrated. All I have now is my ideal to support free speech, and you should appreciate it because it's the only reason I haven't banned you.

Grifter42 ago

You ban me and you prove my point that you've been compromised. I've posted nothing against the rules of Voat. Revealing the abuse of the system that's going on isn't a fuckin' crime.

PuttItOut ago

This might be the only true statement your little fingers ever typed.

BaneGhostiSwear ago

@puttitout is being openly hostile towards people that stand for free speech.

hey @grifter42 if you haven't figured it out yet,

the @puttitout account is run by users like fuzzywords, disappointed, kevdude.

justin chastain and atif colo have 0 to do with voat now.

no no,

go find justin and atif.

i found atif and atif is literally not able to discuss voat AT ALL on any subject, not even to state that he can't talk about it.

Grifter42 ago

What happened to you?

Womb_Raider ago

To be fair, he's agreeing with you based on his comment, Grift. I don't trust him either but you're being overzealous.

Grifter42 ago

He's still a liar. Was it socket libraries, or chat flooding?

I know for a fact it was chat flooding, because I saw it first hand, and it was done by the same Beatlejuice that Putt was jovially talking with just a bit ago.

Womb_Raider ago

Voat has gotten weird ever since Atko and Putt disappeared for two months. It has not been the same since and I don't think it ever will be. I hope we start working to create an alternative platform, so that we can have a failsafe. I have lost faith in this one. It's the best we have. Is it the best we can do?

go1dfish ago

The redesign visually looks more like voat as well from what I’ve seen, but they’ve yet to re-adopt the most important features of Voat: freedom and transparency

I checked it out briefly but I have no desire to aid in the development or testing of the feature as you have described it so far.

The specific implementation details don’t matter much to me when the overall plan involves giving the community the power to institute censorship rules in @system subs.

Grifter42 ago

Yup. This is handing over the site to SBBH.

PuttItOut ago

I see your concern. We will figure it out.

heygeorge ago

A simple and practical solution to much of this would be to keep v/whatever just as it is. Untouchably whatever.

This subverse is a catch-all subverse. If you don't want to classify your submission or don't care about where it belongs, post it here. Anything goes.

Womb_Raider ago

Only having freedom of speech in one corner of an ocean is kind of lame. It's easy to forum slide one massive traffic subverse.

Competition is valuable. This system sounds sloppy, george.

heygeorge ago

It's an idea to start. What idea do you have outside of criticizing me for no reason other than openly speaking my mind?

Womb_Raider ago

What idea do I have? Keeping voat as-is is a better idea than what is being proposed. Your idea is worse than what we have now. Anything that makes manipulation easier is a bad option.

heygeorge ago

What idea do I have? Keeping voat as-is

Aren't you a proponent of the notion that Voat is compromised and run by the bogeyman SBBH? Yet suddenly the status quo seems appropriate to you. Go figure.

Womb_Raider ago

Yes, I am. If one leg is on fire, lighting the other is not a solution. If you cannot perceive that bad cannot become worse, you are as much a moron as you sound.

You are being manipulative.