0fsgivin ago

So we ban any paid trump staffers as well?

Mylon ago

Though we need to be aware of the slippery slope, moderation does serve a useful goal of keeping the signal to noise ratio high. Shills/SJWs/racists/trolls are all welcome, but they're welcome to their own sections where they can shill and whine and insult among themselves. Allowing everyone everywhere creates chaos and is a form of censorship in and of itself as meaningful discussion becomes impossible.

antiliberalsociety ago

What if I told you the shills were the ones clamoring for the censoring...

muffalettadiver ago

Just downvoat and berate with facts. Easy peasy. The more discussion the better, ya?

Lobotomy ago

You are paranoid as fuck.

Lobotomy ago

But muh echo chamber is under attack!!1

pacman2000 ago

The fact they want to censor opinions and view any pro-Clinton opinion as a paid shill is ridiculous. They are just as bad as the users on reddit but from the flipside. I am a liberal and I'm on voat because I hate censorship. I hope voat stays that way.

elgindelta ago

Very true,

Cuckbot ago

I don't get your link. They haven't deleted a comment for 3 months? Besides the Donald is a hugbox sub and have in their sidebar that they delete anti trump comments. They are hardly representing the typical approach on Voat

Nvm, I see what you are saying. As as the current rumblings stay rumblings then it's fine. There's barely any way to prove who is a paid shill anyway so any ban would be bullshit.

Baconmon ago

I will give my opinion on this matter:
I believe voat's system already has fairly adequate tools for combating shills, such as down-voting, and not being able to post much with low CCP, and being able to check the age of an account to see if it was just created a few minutes or hours ago..
Although the "up-vote old content" LOOPHOLE NEEDS TO BE FIXED.. Shills can create alternate accounts and then up-vote their other accounts to give them lots of CCP.. That really needs to have limits just like down-voting old posts does..

When moderators start making all the decisions of what should be seen or not seen, you start entering in to a dangerous territory.. Whether you call it "deleting" or "censoring" is just semantics.. It is information that 1 person (a mod) decides should be seen or not, instead of the many users deciding (via voting).. Thankfully though, voat has an other tool that reddit never had, which is being able to see the deleted comments, so that if a mod ever really does start over-censoring excessively, the users will still be able to check and see exactly what is being deleted and can call the mods out for it..

Actually, I wouldn't mind if the CCP system was altered a bit to make it more difficult to post a lot of crap right after you have just created a new account.. I think it would be beneficial for the voat community as a whole if new users were encouraged to lurk for a bit (maybe few days or weeks) before being able to post too much.. They could still post a few things at first, but not tons.. And as their CCP goes up they would be able to post more stuff..

Also, notice that 4chan /pol/ doesn't really have any mods removing shill posts, and doesn't even have a voting system, yet the shills on there always get spotted very quickly and get made fun of because people aren't stupid and many times can detect when some one has a weak argument that they are trying to push..

One more thing I would like to add: I also think voat mods should be able to create their own subverses that delete/censor shills' posts IF they put a warning on the right side stating some disclaimer like "This is a huge Trump echo-chamber and CTR posts WILL be deleted, so if you can't handle that BTFO", because I think people should still have the option to have a lot of control over their own personal subverse that they created if they want to..
AND, one more tool voat has that reddit doesn't is the "whatever" subverse, where nothing is censored.. So it isn't like any one can be completely locked out of every major sub on the whole site (unlike reddit)..

weezkitty ago

I disagree about preventing upvotes of old content. It would hurt the small subs

KikiCat ago

Agreed. It's the spirit of the sub that needs to be stated. If you claim freedom, you need to follow it. At the same time if you're like we are fph level of ban hammer for Clinton sympathy because we're pro trump, it's fine as long as you make that very clear and not try to pretend to be neutral.

Aged ago

Putting restrictions on new users is an elitist practice. This isn't a goddamn school, there's nothing hard to learn about this. Post content that people like you get upvotes, post the opposite and you get downvotes, post something neutral and you may receive downvotes anyway. I know nobody likes shills but if you don't like, downvote. This kind of "soft" censorship is ridiculous.

Baconmon ago

That is true for a normal person that intends to submit content of their own volition.. But I was saying it in the context of trying to figure out a reasonable way to combat shills that create new accounts solely to continue shilling because their old accounts don't have enough CCP to post very well any more..

It seems like you are arguing that as soon as some one creates an account, they should have unlimited and unrestricted posting abilities.. And that would work wonderfully in a perfect world.. But in this world, it creates a loophole that the shills can knowingly take advantage of, and they do..

You can call it censorship if you want to, but it would only be a temporary limit to new accounts only, and as they accrue more CCP, they would be able to post more and more.. I mean, we actually have that system in place now actually, so I'm sorry if you don't appreciate it very much..
But look at it from the perspective of a non-shill normal person: Most people are only going to create 1 account.. There are already anonymous subverses on voat, so it would be rare that some one needs more than 1 account.. They would only have to go through that initial period of having their posting-rate limited one time.. Even if some one wants to make 2 accounts for some reason, they would only have to go through that short posting-rate limit period once (for each account) and then they would be fine for the rest of their entire account history..

I hope that you understand the positions that I am taking.. I don't consider it an elitist practice as you claim.. I only consider it a type of hedging against would-be shills that want to pour in and spam their money-backed opinions every where in an unlimited supply.. That type of thing really deserves some type of counter-measure..

heygeorge ago

Similar to misguided gun control measures, this will only serve to shut down individuals voices. 'Pro' & dedicated shills will already have the accounts they need in reserve.

elgindelta ago

Besides it being wrong to delete them. Take it as an opportunity to learn the talking points they have been fed. And then out them as shills.

perfectShuffle ago

Why bother 'outing' anyone? You're nuts on this site sometimes with all the 'oh there's a shill' 'found the Jew', 'guess we've spotted the xyz' stuff. Why not just address the merits or lack thereof of what someone is saying rather than just trying to blanket dismiss whatever is said 'cause "oh they're one of Them". Is that not better? If You're really right, and They're really wrong it should be easy no? They're should be no need to resort to that kind of thing? Leftists and Shills and CTR and Libtards are all idiot retards who's arguments have no merit, right? So why not just dismantle their points with counterpoints of your own?

goatsandbros ago

We are the censors, as it should be.

Browse /v/all/new and take out the trash, everyone!

AfricanZionSafari ago

WTF is CTR? Cathode Tube-Ray?

Viropher ago

Correct The Record,the pack of paid trolls for Clinton going around trying to turn all social media users into Clinton Zombies.

AfricanZionSafari ago

Thank you for answering my question.

In my day we called those types of people "faggots". The acronym was "FAG".

Sikozen ago

You're absolutely right.

Crawdadie17 ago

Don't they just get downvoat and ridiculed anyways?

guinness2 ago

I've noticed a disturbing trend with CRT shills: they drop their pants and make hundreds of shitposts without making a single comment, so their CCP remains at zero and they don't get constrained.

What's the point of a public free speech discussion forum if users aren't even willing to discuss anything?

These people are nothing but spammers making blatant Hillary advertisements and harming Voat by wasting everyone's time and resources.

weezkitty ago

The problem is how do you ID them without targeting legitimate users?

AlphaWookie ago

OP is right we must protect the shill or who knows maybe they will come for the joos next.

hungry_mungry ago

God forbid we use that little downward-facing arrow to the right of comments, right?

smokratez ago

You will only get censored if you are against homos.

Womb_Raider ago

You downvoat me in every single discussion we have together, you hypocritical sack of shit.

gazillions ago

The shills don't matter anyway. They don't win arguments or anything else.

Bill_Murrays_Sandals ago

Shills lose debates when confronted with hard truth. Don't let them silence you!

frankenmine ago

blatent adverstisement

They're getting paid millions of dollars to promote Hillary. It doesn't get more blatant.

0fsgivin ago

So anyone found to be a trump staffer must also be banned?

frankenmine ago

There is no Trump equivalent of CtR.

weezkitty ago

That we know of. Not saying there is but I am not discounting anything

frankenmine ago

He doesn't need spam slave labor when he has the genuine support of the entire internet.

elgindelta ago

Nonsense, the shill itself makes no more than minimum wage and actually most likely less via straight pp payouts

Crensch ago

An individual shill is irrelevant. The only relevant thing is what real users have to put up with, and that's some portion of $6m worth of shills.

elgindelta ago

I didn't realize there was a concerted effort. I have been doing it for lulz. I kinda bully them, cuz I mean, theirs is a pretty assailable position. In the end however I practice catch and release. Here is today's :).

This explains why VOAT gushes over Trump like a bunch of teen girls. by ngedikerse in whatever [–]elgindelta 0 points (+0|-0) 9 hours ago

Says a five minute old acct. You shills, lol, good Lord. What do you get paid? Bet it's under the min wage. Prolly trough paypal, yea, fuck paypal. Maybe if your aspirations of being a writer were established in hard work and talent you wouldn't be shilling for a traitor. Yet alass, here we are. Good luck douche

LlamaMan ago

Yeah and I make $0/hr on Voat. Some of us actually pay Voat.

frankenmine ago

CtR's budget was most recently confirmed as $6 million. That was as of a couple of months ago. It's probably increased since then.

Gorillion ago

Someone up top makes the nice bucks. The CTR posters get a wet finger up their ass.

Onlio ago

It doesn't matter. People get paid to defend Hilary all day long. It doesn't matter if they are lying. People fighting the shills are doing on their own time and don't get paid.

elgindelta ago

Right, I know. Now take out the cf's cut. The organizers and their assistants. And look at the grasp of most of the shills ability at persuasive manipulation. Is it that we goats are all mensa level genius? Or are they for the most part lacking? (Something x2) razor

frankenmine ago

We're probably well above average intelligence, but our biggest advantage is media and social media literacy. We recognize propaganda and psyop tactics.

elgindelta ago

Lulz, it's super late/early by me. Been an all nighter to boot. I thought about it after I sent it. For the most part, yes. The field of goats is laden with smarties, a major reason I luv it so. And also yes, their tactics are horrid. A few times now I have gotten the impression that a post was really just a shill trying to ascertain counter points