I posted the sticky in the first place because I wanted to inform the users of a major change that was not expressed just done. I only linked to putt's answer so those could see the question posed and answer given to make up there own minds. I did hope that people who notice and ask questions so that a full answer would be given. I did not hope to get removed from my modship.
Regarding Putt's submission I will respond.
Used a @system subverse as a personal platform
I did do that and in hindsight was the wrong approach, I should have made a video and then stickied it.
Defacing the subverse CSS
I activated a floating banner that has been historicly used many times before, starting when I created "Original Content Friday's", it was designed to open up the new page of /v/videos if clicked. It was also used to urge users to go to new and upvoat stuff rather than staying on hot. I did change the banner to look like this, I did not deface the css or inhibit any usage of the sub whatsoever. I do think it's strange they allowed the banner before (yes for video related) but now it's defacing css?
@Cynabuns doesn't have the power or authority to remove moderators and neither did she request either of you to be removed.
I suspect the admins sent her to make the request knowing that if they asked I would have complied, and when I responded how one would expect me to respond to @Cynabuns given our history they used that as their tool and reason to remove me.
Bottom line is you thought v/videos was your personal subverse to do with as you please
Untrue. I always advocate that it belongs to the /v/videos users and they should be in control of it entirely, even above you admins.
You had issues with Voat asking for Janitors on @system subs
Also false, I had an issue here with @AOU requesting janitor status as he was the only one, and one doesn't have to look far as to why I would have objected to that.
had issues when admins stepped in due to poor handling in the past.
I don't know what you're referring to in this exactly, please elaborate and I'll answer.
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.
I did not want removed, but I will admit that not having that weight is nice for a change. I do think that you wanted to remove me ever since you said this specifically, "A point worth noting, when we act on a system sub we have a history of purging mods." As well as you stated you don't have input on system sub rules in this comment. Dispute it, if it's untrue please.
To Atko's Comment:
I don't take kindly to people who point a gun at my face and make demands
When did I demand anything? Citation needed, please prove me wrong.
Some of you may hate me for stirring this shit up, and for that I apologize. I truly and genuinely only wanted to inform users of something that I thought was being intentionally left in the shadows in hopes no one would know.
view the rest of the comments →
vaginaenvy ago
Thank you. It's so rare nowadays for people to own up to their mistakes.
In view of this, I think it would be appropriate for you to at least temporarily lose moderatorship, if only to set a precedent of concrete consequences for misbehavior.
Chiefpacman ago
Put isn't our fucking baby sitter. He doesn't need to put mods in timeout for showing dissent. Thats exactly what reddit does. He called this 'malicious' editing of the CSS, which it clearly was not.
The admins have had an issue with users like THC for a while. I think they're making an example of him.
Should have been handled better, but admins needed to brush this one under the rug. Sticky was up for how long? Its already gone.
vaginaenvy ago
It's not for showing dissent, it's for using mod powers to push their message. Regardless of whether you agree with the content of the message, the method by which the message was propagated was -- by THC's own admission -- inappropriate.
Enforcing site policy is exactly what admins are for. Mods who abuse their power get demodded.
Chiefpacman ago
Do you notice, that while I'm getting two upvoats and you're getting two upvoats, I'm the only one getting two down votes?
That's because your ideals are weak, and you need to hide what I'm saying. We're not down voating you, because we want you to be heard. You have the freedom to share information.
vaginaenvy ago
I haven't downvoated anyone in this thread.
Chiefpacman ago
Well good on you.
Most on your side apparently don't agree with you on that.