This post is an advisory to users that your username is connected to whatever you write in anon subs.
What you write can be seen by one or more devs who’ve been given that special access. But what you may not know is that they can and do use it against you as they’ve done with me in the past and as recently as yesterday. And one or more of those users who have this ability are part of SBBH.
Some history: One of the SBBH members had a hissy fit with me over a year ago and is probably the same user who would “miraculously” happen to know it was me when I would write certain things in anon subs in the past. I’d write something and they’d make a snarky remark revealing that they knew were talking to my account. It wasn’t a huge deal but it made me aware that my username could be seen by one or more users with this special access.
Back to present day: I’d never bothered to get caught up in SBBH drama until about a week ago when I started needling them in anon subs with a comment here or there regarding their questionable activities on voat.
It didn’t take long for one of them to take the bait and clearly refer to me when making this remark about my recent comments:
http://archive.is/eBPYZ
My account is exactly 2.7 years old. Whoever wrote that comment was a fool; for so obviously ‘giving away’ that they could see it was me writing those comments (showing their hand), and to give such a sensitive shit over what I wrote (notice it took anti-SBBH comments for them to get fresh and reveal themselves).
Let this story be a warning to any of you that this ‘special access’ to see which user is writing “anon” comments creates an unfair advantage and in the wrong hands can be used against you. At the same time, these privileged few are able to enjoy the ability to hide in anon subs themselves.
@PuttItOut, users will never be free to “have their say” in anon subs until everyone but you is stripped of the ability to see who’s posting what in so-called anon subs.
--
Edit: Hey, cool! My post got a "Speculation" flair. Perhaps the first in voat's history in v/Whatever.
view the rest of the comments →
BB-3 ago
@PuttitOut this is serious. If anon subs aren't anonymous for everybody, they're not anonymous.
WhiteSurvivalist ago
The idea that you can't post there without being logged in should be the first dead give away.
speedisavirus ago
It would be good to require a login to reduce spam. There is however no good reason they are documenting the user for the post. Other than either maliciousness or pure laziness.
BB-3 ago
I didn't expect to be completely anonymous from the website's owners. With all of the anti-spam and DDOS protections, logging in to post anonymously is understandable, even if it's not a perfect solution. The owners giving that same access to their friends and cohorts without being open about it, is what's concerning. If there was a list of users with these admin privileges, we could at least hold the group accountable. As it stands it looks like putt himself is making these comments, because we don't know who else could. At the very least he is responsible for the violations of anonymity because he allowed it to happen.
Womb_Raider ago
Now do you fuckers see why I find it alarming that Putt appears to be friendly with SBBH? He lets them run rampant.
CheeseboogersGhost ago
Boo hoo hoo SBBH did this https://kek.gg/i/wBHWm.jpg
SyriansAreTerrorists ago
Yes, I posted pictures of my butthole on an anon sub and it's concerning that putt knows it's me
flyawayhigh ago
That was my butthole. Stop trying to take credit for such amazing beauty.
recon_johnny ago
Was going to ask if you had an idea who was making the comments. You think it was Putt? What was so egregious for your comments that folks had to call you out?
BB-3 ago
I actually suspect another user, but not strongly enough to name. My point was more that Putt is the only one who we can be sure has that access, and anyone else with that access must necessarily have received it from him.
I don't know which "you" that you're referring to here, other than to say it's probably not me.
recon_johnny ago
Someone listed your account. Why? What did you say so that this other person listed your account.
BB-3 ago
I have no idea what list you're talking about.
thantik ago
If you were able to post there without being logged in, there would be no way to protect voat against massive spam attacks, etc. There still should be one, and only one username to a person.
sguevar ago
I agree with one username.
WhiteSurvivalist ago
Sounds self defeating then, either it's anonymous and requires no login but moderation, or it's not and is merely a deliberate facade as OP notes.
thantik ago
Your argument is a false dichotomy fallacy. It's not either/or. You can have anonymization and login required.
Wahaha ago
While that is certainly true, the step of requiring a login does nothing to improve the anonymization. It could, however, be used to defeat the anonymization. Users wouldn't know. And it doesn't strike me as a smart thing to do to trust things you do not know. So the part where login is required should tip users off, that things ain't necessarily as anonym as they think.
thantik ago
https://github.com/voat/voat
You're welcome to go digging. Voat doesn't hide things from users... I highly doubt you'll find anything incriminating in there...
Wahaha ago
That's cool, but there's no guarantee that the github code is what is actually run here.
WhiteSurvivalist ago
If you say so.
thantik ago
I say so. How do you think your password for voat is stored, eh? You think hunter2 is just sitting in a database somewhere in clear text?
No. It's single-way hashed, and when you enter your password for verification, it's single-way hashed again. The hashes are checked against one another against that encryption algorithm.
If your diminutive understanding of technology were the truth, then it would be the same as the web admin just having open-access to your password. That's not how technology works, and it's easily possible to both require a log in, and submit information to a database without it being tied to a specific user -- even possible for the programmer of the website to make it so HE cannot even know who it is, if it is done correctly.
BlueDrache ago
Did you provide aloe for that burn?
SexMachine ago
Right? I never considered them anon if they're linked to your account.
patriot_biz ago
Yeah, OP is dumb to get caught up in this. 93% of anon posts are shitposts. I'd be happier if the feature just went away.
Voat is cool. It has it's ups and downs but it's not an imageboard.
lordbeatlejuicethe1 ago
anon subs are where i play
patriot_biz ago
Sorry, Beatle. Didn't know. Can you PM me a link to one of your anon posts? I'd like to see an example of an anon post that's not a shitpost.
lordbeatlejuicethe1 ago
no they are all shitposts
look for submissions in all lower case letters
NoBS ago
I find it pathetic to see such honesty for being a deceptive shit poster.
It's like we are being groomed to be no better than the typical shit poster just to lower the collective intelligence.
I guess humans are dependent on the rabid herd mentality that is required for control. The Deep State really appreciates your fucking help.