If you read the actual reason why though, it makes complete sense. This is CNN tier headline shit where they warp the truth to get people agitated because they weren't clear in the first place.
Alright concern shill. Take your yammaca off for a second.
Janitors and mods should know exactly how voat works and operates. The user in question clearly did not. Furthermore, not only did they show signs of untrustworthiness, but untrustworthiness during a time of growth on voat. Now is not the time to be clueless on how to janitor or mod and nor is it the time to do so as voat changes for the better.
They werent """punished""" as you say. You warped the whole situation like a fucking JEW to fit your narrative. Fuck off back to reddit
Let me guess, when people delete their Facebook account they can 100% trust that Facebook will properly delete all of their information, right? Right?
He wanted a script that doesn't rely on a website that he was cautious might have been subverted. That you're trying to frame him as not understanding the website because you don't understand basic opsec is actually hilarious and does nothing but illustrate your lack of knowledge in regards to how the Internet works.
not only did they show signs of untrustworthiness,
Oy vey, anyone who is cautious of Voat being taken over is showing signs of "untrustworthines". Tell me more, Kike.
Now is not the time to be clueless on how to janitor or mod and nor is it the time to do so as voat changes for the better.
Trying to double down on your lies?
They werent """punished""" as you say.
They were 100% punished by having their hard work and dedication to the website stripped for nothing other than being cautious.
view the rest of the comments →
PuttsMum ago
I too am a little bit surprised Putt did that, especially to a janitor mod position.
Its a miracle, you and I agreeing on something :p
lets_get_hyyerr ago
If you read the actual reason why though, it makes complete sense. This is CNN tier headline shit where they warp the truth to get people agitated because they weren't clear in the first place.
SaneGoatOySwear ago
Why does it make sense? No one has explained that, yet you're acting as if it's established truth? Intriguing.
All that Bob did was make a post about what he can do if Voat is subverted by the new partner. That's all. Then he was punished for it.
lets_get_hyyerr ago
Alright concern shill. Take your yammaca off for a second.
Janitors and mods should know exactly how voat works and operates. The user in question clearly did not. Furthermore, not only did they show signs of untrustworthiness, but untrustworthiness during a time of growth on voat. Now is not the time to be clueless on how to janitor or mod and nor is it the time to do so as voat changes for the better.
They werent """punished""" as you say. You warped the whole situation like a fucking JEW to fit your narrative. Fuck off back to reddit
SaneGoatOySwear ago
You're full of shit.
Let me guess, when people delete their Facebook account they can 100% trust that Facebook will properly delete all of their information, right? Right?
He wanted a script that doesn't rely on a website that he was cautious might have been subverted. That you're trying to frame him as not understanding the website because you don't understand basic opsec is actually hilarious and does nothing but illustrate your lack of knowledge in regards to how the Internet works.
Oy vey, anyone who is cautious of Voat being taken over is showing signs of "untrustworthines". Tell me more, Kike.
Trying to double down on your lies?
They were 100% punished by having their hard work and dedication to the website stripped for nothing other than being cautious.