They literally downvoated @Coors_Nationalist to the point where he can't vote, post, or comment. Who is the real censor? The guy who has a sub for a specific Minecraft server and doesn't want his sub filled with off topic garbage? Or the people who take away his ability to use the website? @PuttItOut, this is a problem I've touched on over the years. If someone isn't a spammer but just isn't liked or has "the wrong opinions" they are prevented from using the site.
Possible solution: an appeal process where someone downvoated to oblivion can have their site privileges returned to them.
This is an issue, it is an exploit in our system. I've never once denied this.
Sub owners should run their subs how they want. But then Voat users should vote how they want. See the problem? Which group are you going to target?
How I see it: 90%+ of these cases involve someone conducting themselves in a fashion incompatible with Voat's principles, or they are hostile and prideful in their conduct/communication. Both scenarios indicate an unwise person.
It would be ideal if Voat lived and let live, but that will never happen because Voat is filled with people that test and abuse in order to claim a trespass. Voat is right in the end though... Those with incompatible principles never assimilate. In this way I'm proud, but I do wish Voat was more measured in their response rather than going nuclear immediately. This drastic attack based response is a sign of immaturity on the part of Voat and actually works against Voat in the end. I wish Voat was wise enough to see this perspective.
Pretty sure @stonetoss took off because of a similar situation.
Thanks for the quick response. I understand both sides and see your dilemma. @stonetoss is a good guy. Chasing people like him away is not good for voat. I understand people attacking a powermod of a sub that is used for a more general purpose, but when someone has a personal subverse like this, the freedom to moderate how they see fit should be more important. I know you probably won't have any solution anytime soon, but thanks for acknowledging the issue. I don't think voat will be able to ever grow much without this being addressed.
This is exactly why Voat hasn't grown. Voat is its own worst enemy, we just don't acknowledge it.
There is no solution from where I stand as any solution will remove freedoms from one party.
This is ultimately the issue with all public goods... How can you offer freedom without limiting it?
I obviously do not have a solution, but this scenario is the root of all Voat's problems as a community. We solve this, or grow past it as a whole, we would be unstoppable.
Maybe there needs to be like some sort of trial period where a subverse is somewhat limited to keep users from making mistakes like this. I know that will set off a lot of alarms for goats but hear me out. This has happened three times now in recent memory, and I don't know about the last two but this one was completely avoidable. It's unreasonable for people who have never been a mod before or owned a sub to understand how voat works or why exactly we are so strict on certian issues like not deleting posts. I guarantee this guy didn't know about private subs.
Perhaps a new sub can be automatically set to private, then default to public after a week. Or maybe make it impossible for mods to delete posts in a new sub for a few days. That alone would avoid a lot of stupid misunderstandings.
If that would be the case, then you guys can just mass downvoat spam him and his sub to get them both removed after the trial period. Not everyone is going to be like that. Most people would probably learn quickly and fit in. They at least deserve a chance. You absolutely cannot expect a new user to come here and instantly know the site culture and why we do stuff the way we do.
view the rest of the comments →
dtaraasdfasdf ago
why dont you just wait until the pv goon squad doesnt like what they do, then lie about them, then downvoat brigade them to nothing?
That the protectvoat way @puttitout
oiseaulibre ago
They literally downvoated @Coors_Nationalist to the point where he can't vote, post, or comment. Who is the real censor? The guy who has a sub for a specific Minecraft server and doesn't want his sub filled with off topic garbage? Or the people who take away his ability to use the website? @PuttItOut, this is a problem I've touched on over the years. If someone isn't a spammer but just isn't liked or has "the wrong opinions" they are prevented from using the site.
Possible solution: an appeal process where someone downvoated to oblivion can have their site privileges returned to them.
PuttItOut ago
This is an issue, it is an exploit in our system. I've never once denied this.
Sub owners should run their subs how they want. But then Voat users should vote how they want. See the problem? Which group are you going to target?
How I see it: 90%+ of these cases involve someone conducting themselves in a fashion incompatible with Voat's principles, or they are hostile and prideful in their conduct/communication. Both scenarios indicate an unwise person.
It would be ideal if Voat lived and let live, but that will never happen because Voat is filled with people that test and abuse in order to claim a trespass. Voat is right in the end though... Those with incompatible principles never assimilate. In this way I'm proud, but I do wish Voat was more measured in their response rather than going nuclear immediately. This drastic attack based response is a sign of immaturity on the part of Voat and actually works against Voat in the end. I wish Voat was wise enough to see this perspective.
Pretty sure @stonetoss took off because of a similar situation.
oiseaulibre ago
Thanks for the quick response. I understand both sides and see your dilemma. @stonetoss is a good guy. Chasing people like him away is not good for voat. I understand people attacking a powermod of a sub that is used for a more general purpose, but when someone has a personal subverse like this, the freedom to moderate how they see fit should be more important. I know you probably won't have any solution anytime soon, but thanks for acknowledging the issue. I don't think voat will be able to ever grow much without this being addressed.
PuttItOut ago
This is exactly why Voat hasn't grown. Voat is its own worst enemy, we just don't acknowledge it.
There is no solution from where I stand as any solution will remove freedoms from one party.
This is ultimately the issue with all public goods... How can you offer freedom without limiting it?
I obviously do not have a solution, but this scenario is the root of all Voat's problems as a community. We solve this, or grow past it as a whole, we would be unstoppable.
Rainy-Day-Dream ago
the solution is giving users a means to oppose power mods themselves thus making them the constituents of their favorite subverses
PuttItOut ago
We will have this shortly, but how would have this feature solve this current issue?
Isn't this about a private subverse who's mod deleted something designed to be deleted by the author for the purpose of creating this exact situation?
CameraCode ago
Maybe there needs to be like some sort of trial period where a subverse is somewhat limited to keep users from making mistakes like this. I know that will set off a lot of alarms for goats but hear me out. This has happened three times now in recent memory, and I don't know about the last two but this one was completely avoidable. It's unreasonable for people who have never been a mod before or owned a sub to understand how voat works or why exactly we are so strict on certian issues like not deleting posts. I guarantee this guy didn't know about private subs.
Perhaps a new sub can be automatically set to private, then default to public after a week. Or maybe make it impossible for mods to delete posts in a new sub for a few days. That alone would avoid a lot of stupid misunderstandings.
boredTech ago
They just hibernate. Create sub, let people fill it with junk, when trial period over delete everything, rule with a reddit fist.
CameraCode ago
If that would be the case, then you guys can just mass downvoat spam him and his sub to get them both removed after the trial period. Not everyone is going to be like that. Most people would probably learn quickly and fit in. They at least deserve a chance. You absolutely cannot expect a new user to come here and instantly know the site culture and why we do stuff the way we do.