0
3

[–] johnr754 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

I think that the 10 subverse limit is fine.

I, however, honestly think that a limit should be placed, though, for the amount of subverses with a certain amount of subscribers. For example, 10 subverses for subverses with under 500 subcribers, 7 for subverses with under 2500, 5 for those under 500, and only 1 per those with over 5000. Obviously the limit increases, as the users increase.

As for the reddit powermods invading Voat, that is a problem. Hopefully a limit to the amount of subverses moderated stays. And if a user is revealed to have been using alternate accounts to moderate more subverses, they should be immeaditely demodded, and maybe even banned from Voat.

0
1

[–] explorevoat [S] 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

I, however, honestly think that a limit should be placed, though, for the amount of subverses with a certain amount of subscribers. For example, 10 subverses for subverses with under 500 subcribers, 7 for subverses with under 2500, 5 for those under 5000, and only 1 per those with over 5000. Obviously the limit increases, as the users increase.

I really like this idea! So ten would be the limit but a mod should only be allowed one verse with over 5000 subscribers.

How can we get a list of all these ideas to the admins?

0
2

[–] Bru 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

I would go like that any account can create only 3 verses at the beginning. If at least one of those verses is active at the end of the first month (some kind of formula would be needed), then the user could create another verse. With each additional active verse he would simply gain +1 verse creation. Do you think this is a good idea? :)

0
1

[–] explorevoat [S] 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

This is an excellent suggestion. It is creative.

It also made me think that perhaps every summer there could be a survey that all subscribers could take regarding the mods of their favorite verses.

People who get great ratings from subscribers could get another mod credit, and those who get bad ratings as being abusive of power might be reviewed by admins?

The survey responses would have to measured against total subscribers, whether they respond to the survey or not otherwise a vocal minority could kick out a mod. So if only 10 people respond to the survey, but their are 10,000 members of that verse - then you assume the other 9,990 people are happy enough not to complain, and not punish them. But if 4,000 negative surveys come in about a mod abusing his/her rights then their replacement would be discussed somehow.

I really like your idea.

Is there any effort to collect the best ideas to insulate Voat in advance and prevent the problems that developed at reddit?

0
2

[–] Riot1044 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

I think the limit should be 3. It cuts down on power-modding and the centralization of power, while simultaneously allowing a voator to concentrate on several areas of interest.

0
0

[–] explorevoat [S] ago 

This is a good idea. What do people think is the best number? I am sure there could be a compromise found on this.

I really like the idea that it would only be heavily restricted by number of subscribers, so only 1 or 2 verses could be modded if they are major ones. However the limit would not apply so much to small niche verses.

2
-2

[–] Empire_of_the_mind 2 points -2 points (+0|-2) ago 

FUD