0
0

[–] erowidtrance ago 

I'd like to see if it's possible for voat to be owned at least in part by the users via shares or something which could prevent any unwanted takeovers.

0
1

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

I don't know if it was you who I told this already but, who will defend the minority? They will always lose to the majority. For example, the US is approximately 70% overweight, what if we voted on HAES? You don't want this to be another social justice website do you?

0
0

[–] plastination_station [S] ago 

Are you referring to the idea HAES or what? People are going to hold their own opinions but I was thinking about voting on site wide changes such as anything that gains traction on IFV.

0
3

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

Will only result in Tyranny of the majority. We need a system were it's basically impossible for someone to come in and take the place over, direct democracy is the exact opposite of that. Here are some circumstances and how I think they should be dealt with.

Problem: Abusive Moderator

Solution: Moderation logs + a system for flagging an abusive mod. If people can make an informed decision they will just leave subverse with a bad moderator or owner to start a new community.

Problem: Brigading

Solution: Subverse owners need to make use of the per-subverse CCP setting. Unfortunately this removes the subverse from /v/all, this needs to be remedied so the feature can be taken advantage of.

Problem: Subverse Banning

Solution: Admin log with reason for why the subverse was banned. The list of valid reasons should essentially begin and end with engaged in illegal activity.

Problem: User Banning (site level)

Solution: Admin log, full transparency with reason provided

Problem: user Banning (subverse level)

Solution: Moderation log, full transparency with reason provided

etc....