[–] Intheknow2 2 points 2 points 4 points (+4|-2) ago
Are you really going to do the same thing he did?
[–] Astupidname69 0 points 5 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago (edited ago)
So he was never really an active mod and only accepted the position as act good faith so to speak?
Also @Peaceseeker seems to calling out both sides.
[–] PeaceSeeker 1 point 11 points 12 points (+12|-1) ago
So he was never really an active mod and only accepted the position as act good faith so to speak?
Yes. I have long respected what PV purported to do, especially the two main personalities behind it, /u/kevdude and /u/Crensch, but given that my moderatorship was entirely inactive, and PV has become a "side" in this civil war of which I want no part, I have resigned. I made clear in my comment that this choice has nothing to do with /u/kevdude personally. And yes, I have spoken for and against both sides where I have seen them to be in the right or in the wrong.
[–] Crensch [S] 2 points 0 points 2 points (+2|-2) ago
That's very true.
Despite that, the name is no longer on the sidebar in direct support of /v/ProtectVoat like it was. Am I wrong to point that out?
[–] Vindicator 2 points 7 points 9 points (+9|-2) ago
@Peaceseeker was very straightforward about what he sees as bad behavior on both sides of this "civil war" and I respect his desire not to be co-opted by one side or the other.
That said, Peaceseeker, thank you for acknowledging the right of subverse creators to protect their homesteads, the work they've contributed here. It's the one common sense thing I've seen these past few weeks that hasn't made me feel like I was taking crazy pills.
It's been said that the opposite of love is not hate or anger, but apathy and unconcern. Those of us from GA and PG speaking up right now -- though it may seem like "civil war" -- are doing it because we love Voat and the goats that call it home and have seen too many left to the wolves.
[–] argosciv 0 points 7 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago (edited ago)
@Peaceseeker has been a wonderful voice of reason throughout this.
We definitely need impartial parties to keep everyone in line and remind us to evaluate our own positions.
[–] PeaceSeeker 0 points 7 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago
I think more could be gained by having serious discussions about the differences we all have concerning acceptable moderation than the back-and-forth attacks, meta-threads, and dismissive flairing we've seen all around. As you saw, I attempted to begin such a discussion here, and /u/kevdude seemed generally receptive if only there was a sufficient admin presence to ensure nothing got out of hand (for if a slippery slope were to occur and power mods were to take over large subverses, and Putt were away, a great deal of damage could be done in a short period of time, and so maintaining a strict anti-deletion policy with respect to the entire website's moderators may be the safer path in the meantime). With that said, I think Putt is more present than people tend to realize -- I think the last time he was truly absent was when Voat went down for three days, and as he said at the time that was a special case where his mother was in town.
Anyway, the best thing to do now might be for us all to discuss how we think we should handle moderation in the interim while the Votes feature is dev'ed out. Right now people are pointing out the flaws they think they see in /u/kevdude's stances, but there is so much hostility and accusation in these cries that it leaves little room / doesn't really encourage real discussion. We also have to ask if campaigns like those we know /u/Crensch is capable of carrying out is the best path forward. It seems /u/Crensch is trying to do to /u/kevdude precisely what /u/kevdude has been accused of attempting to do to /u/virge. This just doesn't seem the best way forward. This isn't discussion. This isn't Logos.
[–] Dismember 0 points 4 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago
I think more could be gained by having serious discussions about the differences we all have concerning acceptable moderation than the back-and-forth attacks
This is what needs to happen even if if I'm not sure people are ready for it yet. I would make a thread myself, but as you say even being a PV mod now is seen as taking sides. Hopefully when it's made it has a thread title that invites the discussion it deserves. Would you make one? I really want to hear the opinions of a lot more people on this. I don't think there has to be a big shit fight here at all.
[–] Vindicator 2 points 5 points 7 points (+7|-2) ago (edited ago)
I think more could be gained by having serious discussions about the differences we all have concerning acceptable moderation than the back-and-forth attacks, meta-threads, and dismissive flairing we've seen all around. As you saw, I attempted to begin such a discussion here, and /u/kevdude seemed generally receptive
I would like nothing more than to move into a constructive discussion that would benefit all of us.
However, you can't have reconciliation where there is no remorse or repentance. Some very despicable things have been done -- and are still being done. Voat needs to be made aware of them. The truth needs to come out before we can actually make prudential decisions about how to do things differently to prevent those things from happening again. I don't know a way for that to happen that isn't bloody and painful and likely to be labeled "drama".
there is so much hostility and accusation in these cries that it leaves little room / doesn't really encourage real discussion
So long as the problems being exposed are shooed away, that is likely to remain the case.
It seems /u/Crensch is trying to do to /u/kevdude precisely what /u/kevdude has been accused of attempting to do to /u/virge. This just doesn't seem the best way forward. This isn't discussion. This isn't Logos.
Logos Himself drove the moneychangers from the Temple.
There is a time for discussion and a time for action, and Crensch concluded the later was what justice required. It was a veneer of Logos and a dearth of action that allowed things to get this bad.
Thank you, Peaceseeker and @Dismember, for giving serious consideration to what is being presented.
[–] kestrel9 0 points 8 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago (edited ago)
@Peaceseeker was very straightforward about what he sees as bad behavior on both sides of this "civil war" and I respect his desire not to be co-opted by one side or the other.
Absolutely, no one need be co-opted, and at the same time it's also helpful to understand something that @MadWorld mentioned not long ago
[–] MadWorld 11 points (+11|-0) 1 fortnight ago
@kevdude, @Crensch, and many others would turn on their close friends, when presented with reasonable evidence... This is one of those things that I love so much about Voat!! ...
My point in using the quote is that, given reasonable evidence, some goats found it necessary, in all loyalty to Voat's ideals, to take a position to speak out against a problem that was long in the making, and, imho, would never even stood a chance for true resolution and honest discussion without facing the fact that PV was not envisioned to protect users of today, but to prevent POTENTIAL FUTURE behavior of MODS, which is something unprovable, and shouldn't be counted as a statement of fact when a mod is run off due to a verdict of GUILTY of a theoretical crime in in the future.
[–] Crensch [S] 1 point 1 point 2 points (+2|-1) ago (edited ago)
@Argosciv @sandhog @cognitivedissident5 @Peaceseeker @Vindicator