[–] k0s 3 points 6 points 9 points (+9|-3) ago (edited ago)
You know you're probably a bad mod if I know you exist. Mods should just be in the background removing spam, and depending on the subverse removing unrelated content, doxxing, and NSFW content without NSFW tag.
/u/she has stepped over moderator bounds and put her own ideology into a neutral default subverse. this shouldnt be allowed.
[–] zoetry 5 points 6 points 11 points (+11|-5) ago
At -274 [She] is unable to perform her duties as a mod
That's not true.There's no rule that even suggests that a moderator must comment. Personally, I've always hated that moderators feel compelled to comment to leave a reason for deleting a submission. It gives them an inappropriate opportunity for positive karma. Removing or stifling conversations does not, by any means, contribute to the conversation.
At any rate, there's nothing stopping her from having another mod leave a deletion notice, or, as far as I'm aware, PMing a user with a reason for deletion.
If they implemented deletion reasons as they should, she'd have even less 'need' to comment.
and she will never climb above -50 ever again
Says you. Maybe some other people agree. It is, at best, a guess. Amalek's gotten himself out of some ridiculous holes before.
She fell below -50 hours after the transfer was granted. The transfer should have been annulled at that time, anyway. Transfer rules explicitly forbid transferring moderatorship to such a universally-hated user.
The rules are not retroactive. Where'd you get that idea?
She met both the original and updated rules at time of request, and at time of transfer. That's all that currently matters for /v/subverserequest.
[–] frankenmine [S] 8 points -2 points 6 points (+6|-8) ago (edited ago)
This isn't about posting or commenting (though those are also factors). Falling below -50 shuts off certain mod tools, as well. That's the biggest factor.
That's why being above -50 is specifically a condition of a head mod transfer.
She's fallen afoul of that condition mere hours after the transfer, so the transfer should be annulled, and she should preferably be demodded completely.
The community simply doesn't want her.
[–] zoetry 5 points 2 points 7 points (+7|-5) ago
She's fallen afoul of that condition mere hours after the transfer, so the transfer should be annulled, and she should preferably be demodded completely.
So you should be asking for a rule change, not an unfounded demodding.
The community simply doesn't want her.
Some people certainly don't. She's only fallen, what ~3,000 points? And you think that's enough, given that there are tons of sock puppets and people that will have gone way back in She's history downvoting things that had no place being downvoted, to represent a community with almost 47,000 people in it? Really?
If only the 11 people that upvoted this post went in with 2-3 alt accounts, they could easily have caused as large of a shift as has happened recently.
Where's your evidence that a significant proportion of the community doesn't want her? I've certainly seen some hate here and there, and she's certainly been brigaded by maybe a couple dozen people, but it seems to be a tiny majority of the community that A.) cares enough, and B.) Is on your side.
[–] RedditCEOEllenPao 6 points 13 points 19 points (+19|-6) ago
I am so sick and tired of this drama shit cluttering up my front page. It's not bad enough every thread in /v/AskVoat is "DAE /u/she is literally Hitler?", now it's seeping into every other fucking default subvoat.
http://gifsec.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Enough-GIFS.gif
[–] frankenmine [S] 8 points 1 point 9 points (+9|-8) ago
The rest of us don't take any more pleasure from dealing with this than you do.
However, it must be done. SJWs cannot be allowed to destroy Voat like they destroyed reddit.
[–] Broc_Lia 3 points 1 point 4 points (+4|-3) ago
It's getting pretty stupid. Plus, I'm pretty sure most, if not all, of the people complaining have already migrated to /v/askgoat anyhow, even while complaining that migrations don't work.
[–] Atko 3 points 65 points 68 points (+68|-3) ago
I expect moderators to (voluntarily) do the following:
Moderators who do the above would be awesome people to have around here and that would help us all a lot but nobody can keep doing that for free for any reasonable amount of time. As long as we have humans doing these things, there will always be room for trouble and we would have to play whack-a-mole.
What you're asking for would create the need for us to continue getting involved every time a moderator decides to do something Voat users don't approve of. While our involvement would make sure Voat is what we want it to be, the hard truth is that we don't have time for that kind of involvement. We're not working full time for Voat (in fact, there are times where weeks go by where we don't have time to do anything for Voat because we have a life and daytime jobs), we're not getting paid and I really wish you guys could chime in with ideas on how to keep Voat alive because time is running out and money is not going to last forever.
Anyways, we are thinking about ways we can fix moderation problems (social problem) once and for all (for example, have the community moderate Voat by taking "delete" feature away form moderators and giving it to the users) but this will take some time (6 months? a year?) to develop and experiment with before launching it site-wide. In the meantime, the clock is ticking...
[–] frankenmine [S] 1 point 12 points 13 points (+13|-1) ago (edited ago)
To fund Voat, I think you can begin to sell merchandise. T-shirts with the Voat goat on them would sell like hot cakes. There are service providers that will handle the entire turnaround process for you, including production and shipping. All you have to do is upload the artwork. So you can start doing that real quick.
To keep subverses modded by well-liked mods, I think there have to be user elections during head mod transfers, and also periodically (say, once every 6 months or a year) by active users of the sub. The definition of "active user" is open to debate, but I think subscription to the sub for a certain period and a certain SCP+CCP total in the sub are good criteria.
[–] [deleted] 1 point 20 points 21 points (+21|-1) ago
[–] frankenmine [S] 1 point 16 points 17 points (+17|-1) ago
Any action by an admin or mod which causes harm to Voat, Inc. should be thoroughly investigated and acted upon quickly.
Even Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics had a secret, zeroth law, that allowed the three laws to be ignored in cases of harm to humanity.
I think a similar case can be made for harm to Voat.
[–] Disgruntled 0 points 4 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago
I think a lot of this has to do with the fact that she was given a sub which benefited from being a default. Not having any default subs could prevent a lot of these issues.
[–] frankenmine [S] 2 points 2 points 4 points (+4|-2) ago
SJWs love infiltrating institutions with large spheres of influence.
On sites like reddit and Voat, this means default and large subs.
[–] Disgruntled 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Which is why we should not have default subs. Let the subs grow on the merit of their content. If there was a way to remove all users from askvoat and have them start fresh I'd be all for that as well and wouldn't care if she had the sub any more.
[–] blackblarneystone 2 points -2 points 0 points (+0|-2) ago (edited ago)
i have an idea. lets ban anyone that ever mentions this gay-ass bullshit ever again
[–] Broc_Lia 9 points 7 points 16 points (+16|-9) ago
No. Mods should not be removed because their comment history is being brigaded. If you want to remove her power, just migrate to /v/askgoat. Problem solved.
[–] frankenmine [S] 10 points 0 points 10 points (+10|-10) ago
Her comment history is being brigaded because this is the only way the community has to oust an unfit, malicious mod.
If we had a more civilized way of doing it, such as submitting a vote of no confidence, we would have done just that.
This is our vote of no confidence. This person is unfit to be a mod of a neutral 50K sub. They subscribe to an ideology that goes against everything Voat stands for, the very reason it was founded.
She can fuck off and mod /v/ShitVoatersSay.
[–] Broc_Lia 5 points 6 points 11 points (+11|-5) ago (edited ago)
"The community" can migrate if it wants to (and is in the process of doing so), and there's no guarantee that a brigade will represent "the community." (insofar as an amorphous grouping can be represented by anyone)
I personally do not want to belong to another site which bases moderator positions on political reliability.
[–] Deathchild95 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago (edited ago)
Voat is all about freedom. If @she wants to super-moderate v/askvoat then it is her right at mod of a sub. Some people might even like it super moderated. But It is our freedom, if we do not like as subverse, to make an subverse that fits the niche that you want to find. We have 10 different subverse that talk about the same thing, they just do it slightly different and have different user bases.just move to the one that fits you best and avoid the others.
[–] CptCmdrAwesome 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
Actually, we did. This was not the only one. For all the good any of them were worth.
The one I posted is currently two votes shy of 1,000 with an 88% approval rate, and does not even mention "SJW" or the personal views of any moderator, it only serves to register dissatisfaction with the moderation of that sub.
[–] [deleted] 2 points 3 points 5 points (+5|-2) ago
[–] Broc_Lia 2 points 0 points 2 points (+2|-2) ago
While that all sounds fine and dandy on the surface, who gets to define abuse? If the site is subject to mob-rule and any sub which offends the hive mind gets bulldozed then there isn't going to be a whole lot of free speech around the place. Whether there ends up being an SJW clique in control or an anti-SJW clique makes no difference, the site will default to reddit standards.
Moving sub is not such a hardship that it must never be required to happen. /v/askgoat is running just fine.