0
19

[–] 123_456 0 points 19 points (+19|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Hello. You are throwing out some accusations here, which I feel are incorrect:

  1. I don't care about points.

  2. It's not spam. Spam specifically is advertisements.

  3. I have no affiliations with any of those websites and gain no benefits from submitting them to Voat.

  4. I only submitted those to add content to this website, which it is lacking.

  5. I read every single one of those articles. We're not talking about a hundred articles here. There are less than 20.

  6. What is this signal to noise business? Why would people not post because of my submissions? There are barely any submissions around here. The front page is extremely static.

  7. Yeah, these links are on reddit, but reddit is just an aggregator. These also appear on other social bookmarking websites that exist, like digg, boingboing, stumbleupon, Facebook, Google News, etc. And these are large websites. You don't think I visit the Washington Post, or CNN on my own, that I get my stuff exclusively through one website?

Now I don't feel like posting anymore...!

[–] [deleted] 0 points 12 points (+12|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
1

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

Yes, please don't be discouraged. Right now, I feel, is a good time to do some focusing on populating the site. I think this helps to build a larger foundation for Voat. As this solidifies we can proceed with building this cathedral of beautiful, more carefully placed information.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

0
2

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

There seems to be some kind of comment limit or timer so i'd have thought there'd be one for actual submissions.

0
6

[–] noexit 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Finally somebody that understands the definition of spam. Spam tries to generate revenue. This is often called shitposting and it's up to Voaters to decide if they read it or upvoat it. If it annoys somebody they can downvoat or put in a negative comment during the discussion. Shotgun shitposting is not spam, it's often just way for somebody with limited time to take care of their posting all at once.

1
3

[–] Danbear [S] 1 point 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

Well that is the newer usage of Spam yeah, but originally it was meant to be anything that is posted/said repeated quickly. Like if I went on your IRC chat and said "K" "K" "K" "K" "K" "K" "K" "K" "K" "K" "K" "K" "K" "K" over and over constantly so no one could see any other content on the screen, I would be "spamming" the chat.

That is the context that I used Spam here.

2
1

[–] Danbear [S] 2 points 1 point (+3|-2) ago 

Honestly did you read all of those? Did you read ANY of those?

If you don't even read them then why should anyone else?

IMO the only thing worse than comments commenting without reading the article is an OP who is posting without even reading the article.

Yes, there is more aggregators than Reddit but just because a news story is heavily aggregated doesn't mean it belongs here, much less that it should be posted without even reading it. That makes things just one GIANT echo chamber.

Post away, but next time take the time to read the articles and leave a comment or two about the news story, what you personally think, why we should care enough to read it too, what greater implications that story might have on the world. Offer more than just a link, please offer more than just a dumped bucket of links, please for the love of god read the stuff before you dump the bucket.

0
4

[–] BrutalJones 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Honestly did you read all of those? Did you read ANY of those?

If you don't even read them then why should anyone else?

IMO the only thing worse than comments commenting without reading the article is an OP who is posting without even reading the article.

I don't see that any of this is relevant. The point of Voat is to upvote good content and downvote bad content. If he posts something of poor quality, you guarantee somebody will call it out in the comments and it will be downvoted. And even that is valuable -- If something is disagreeable or of poor quality, there is valuable discussion to be had in conversing on why that is.

Yes, there is more aggregators than Reddit but just because a news story is heavily aggregated doesn't mean it belongs here, much less that it should be posted without even reading it. That makes things just one GIANT echo chamber.

I don't quite following you here... How does posting links found on Reddit make Voat an "echo chamber"?

Post away, but next time take the time to read the articles and leave a comment or two about the news story, what you personally think, why we should care enough to read it too, what greater implications that story might have on the world. Offer more than just a link, please offer more than just a dumped bucket of links, please for the love of god read the stuff before you dump the bucket.

Why is this important? I don't come to Voat to read an OP's comments on a link, I come here to browse the links. And he has provided a ton of content for me to browse.

Honest question: Why does his posting activity bother you enough to start a dedicated discussion? Voat is a small community that benefits from content, and he is providing. He's not spamming as none of this benefits him personally or financially. He's posting legitimate links to things that warrant discussion. I honestly don't agree that this is adversely affecting the site in any way, which makes me question why it seems to bother you so much.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
4

[–] Danbear [S] 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Yeah, I was thinking something like putting a 10-20 min delay between making a new submission to the same subverse. Give the first one time to be read before you push the next.

I guess the argument comes down to Quality vs. Volume. Some people are arguing its fine because it IS content, but I don't just want content, I want Community. I'm on the same page as you.

0
1

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

I like the rule about needing upvotes (upvoats?) before a user can start downvoting people. Maybe there's something akin to that? Like the more positive reception for your posts, the faster and more often you can vote?

Of course, creating power users can have its own set of problems...

1
6

[–] smokratez 1 point 6 points (+7|-1) ago  (edited ago)

I don't mind more active contributors. It's not like it's the same site where the articles are coming from. Nor is it the same topic. I see no agenda pushing either.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
6

[–] 123_456 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Thanks. Yes. This is the case. I'm trying to keep it fresh. But now I'm kinda spooked. It feels like I'm being spied on. So, submit, don't submit?

0
3

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

I would not take it as being spied on, or even called out for it, but instead using you as an example to start a important conversation. I would not tell you to not stop what you are doing at this point, and I doubt that anyone will even bother to look at your account once this thread has finished its discussion.

1
1

[–] Danbear [S] 1 point 1 point (+2|-1) ago 

http://i.imgur.com/oT6eObT.jpg

That's what I was seeing.

0
3

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

You're looking at the New tab. @buttflyhoney was specifically referring to the /v/news subverse frontpage, which looks far different from what you posted.

0
2

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

Don't know why you aren't seeing it. Maybe he deleted some after my post. It was 15 at 3 hours ago. I'll see if I can get a screen shot.

2
3

[–] chronos 2 points 3 points (+5|-2) ago 

Seems very iffy to me. What user wants to post so many links so quickly? A thoughtful one? Most likely not. Seems spammy to me!

0
6

[–] Atko 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

In order to solve this problem, I have just implemented a daily posting quota.

Every user now has a quota of 5 submissions per 24 hours per subverse, regardless of submission type.

I see no real value in a single user being able to post more than 5 links or discussion threads to a single subverse over the course of 24 hours.

If you used up your quota in sub X, you can still post to sub Y.

This is experimental and it may need some tweaking, so please provide feedback.

1
4

[–] Danbear [S] 1 point 4 points (+5|-1) ago 

Thanks Atko! 5 might be a bit strict but all that can be worked out in testing. Perhaps it will push people to try new subs and push content away from the major subs into the smaller ones (a great thing). Appreciate your effort in the site!

0
4

[–] 123_456 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

That's a rather unwieldy policy to implement. Reddit's submission process is based on the quality of what you post. For example, if you have minus X points, then time limitations are imposed. Otherwise, if everything is deemed to be of good quality, it doesn't matter (to the website).

Anyway, I'm being called out here, but I think a user like this is far more suspicious:

https://voat.co/user/burtzev/submissions

0
1

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

You're not being called out, I had this planned a at least 6 months ago and had a method stub in place all this time. I think this change will cause more diversity and more positive effects than negative.

[–] [deleted] ago 

[Deleted]

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

[Deleted]

0
3

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

No. Every submission gets timestamped. This checks if you made 5 submissions in past 24 hours. The check is made when you click submit button and there is no background/scheduled processing.

0
1

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

We'll have to see how it plays out, but in general I like this rule. Reddit is filled with people who had (and have) great intentions but have become superusers. Collecting too much karma, submitting too much content, having too much influence over the types of content people see, administering too many subverses are all things that can negatively affect the site. Even if the people involved have no ulterior motive other than to promote the site.

0
6

[–] 721r 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

I think it should be at mod's discretion - if subverse has no restrictions to number of submissions a day from one user, then it's okay. If mods feel that there should be some sane restrictions (you know, 15 is maybe okay, but what about 100? 1000?) they can list them in the sidebar as rules.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

3
1

[–] Danbear [S] 3 points 1 point (+4|-3) ago 

I get that. I see the same users posting 4 or 5 times to the same subs all the time. But they normally have some time between the postings, like they actually found an article and read it first.

But 15 posts in a matter of minutes...

0
0

[–] KiltedKen ago 

I'm likely to post all of my posts at once, I'm not on voat all day long. I'll bookmark something for later, and might have many things to post, when I do. Possibly not 15 posts, but others could easily reach that.

[–] [deleted] ago 

[Deleted]
load more comments ▼ (4 remaining)