This user has mostly submitted to the following subverses (showing top 5):
61 submissions to NatureIllustration
15 submissions to MajesDick
13 submissions to SpacePix
9 submissions to smuckersclub
5 submissions to Hardstyle
This user has so far shared a total of 111 links, started a total of 9 discussions and submitted a total of 143 comments.
Submissions: This user has upvoted 1701 and downvoted 2 submissions.
Comments: This user has upvoted 4575 and downvoted 7 comments.
5 highest rated submissions:
PRAISE ATKO, FOR VOAT IS RISEN!!!, submitted: 7/7/2015 4:42:28 AM, 15 points (+15|-0)
Charon, the moon of Pluto, as photographed by New Horizons, submitted: 7/13/2015 11:09:10 PM, 14 points (+14|-0)
Earth's Path in Space, submitted: 7/13/2015 10:52:45 PM, 13 points (+14|-1)
Hubble's 2003 Pluto Image versus New Horizons 2015 Image: Side-by-Side Comparison, submitted: 7/14/2015 7:15:47 PM, 13 points (+13|-0)
Paleontology FunFact: Dimetrodon is more closely related to extant mammals than to any living reptiles., submitted: 7/10/2015 5:57:23 AM, 13 points (+13|-0)
5 lowest rated submissions:
Earth's Path Through Space - Fancy GIF Edition (thanks to @SkeletonHand), submitted: 7/14/2015 12:24:26 AM, 0 points (+1|-1)
Nepenthaceae, from Ernst Haeckel's "Kunstformen der Natur", submitted: 7/15/2015 10:12:46 PM, 1 points (+1|-0)
Lacertilia, from Ernst Haeckel's "Kunstformen der Natur", submitted: 7/15/2015 10:16:01 PM, 1 points (+1|-0)
Ammonitida, from Ernst Haeckel's "Kunstformen der Natur", submitted: 7/15/2015 10:16:38 PM, 1 points (+1|-0)
Pelargonum zonale, submitted: 7/15/2015 10:20:44 PM, 1 points (+1|-0)
3 highest rated comments:
photonasty 0 points 21 points 21 points (+21|-0) ago
I think it will largely depend on the userbase. The stupid aspects of "reddit culture"-- baconing narwhals, pun threads, cumboxes, etc.-- weren't deliberately designed by the admins or anything. They arose organically from the community itself, as shitty as that is.
If it gets big enough, Voat will develop its own culture and in-jokes. It's something that happens naturally in online communities. I think the key to avoiding that shit is a mature, adult userbase interested in discussion. Default subreddits like /r/pics, /r/funny, and even "serious" default like /r/politics are cesspools of crap. But smaller, more tightly knit subreddits are totally different. You don't see the baconing narwhals and whatnot at /r/UnresolvedMysteries or /r/HomestarRunner.
The best way to prevent Reddit-style cliche tomfoolery is for the community as a whole to disapprove of it and downvote it. Honestly, lighthearted image-based subverses will be more prone to jokey content than subverses that are discussion-oriented. The best thing is for all of us to act in favor of relevant, interesting, non-shitty content, and downvote the crap.
On reddit, I bet most of you could correctly predict the top comment of a thread with pretty good accuracy.
Pretty much. On Voat, there isn't really as much of an established "hivemind" yet, which I think is a good thing. The "hivemmind" goes beyond just people repeating jokes and memes. It also affects people's opinions and viewpoints about various issues, like politics and social justice. It can make people either afraid to express a dissenting viewpoint, or unable to make themselves heard because they're downvoted for going against the grain.
photonasty 1 points 17 points 18 points (+18|-1) ago
Some people have posited that Pao may be a sort of a "sacrificial lamb," if you will. That is, she may have been intentionally positioned to take the heat for Reddit's upcoming changes. People are much better at channeling their rage at a person, than at a more abstract, faceless group. Remember Big Brother? It's the same effect, but the opposite-- a conduit for rage.
While Reddit circlejerks over Pao, they could theoretically depose her, seemingly to appease the community, and reap the positive PR from doing so. In the meantime, however, they would still be making changes in the interest of monetization.
Please note that this is all purely hypothetical.
photonasty 0 points 17 points 17 points (+17|-0) ago
I think this is basically corporate doublespeak. It sounds reasonable at first glance, but when you look a little closer, you realize that it's incredibly vague. It's a lot of words that say very, very little.
3 lowest rated comments:
photonasty 2 points -1 points 1 points (+1|-2) ago
My tendency is to agree with you. For the average non-biologist, it can be very difficult to tell the difference between bones from different animals. It's not unimaginable at all that people mistook bones from mastodons and other extinct megafauna as being from giants. In fact, some people have even proposed that cyclops myths may have been associated with elephant skulls in ancient times-- although the Cyclops has its own symbolic significance, and may not have arisen in folklore because of elephant skulls.
I think that many people really want giants, or biblical Nephilim, to have really existed. Something that big, but unknown to modern archaeology and paleontology, is an enthralling and romantic notion. It actually would be pretty cool if someone found Homo sapiens or hominid fossils that were much larger than one would expect. With that said, however, the actual concrete existence of such "giants" seems very improbable. Not only are there no truly verified skeletal or fossil remains from these organisms, but at a certain level of "giant-ness," one has to also consider biomechanical issues and limitations that might preclude a truly "Giant" hominid.
photonasty 0 points 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago
The most recent development was an April 2015 update that rewards sites that are mobile responsive. Other than that, their basic information seems pretty perennial.
photonasty 0 points 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago
I almost forgot about that. I didn't really follow that story very closely.