Profile overview for qpwt.
Submission statistics

This user has mostly submitted to the following subverses (showing top 5):

19 submissions to whatever

18 submissions to healthandfitness

9 submissions to videos

4 submissions to AskVoat

3 submissions to ContestOfChampions

This user has so far shared a total of 45 links, started a total of 24 discussions and submitted a total of 260 comments.

Voting habits

Submissions: This user has upvoted 615 and downvoted 5 submissions.

Comments: This user has upvoted 425 and downvoted 32 comments.

Submission ratings

5 highest rated submissions:

Fox is part of the mainstream media, submitted: 3/28/2017 4:13:11 PM, 142 points (+153|-11)

Horowitz: Sweden now rape capital amidst Muslim immigration, submitted: 2/20/2017 10:05:28 PM, 118 points (+121|-3)

Now is the time to buy old books, submitted: 2/20/2017 6:58:47 PM, 89 points (+92|-3)

Don't take on investors. Keep control. Offer us an option to donate/subscribe on a monthly basis. @atko @puttitout, submitted: 11/28/2016 5:34:22 PM, 86 points (+87|-1)

Fuck any post with click-bait CAPITALIZED titles like WOW / BOMBSHELL / BREAKING / WAY BIGGER / RELEASE / etc, submitted: 11/4/2016 9:31:56 PM, 83 points (+96|-13)

5 lowest rated submissions:

Comment ratings

3 highest rated comments:

'Edward Snowden did this country a great service. Let him come home' submitted by FreeSpeachRocks to Worldnews

qpwt 1 points 42 points (+43|-1) ago

Bring him back and vote him into Congress so we have someone who is technically literate in that sloppy group of corrupt liars.

A public call for funding submitted by Atko to announcements

qpwt 0 points 34 points (+34|-0) ago

If the service is good, the users should be willing to pay for it without receiving equity in the company. When others take equity, you lose control, either by being beholden to 1 big investor or 1 thousand smaller investors. Plus, it would be difficult to parse through all of those investors. A majority of them could be from the same group of people, trying to take over Voat.

As I stated in my other comment, I would be willing to donate via recurring subscription. I don't mind if my identity is known to Voat, so long as Voat makes a reasonable effort to protect it. Supporting free speech is worth that.

Still others prefer anonymity. Understandable. Give the people what they want, eh?

EDIT: keep it simple. always the best method to ensure quality.

I just came over from Reddit. My Voat age is literally 3 minutes. What should I know about Voat before embarking on this new journey? submitted by Celestial_teapot to AskVoat

qpwt 0 points 34 points (+34|-0) ago

Welcome. Anything goes here, except for the explicitly illegal stuff of course. We at Voat prefer to hear everything and filter it ourselves individually instead of having corporate overlords or the politically correct majority tell us what to think.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.

TJ said it best. We came here for the hard, unadulterated truth with no censorship of legal, unpopular views. Yes, that means even "alternative" viewpoints of Hitler are welcome here.

Have an open mind and a thick skin but feel free to stick to your principles and say whatever the fuck you want.

3 lowest rated comments:

Account Deleted By User submitted by otakiba736 to Starlet

qpwt 10 points -9 points (+1|-10) ago

This is a sexualized photo of a child. She is 14. OP why the fuck would you post this? On second thought, why the fuck does this sub exist?

If you're a man and looking at this, go somewhere else. If you're a teenager or younger, go outside dammit! Go play, learn skills, do something with your life instead of sitting at your computer playing minecraft and jerking off looking at suggestive photos and nip slips!

Tucker to advocate: Why are sanctuary city debates racial? submitted by EdSnowden to politics

qpwt 8 points -7 points (+1|-8) ago

Tucker's guest held his own. He did very well and this doesn't reflect well on Tucker at all. This is the annoying bullshit that mainstream news pulls all day every day. "Let's bring on a guest who holds views opposite to our branding and try to start a fight with him". Didn't work and it makes Tucker look fucking stupid.

EDIT: I challenge you pussies who down voted me to state your objections in a reply. The "interview" is retarded. Makes Tucker look like a constipated faggot. I support the current immigration policy, I support a lot of things Trump is doing, but I don't support right-wing propagandists any more than I support left-wing propagandists. I don't like the video because it makes legitimate support of immigration policies look bad.

Free speech is great. It means I can say things like "Fuck this whole subverse". That's what I'm doing with v/starlets today, fuck that shit. (possible NSFW, inappropriate photos of young girls) submitted by qpwt to whatever

qpwt 3 points -3 points (+0|-3) ago

Thanks for the reply. I respect your right to your opinion. I agree with some of your points and disagree on some points.

name an animal other than humans

There's a huge difference in the analytical capacity between humans and animals. That's why we're arguing on the internet and your dog is eating his own puke. Don't rationalize human behavior by comparing it to another species.

you aren't just asking for censorship, you are asking for humans to give up human nature

Not necessarily. Isn't it also human nature to discourage potentially harmful behavior and encourage healthy behavior?

the pictures you posted

I didn't post them, I linked to other posts

they WANT the SEXUAL ATTENTION. that is natural, what is unnatural is a society that doesn't allow them to have sex. what is wrong is people who would try to oppress those girls and take away their ability to choose to have sex or to pose in sexual manners. what is wrong is people who want to control everyone else

Yes, they want attention. But some of those kids are 12 years old. You think they should be having sex? wtf? How much attention should the internet give them? Do they want attention because they don't get enough from their parents and friends? Should we encourage them to post pictures on the internet so they can get attention from strangers? Not sure if "oppressed" is the right word, but I agree that some parts of society need to shrug off the religious anti-sex movement. It has been hurtful and does intend to deny natural human sexuality. That's not what this post is about. At the same time, "anything goes" probably isn't the solution. We can all collaborate on a healthy balance.

don't try to bring your bullshit moral authoritarian mindset and inflict it on us

These pictures sexualize children. If you can't see that then take a step back and try to be objective about the world you live in. Is discouraging sexualization of children really a "bullshit moral authoritarian mindset"?

you know what? i got out of my way to support the companies that use models like that.

You support companies that sexualize children?

also want to see something cool? go to youtube and look for young pretty girls and look at how many people are following them and are subscribed to their channels, look how much money it makes for them

That's not cool and I don't care how much money young youtube stars are making. They are capitalizing on a new medium. Great. How long is that going to last? Your argument is that we should encourage child youtube stars because they are making money. Should we as a society encourage all "young pretty girls" to sell themselves on youtube because they are making money?

some of them probably make much more money than you do, and are told that they are beautiful, and they are loved in the process of making that money

You care a lot about money... This sounds a little too much like strippers and prostitution, which should be legalized, just not for minors.

minors are some of the sexiest people on earth

Fucking hell...

you don't have to sexualize them, look at the makeup industry

I hate the make-up industry. Why would we ever want to use the make-up industry as a standard? It is constantly telling us "you're not good enough, buy this". What kind of low IQ, poor self-esteem argument is that?

that last picture you posted, the one of jordyn jones. as far as i am concerned, she is the prettiest and most attractive person walking this earth right now that i know of

Okay... Go outside, travel a bit. It'll do you some good.

don't like my freedom of speech? go somewhere else. this is not your safe space

Oh no I like it. I like this argument a lot haha. It's a great reminder of the diversity of opinion in the world. And you're an english-speaker! I don't know what the arguments would be in other countries but I can only imagine.

edit: formatting