4
13

[–] G4 4 points 13 points (+17|-4) ago 

No. Rules should be sub-based entirely. Site-wide rules lead to censorship.

6
11

[–] dannydale--- 6 points 11 points (+17|-6) ago  (edited ago)

If you want to become a default sub, you should be under strict voat policy since default subs BENEFIT from an artificial head start. we regulate gas, electricity, and water for a good reason.

if you want to be your own niche sub, have at it.

You can't hold your leaders accountable until you learn to hold YOURSELVES accountable by putting your own views under public scrutiny.

0
3

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

I concur.

0
0

[–] normal_dude 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Voat has no default subs.

0
3

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

We already have site-wide rules, though.

https://voat.co/help/faq

If majority of the links you submit are to sites you are associated with, your domains may be globally banned from Voat. To be on the safe side, if you submit 10 links to various subverses on Voat, at most 2 of the 10 submitted links may be to the sites you are associated with.

and

Each subverse has its own rules which are stated in respective subverse sidebars. If you ignore said rules, your account may be banned from submitting further content to the subverse or in some cases, globally.

0
0

[–] Porphyrogennetos 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I agree except for defaults.

0
9

[–] SwiftCase 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago 

I think there should be checks and balances so that users can hold mods accountable for what users may see as wrongdoing or bias, but I don't know what that system should be. What I worry about is a witch hunt, like what is currently happening. There shouldn't just be a vote to decide whether a mod stays, but there needs to be some form of potential punishment to let them know that they will be held accountable for their actions as mods, just like users are held accountable.

There almost needs to be something like the Arbitration Committee on Wikipedia. A group of high-up and most trusted users who decide matters as a neutral party when all else fails.

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

[Deleted]

0
1

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

I second modcourt. You going to make it w00zi? I would but I'm not as active as you are. I'd like to be a part of it though if you do.

0
2

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

Yeah, or something like a trouble ticket system that has the power to get an admin involved in a moderation issue, but obviously that idea by itself is too simple and likely not foolproof.

0
0

[–] omegletrollz 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Have you ever heard of Occam's razor? It's a theorem that states that the simplest idea is always the best when compared to others that offer the same benefits.

I actually think your idea is pretty good. We could have a v/adminintervention and someone with higher powers could take a look at it once a day and see if the top X posts from that day require intervention.

0
0

[–] tex 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

The term "witch hunt" loses its meaning when the witches actually exist.

0
0

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

Witch hunts in virtual spaces aren't necessarily a bad thing. Witch hunts are one way that communities protect themselves against likely or perceived threats. In the real world, witch hunts are very different. However, we already have rules against doxxing, so users that dox would be removed.

0
0

[–] SwiftCase 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

In my opinion, witch hunts just breed hysteria and a mob mentality among users in a community; it's more important for level-heads to prevail.

[–] [deleted] 1 points 5 points (+6|-1) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

0
2

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

If, say, 75% of votes are in favor of demodding the moderator in question, then that Mod has to go

You contradict yourself by saying that the bad guys are invading - what is going to prevent the bad guys from having 75% of the votes? A system with absolute numbers is open to abuse.

0
0

[–] hi5enigma 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I second this point. A strong mod system is vital to the well being of niche or controversial subs.

0
0

[–] ILikeMyDogNotYours 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Then make the sub to do that, garner the subscribers, and bring the downvoats to bear on whoever.

2
-2

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

This needs to happen!

1
3

[–] TahTahBur 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Yes - it's called dethrone the scone. Create a subverse that can literally undo a mods actions within 48hours and dethrone all powers for 48 hours. Simple rule - 33% of mods must remain in power at all times. So if your subverse only has two mods, it can't become powerless - but if it is a popular subverse 2/3rds can be dethroned and temporarily demodded (requires 200 upgoats and 77.77% approval). mods that are dethroned can't be removed (demodded by other mods) during this state (to prevent hostil take overs). That would have solved this issue real fast. If a mod disagrees then they must make an appeal that works the same way in the other subverse. I am sure this can be programmed.

0
1

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

That is just open to abuse. Majorly, there are currently 47,000 subs to ask voat while voat is considered small, 200 allows control by 0.4% that is just asking for brigading and personal harassment.

Oppose completely.

0
1

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

0
1

[–] Wise-Old-Man 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Legislating morality never works. Ever. Guidelines should be used and those guidelines should be published and commented on by the users. Grey-ness must be tolerated.

0
1

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

  1. Mods can only be over X subs.
  2. Once a post reaches X votes (up or down), X amount of time, or X position a Mod can not remove it. The people have spoken.
  3. Any post removed must have a reason attached to why by said mod, and go to an undelete sub for those wanting to read them anyway.

0
1

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

This is the same fucking rabbit hole that reddit went down. Jesus, if you don't like the way shits being handled in the sub, go create your own. You can literally call it v/askvoat2 or whatever. If your mod style is better than v/askvoat, then yours will grow while the other shrinks.

All you need is the upvoat/ downvoat and leaving a comment to tell whoever on the daily they suck and should quit.

0
0

[–] gatordontplaythatsht 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

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

[Deleted]

0
1

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

Thanks

load more comments ▼ (5 remaining)