You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–] [deleted] 6 points 2 points (+8|-6) ago 

[Deleted]

0
7

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

Can I ask why you and she are so focused on making rules that really do nothing but allow you to subjectively police and delete conversations users are having in the sub? A rule like "Soapboxing" is just begging for abuse and shitstorms. And the ? is ridiculously anal-retentive. Come on dude, your sidebar is fine, there are no shitposts. Are you guys just bored and looking to make rules that give you the excuse to delete things?

1
1

[–] Stoic 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

To be clear, it has not yet been established whether or not soapboxing will ever become a rule again. At least I dont want it to be.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

0
0

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

If you mean the button to submit something, its actually the big speech bubble on the side with a question mark in it. Took me a sec to figure it out, but it could certainly stand to be more obvious.

0
3

[–] HowAboutShutUp [S] 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Hey there, I appreciate your taking the time to reply.

If I may, I'd like to suggest that if the goal is to use /v/ModsOfAskVoat for this sort of thing, any ongoing discussions should be cross-linked in an /v/AskVoat sticky post that will remain active until the close of that discussion and the enactment of anything that results from that discussion (not a secondary discussion here, rather an obvious link that will funnel people into the ModsOfAskVoat discussion if they wish to participate). The goal of this would be to make sure any user who visits this sub is aware that a discussion is happening, without too much effort required on the user's part to find such meta-related topics.

  1. I hope the way this is formulated gets some fairly deep consideration. It could be easily possible to construe something like an attempt to raise awareness about something as "soap-boxing" even if it's about something serious or important. That's not saying I think drumming for causes should become a thing in AskVoat, I'm just not sure the definition of soap-boxing as I understand it is the right way to look at the kind of posts a rule like this might target. Over the course of figuring out what the definition used by the rules will be, perhaps a better descriptor will reveal itself.

  2. Can you elaborate a bit on this point? To be frank, my hope is that if someone clearly phrases a question in the title but neglects to add a question mark, that the post will be allowed to slide.

  3. I support the objective criteria point 100% and feel like this is a great example of the kind of stuff that helps resolve concerns like mine. I'm looking forward to seeing how that unfolds.

  4. Understandable, I'm sure there's a lot to do. Again, looking forward to seeing what develops.

I know I've been kind of a shit lately, but honestly the idea of the internet becoming a place hostile to open discourse is something that really disturbing to me, so I struggle very much with not overreacting to issues like that. I'm sorry for the added stress anything I've personally done may have placed on you, but I really do hope things can work out in a way that's positive for all of us.

0
2

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

I don't think it needs to move to another sub. This affects the v/askvoat community and should be discussed in v/askvoat.

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

[Deleted]

[–] [deleted] 9 points -6 points (+3|-9) ago 

[Deleted]