You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

3
13

[–] lofalexandria 3 points 13 points (+16|-3) ago 

I swear, the paranoia I have seen displayed on and across Voat regarding "shills" is going to become a serious issue if it is not tempered at some point.

Seriously, there are some pretty interesting systems being talked about supporting content creators which, combined with the 2/10 rule on self promotion indicates that this community is intended to be much more open and friendly towards content producers and people who are going to be promoting their work.

As long as people are adhering to the rules people need to get the fuck over this idea of shills and paranoia about marketing. I don't give a fuck at all if Microsoft makes an account named Microsoft and 2 out of every 10 posts it makes are links to new Microsoft products. As long as it is within the rules and participating within the community there is nothing wrong with this.

The Signal to Noise ratio post the other day is more important than many will admit and this is an issue that will need to be very clearly addressed one way or the other sooner rather than later.

1
13

[–] SpaceRosa 1 points 13 points (+14|-1) ago 

Yes. And SJWs. I believe if it continues, and becomes worse, you'll have the Voat equivalent of ShitRedditSays, except it'll be SJWWatch or something, and instead of hunting people for being "offensive" they'll go after them for being "too SJW". Seems to me like there are definitely people trying to take advantage of this to stir shit up. In /v/conspiracy for example, a ten minute old account accuses some random user of being a shill with capital letters.

This attitude many people seem to have is a collective vulnerability. Makes people easier to rile up.

1
6

[–] lofalexandria 1 points 6 points (+7|-1) ago 

Yup. It is absolutely best to approach all problems involving human behavior with the base assumption that all people suck and are on a fundamental level, stupid, evil, and corrupt.

Then, you can only be, occasionally, pleasantly surprised and these types of issues shouldn't ever catch anyone off guard. Of course people are going to be idiots and jump down the throats of people who say things occasionally in line with SJW rhetoric, that's how people work, that is how in-group/out-group behavior works.

Even a broken clock is correct twice a day and I guarantee that there are a number of good SJW arguments that are completely rational and coherent in the correct context. But at this point I would be less surprised to see someone freak the fuck out about any resemblance than I would be to see each individual argument made by someone considered and evaluated on its own.

This is why we need concrete rules with as much transparency as possible and good oversight. Then, you sit back and let the chips fall where they may. Eventually, you re-evaluate and decide if the rules need to be evaluated or if the tools for transparency or oversight need to be improved, expanded, or tweaked in some capacity.

But we really really need to, as a community, get the fuck over behavior that is within the rules for fear of some down the road boogyman.

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

[Deleted]

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

[Deleted]

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

[Deleted]

0
1

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

Yes, but there is no coherent way to do anything about those types of things outside of holding them to the rules.

Make part of the rules for what counts as your 2/10 be that if you have some kind of logo or business related identifier in multiple posts those posts count towards your 2/10 ratio. It certainly needs more direct oversight than other systems but there is not really anything else that can be done about it.

Make rules for when you hit certain quantities of posts or ratios of posts pushing for something that you be expected to identify publicly your affiliations or be excluded from further conversations.

I have no problem identifying my work as my own, I run my own website (www.lofalexandria.com which is my username) and based on feedback in one of my posts the other day it was suggested that all posts I submit from my own website be tagged with [OC] at the front until a better system is developed.

My website is tiny (like 30-50 page views per day) and pretty much just a collection of my thoughts on various topics and in many situations are comments from Reddit that started small and grew as I research the topic and I converted them into full on blog posts/articles. Sometimes its something I have written is appropriate to include at the end of a comment reply or something new I wrote fits a sub pretty solidly on topic.

I agree that subversive actions to push agendas is an issue, but you are going to have a hard time enforcing policies against those types of things without catching things like my occasional links to an article I wrote about whatever in the crossfire. My concern is that if we are going to be a community that is open to and encouraging towards content creators then we need to be very careful about this type of reactionary actions towards anything anyone might label as a shill. Because like all labels, it will be abused and misapplied and its easier for most people to hop on the "yea, fuck that guy" bandwagon than to seriously consider the situation.

0
1

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

Exactly, it's about noise. Trolls can have them say too as long as they don't infect the purpose of the community.

0
0

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

maybe, but after a point the very appeal of here is that the rules and mod control have finally slackened off. and, the bad part of housing shills is that the way they try to hide under the guise of a legitimate user, they're a very shady method of shifting people.