Last week in /v/voatdev consisted almost entirely of reports for the Voat Votes feature currently in testing on Vout. Here is a report that had nothing to do with Votes! A user was pointing out that many subverses on Voat remain disabled, and cannot be restored or claimed. Putt responded by saying a solution to this is in the works (and it's very probable that he was referring to Voat Votes, so I guess this report had to do with Votes as well...)
The rest of the reports had to do with stuff going on on Vout, half of which have already been addressed by Putt because he is the One and the True.
Posts per day for last week: Wednesday had the most posts last week, at 2,479; the total submissions last week was 15,414. Wednesday also had the most comments last week, at 26,645; the total comments across Voat was 145,994. Odin wins this round!
Most commented posts for last week: A post made after the United States 2018 midterm election results were revealed criticizing followers of QAnon for doing nothing for two years was the most commented last week. This was also the most controversial post for last week, so see the discussion of the post below.
Most controversial posts for last week: The aforementioned post was understandably one that attracted a lot of users and a lot of controversy, given Voat's general divide concerning the issue of QAnon. A large portion of Voat's userbase consists of those directly involved in the QAnon phenomenon, while the rest of the userbase tends to view the phenomenon and those who follow it with disdain. I have weighed in on the phenomenon elsewhere, and have previously voiced my thoughts on the followers as well. Regardless of my issues with some of the logical fallacies the Q folks display, I maintain that they are good people with noble aims in mind, and I feel the need to defend them against the attacks I saw after the midterm results were revealed. The title of the highly commented and controversial post cited above describes the sentiment of the anti-Q school of thought quite plainly: "Q Successfully got you guys to do nothing for 2 years while they lost the house". What I disagree with here is the "do nothing" idea. The implication seems to be that, without Q, these people could be rallying together to take real action that would achieve more than what they are doing from home at their computers. But I have to ask: How many Voaters, who claim to be more red-pilled than the Q folks (and I generally agree with this claim) have channeled their shitposting energy and made real use of their heightened knowledge of the corruption in the world to "rally together IRL" and take "meaningful action" against the establishment? Most Voaters are younger than the boomer demographic of Q followers, so it seems more reasonable to expect us to take action "IRL" than it is to expect Q followers to do so.
And why must we assume people are either online or taking action offline? Is there no overlap? What makes you think the Q followers, while paying close attention to the Q phenomenon (its legitimacy notwithstanding), have not also been speaking in their own private circles, using whatever knowledge they have gained from the Q phenomenon to explain to others (some of) the threats to our society, to encourage people to take the time to vote, to expose voter fraud or signs of it where it appears, to expose the corruption in the parties vying for power? It is the same as we oldgoats, who hide our "power level" where we must, but who also make carefully weighed comments and suggestions on certain issues in certain crowds in order to encourage the masses to see the charades where they are, to manoeuvre them into a position to themselves be red-pilled, to themselves serve Truth? All of us who use platforms such as Voat, who have access to freedom and therefore have a hope of reaching Truth, we all act in what ways we are able to spread and share this Truth, without endangering ourselves. Expecting any more than that from a demographic largely consisting of religious boomers is frankly unjust.
As referenced above, testing is continuing on Vout for the Voat Votes feature. Lots of neat developments have been made, but there is little point in describing them here, as things are very fluid at present, ever evolving, and so it is hard to say what the final status of the feature will be when it is finally ready for launch. Whatever the case, there is no doubting that a truly astronomical amount of time and effort has gone into the development of the feature, and even if somehow there are fundamental flaws with allowing the userbase to use Votes to instigate real outcomes like moderator or subverse rule changes (and with the checks and balances in place, I do not think there will ultimately be such fatal flaws), even if this is so, at the end of the day we will still have a feature that will allow users to vote on issues that do not instigate results (for that aspect of the feature will be useful no matter what), and subverse transfers will surely be usable as well.
One user was banned last week.
One domain was banned last week.
Stay vigilant, goats.