You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →


[–] absurdlyobfuscated 9 points 20 points (+29|-9) ago 

I'm actually going to disagree with everyone here, but hear me out. There are a few important factors here that need to be considered:

  • Rule 2 is clearly stated on the sidebar of the subverse, and the removed comment clearly broke that rule.
  • The mod in question is the owner of the subverse and in theory should be able to set rules for the community and enforce them as within their power in the confines of the subverse.
  • /v/Conspiracy is not a system subverse, and is not necessarily subject to the same guidelines/principles of openness and freedom that are expected of system ones. Anyone can make their own and make rules banning all sorts of silly things.

So unless I'm missing or misinterpreting something, it seems to me that they're right to enforce the rules they've established in a subverse they own. Whether or not the rule in question here should exist in the first place is clearly contested, and frankly I would argue that it shouldn't exist simply because the intention of this site is to be as free and open as possible and because the people here dislike rules that restrict speech. Ultimately it's up to the other mods and the community there to establish their own rules - primarily the latter; the mods should cater to the will of the people and never the other way around.

I would also argue that because that subverse is so big (it has more subscribers than the system sub /v/aww, after all), it should act like a system sub in principle and be free and open just the same.

All that aside, I think I understand the mentality here and the strong aversion to censorship in any form. I'm with you on that. I've also been on the receiving end of a witch hunt or two and it's not terribly pleasant. That mob mentality and the branding of a person as the enemy or shill or sub-human can result in some pretty awful behavior. I would respectfully suggest that we all try to remain objective and rational and remember that there's a living human being behind the screen name with all the same feelings and rights as you, while still being appropriately concerned with the well-being and freedom of voat.


[–] kneo24 0 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago 

Well, for starters, a lot less people would care if they didn't call anything on Voat a subreddit. I've seen witch hunts happen out in the wild to other subverse owners, and it was strictly for what you pointed out and I defended them. Once you start showing any signs of Reddit in conjunction of defense to your actions, you need to metaphorically visit the gas chamber.


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

Definitely a good point and anyone should be disqualified from moderating here when they start acting in a way that's more consistent with the authoritarian style of moderating on reddit than the free and open style here.


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

Voat a subreddit

that was an attempt to trigger y'all and apparently it worked even better than I imagined possible.


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

It's more that the one who started the attack on the sub did so because there are no srs mods in it.


[–] kevdude [S] 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

The mod in question is the owner of the subverse and in theory should be able to set rules for the community and enforce them as within their power in the confines of the subverse.

The distinction there has been whether or not the mod created the sub. In this instance he did not create it so I would argue he has less of an "ownership" claim.


[–] absurdlyobfuscated 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

That is something I hadn't really considered. Now I'm curious who actually established that rule. Was it set arbitrarily by axolotl? Was there an open forum to discuss subverse rules where the merits were weighed and a vote was taken, with the end result reflecting the will of that community?

Someone who usurps and subverts a community surely does not deserve the respect that should be given to the one who builds a community from the ground up.


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

The only kinds of subs where censorship is reasonable are hate subs, and in those cases the only reasonable reason to censor is when a post is in support of the subject/topic that the sub is dedicated to hating.

Every non-hate sub should be modded the same way a system sub is. If it is not the mod needs to go. You seem to believe that subs belong to the mods and they are entitled to be a little dictator if they want to be. That is reddit-thinking and you need to get that shit out of your head. Free speech uber alles. Free speech is the reason that voat exists and it is the reason why voaters are here. A mod is a janitor, not an overseer. The "owner" is a maintenance person, not the ruler.

The fact that censoring mods aren rejected by the vast majority of voaters who hold free speech in the highest regard does not mean that the "muh lynch mob" victim card can be played to defend censorship and condemn people who support the core principle of the site.


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

I agree. The solution here is to migrate to a new subverse, not call on the admins to stomp the mod we don't like.

That said, he is deleting a lot of comments that arguably do contribute to the conversation. He made it look like he was only deleting spam with pure profanity, but that's not what's going on.