@Scandinavian has apparently been blocked from posting on Voat, so I am submitting this post on his behalf. And I just got a blocked message as well so I changed my IP-Address to submit this. If I don't reply, I will have been probably blocked again and can't be bothered to change my IP again.
You, the average user of Voat, suffered a massive loss of confidence in this site yesterday. A lot of us did. What followed was even worse. Here's why you should demand answers from Atko:
Puttitout gives AskVoat to she, calls opposing users "vicious"
Yesterday, Puttitout posted that he'd given AskVoat to she here. In his post, he noted two things:
a) Users that opposed "she" were scolded:
this community is just as vicious, just as judgmental, and just as intolerant as those we seek asylum from
b) Puttitout assumed only a small group was opposed and that opposition to the take-over was "creating division" (not, apparently, the take-over itself):
For the small vocal group intent on creating division at Voat: you need to calm your tits and give @she a chance.
The community protests
Not content with being demeaned and humiliated, instead of being listened to, the community backlashed. "she" made her top mod announcement in AskVoat, which was met with hundreds of protests here. Literally thousands of people have unsubbed from AskVoat.
The community fights back
Protect Voat made this announcement to call for Atko to comment on the language used to demean Voaters.
Meanwhile, some users were accused of downvoat brigading "she". It is not known whether these voats were organic or came from searching her profile, but there are loads of organic voats in his/her announcement and some have definitely gone back to downvoat. As of now, the profile is restricted to 1 post and 5 comments a day.
The she-group shows fears of their power-grab were valid
As soon as "she" had taken over control and AskVoat was now safe to act from, Spacerosa started a brigade against this community here.
In the IRC channel, AskVoat mods announced they would axe other moderators. Just as had been warned against. Proof here.
This was met with accusations of axing inactive mods was "okay". However, mods weren't all inactive, but frozen out - as documented here.
Organized voating brigade appears
Another AskVoat mod then asked users to systematically upvoat "she". Here. This is even a sticky in that sub that solely exists to voat brigade. As warned here.
Puttitout finally shows up the next day, first action is to agree with banning users that protest through downvoats
Following his own narrative of the community being "vicious" (see links above), Puttitout returns to do one thing: Promise that those who have protested by downvoating will be stopped here. Direct quote:
Agree. This will be stopped with a technological solution soon.
And what did "Puttitout" agree with, you ask? The thread was titled: Going through and down voting someone's comment history should be made grounds for a ban from voat.co. So this is the admin's first response: Agreeing that bans should be given.
Forbin offered another perspective in the same thread, direct link here:
I have not downvoted /u/she's comment history (only individual posts which I felt were inappropriate). Downvoting /u/she's history is allowed by current policy.
I'd like to point out that /u/she was given ownership of askVoat solely because "policy" allowed it. She did not create the sub, she was a new user (less than 2 months) when she was made a mod by god knows who, and she petitioned to take ownership after only being a member 2 months. A great number of users opposed her being given this status, but "policy" gave them no say in the matter, and the decision was ceded to autopilot despite the outcry of the community. It was arguably, a hostile takeover by a new user who insinuated themselves into power. The admins allowed her to take ownership solely because she met the criteria of the policy they currently had in place, not because she deserved it.
So again, I'll remind folks that although downvoating someone's history might be bad for Voat, the current "policy" is to allow it. And if we're going to start discussing changing "policy" in order to protect the user experience, it is also fair to demand that new users like /u/she not be allowed to usurp default subs when the community doesn't support it.
Puttitout dodges questions
Scandinavian decided to engage Puttiout as this was too much to sit idly by and watch. He was treated to non answers and an attempt at making it seems like the hundreds if not thousands of users were protesting the transfer only, not the way it was handled. It only made the admins' position worse, as witnessed directly here. On behalf of the community, he told Puttitout he did two things (quotes from that exchange):
Not only did it seem you called everyone who wasn't too happy with the powergrab of AskVoat "vicious", you also said they were "a small group".
So you did two things:
You lost a lot of respect from the crowd that actually believes in the site's founding principles by belittling the community's concerns through name-calling. Yes, name-calling. People saw it as if you decided to give in to the very people who ruined Reddit. I still don't understand why, maybe you're just not very good at communicating.
By pretending there wasn't massive uproar over "she"'s modding actions and calling the opposition a small group, you practically invited the users to prove you wrong. And they did. Hundreds of people have spoken out against "she" in the AskVoat thread and literally thousands of users have unsubbed from AskVoat. Still think it's a "small group"? I thought not.
For a quick overview with quotes in context, see this link instead.
Puttitout goes on charming offensive; finds specific user to tell them they're "assets" and promises jobs at Voat.co
Meanwhile, Puttiout went to specifc users in AskVoat to tell them they were 'a valuable asset' to Voat. Example here. And hinted at a job offer to another user. Here. Apparently, it was more important than making sure there'll even be a Voat left to making money off of before spending time promising jobs to friends on the site.
It's been 24 hours. What was Atko's first action?
Atko showed up. To post a link asking for money to save user manuals. crickets chirping
He's made a post about how he envisions mods, too, but will apparently take his time to answer. See context in this excellent posts that shows why you should be concerned about the cronyism that exists here.
What still hasn't happened
Why was the community told we were "vicious"?
What is Atko's stance on this huge protest from users?
How will Atko and Puttiout regain the community's trust?
Before these questions are fully answered, and answered honestly and sincerely, keep asking questions. Do not let the Reddit-crowd shame you into self-censorship. Each and every one of you amazing people I have met here deserve better than being treated like garbage by a site that promised us a refuge from Reddit's sick ideology, rampant censorship and nauseating admin-mod-relations.
Archive of links:
Edit: Changed envious to envisions