0
6

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

We as a community should maintain an informal control on behaviors that we do not like by means of giving no encouragement to behaviors that we are against.

For example, if someone were to just drop a "ಠ_ಠ" as a comment (something I see daily on Reddit), the community should react by not upvoating, not even courtesy upvoating. If someone does upvoat "ಠ_ಠ" then it only provides incentive for that user to continue reposting the banal meme in other discussions.

Other than informal social control, I really do not know how else we can keep a standard.

0
5

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

I hold a similar view.

I think what bothers me is that, as far as I know, much of our users come from an internet culture where these types of comments are upvoted. I fear that these very users make up a strong enough proportion to prevent comments like those from being downvoted, to a point. If this is true, then I think the transformation to an ideal community should be a potential focus of investment, if it is even feasible. If it is not true, then I think there is a lot of hope for our future.

0
5

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

I think it is going to have alot to do with the personality of the owner/creator. It will grow in the way that he allows it to grow. I attribute alot of Reddits early awesomeness to This Guy Here.

0
4

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

Fair point. If this is true, then I hope that @Atko is how he appears, which I think he is. I think Voat already has an advantage due to the founding values he put into the site from the start, but, even with this much, I believe we can strive for more. We need to capitalize on our advantage.

0
5

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

You. I like you.

0
3

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

This is a very interesting problem that I think every community has faced. Myspace, Facebook, 4chan, Reddit, and others all started with small userbases. They started with specific goals and ideals when they were founded. As time progressed, more and more users entered the community. As the userbase grew, the quality of content began to decrease. It would seem intuitive that an influx of users could bring inappropriate posts and comments. Proper moderation over the site could prevent this downward trend on any of the previous sites. It seems more likely that what occurs is similar to the frog in boiling water. The loss of quality was gradual, that truly "awful" posts and comments were weeded out while less "awful" posts escaped the net. Each time the bar is set ever so slightly lower until one day, users find themselves looking at a community very different than when they entered it. The solution to this "entropy", if you will, is each user make it their personal goal to counter inappropriate posts and comments with healthy, proactive responses. The use of well thought replies and prescreened posts eliminates apathy. Citing and cross-citing information ensures accuracy and verification to an outside observer. Negativity and baseless criticism are frankly, lazy. If someone posts something, and it turns out to be false or misleading, it is in everyone's best interest to notice, inform, and correct the error. In the end, while the moderator of a sub has responsibility to maintain the integrity of their community, each member should take stock in keeping discussion insightful and civil. That's my thoughts on the discussion.

0
1

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

You hit the nail on the head. It happens everywhere, no matter what; when you get that critical mass of users everything inevitably starts turning to crap. Over-moderating to prevent low quality content leads to rather tyrannical behavior and it's why a lot of people are upset at reddit right now. The only real solution I can think of is to restrict the size of a community. Limit the number of people who can subscribe to a subverse, so you force smaller communities to form and nothing can ever get to the point where it gets out of control. Maybe a radical idea, but I honestly don't see how else you can stop the degradation from the influx of masses.

0
1

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

People on reddit aren't upset about "over-moderating", they're upset by SJWs rampaging through various subreddits and taking them over with admin assistance. One thing we've got going for us is that the admins on Voat aren't in cahoots with the SJW crowd, nor are they vicious little pricks who maliciously use shadowbanning to shut down anyone they take a personal dislike to.

When the admins are fucked, there's nothing you can do but leave.

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

[Deleted]

0
4

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

Not in the general sense you are mentioning, since there are many factors that play into the de-evolution. Rather, I am focusing the discussion on how to encourage the community here to restrain themselves from posting in subjects they aren't well-versed in.

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

[Deleted]

0
1

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

I love the daily voting limit at early levels, I think it sets the tone for the site. It shows that it is a place for discussion, a place for engaging and informative (and fun) conversation. It makes you think before you upgoat. If you only have so many, you won't throw one out to the simple memes and whatnot. Instead of disagreeing through downgoats, you have to state a contradictory opinion to show your side of the story (at least early on). These rules will hopefully guide the community in a more positive direction.

0
1

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

Fact checkers. Appreciate and love fact checkers.

Beyond that, we are the company we keep. Engage in high quality debate only. I also thinking forcing a comment on each down vote might help.

0
1

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

Set the tone early by downvoating redditisms, puns, memes, and so on. Every time you see someone pipe up with an idiotic "le..." comment, hit that downvoat button. This accomplishes three things:

  • it shows them right away that their reddit crap isn't welcome here
  • it slows down their climb to the 100 point level, perhaps even stopping it altogether if they can't behave
  • it drives the meme/pun/etc. crowd batshit insane. Hopefully this'll convince them to go back to reddit, since their "wit" isn't be appreciated in the fashion that they expect.

Upvoating content that fits the verse is good, but if you just ignore the bad stuff it doesn't drive the lesson home. Think of it as a virtual bitch-slapping for someone who desperately needs it. It might teach them a lesson, or it might not, but if it doesn't at the very least it might convince them to return to reddit and do their mindless meme/pun routine there.

Edit: these people are already here and for the most part are being ignored. Unfortunately, others of their ilk are upvoating them, which rewards their bad behavior. Without commensurate downvoats, they'll simply continue with the mouth-breathing for, well, forever. It worked for them on reddit, so they don't see any reason to change, and won't unless we give them a reason to change.

0
1

[–] 45140? 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Tear down the prejudices against each other from old reddit, this is a fresh start, keep an open mind and be tolerant of others opinions.

For me, I would only ban someone from my subs if they were obviously trolling, and only then after several written warnings.