[–] mr_skeltal 0 points 20 points (+20|-0) ago 

I, for one, will be unsubbing from this sub. I didn't use it all that often in the first place so it will be of little consequence to anybody, however I will not support banning users for dissent and heavy-handed deletion of comments. That's not a discussion, serious or otherwise. That is a circlejerk.


[–] kevdude 0 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago 

Ambiguous rules allow you to selectively ban people. How is listing usernames above not encouraging a "witch hunt" against those users? You know exactly what you are doing. You are the ones with the power to silence users. No one is saying you should be silenced. That is the beautiful part in all this. No one saying u/she should be censored. We just don't want her censoring others. Either most of your group were powermods on reddit and now you are here to continue your bullshit or you left reddit to start something new and have unconsciously copied the mod behavior you saw over there. Either way you are wrong and have no business moderating discussion forums.


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

The question mark rule is needless to continue enforcing. at this point its all about pride now. its more than obvious. pride always makes people continue doing such pointless things just to prove something. pride is a bitch.


[–] Nurdoidz [S] 9 points -3 points (+6|-9) ago 

The question mark rule is no longer in effect and is not relevant anymore. I described my issue specifically in response to Atko's statement:

I will not support subverses with moderators who impose questionable rules such as "your post has to end with a questionmark".

In the same regard, /v/seriousdiscussion's rules can follow under the "questionable" category.


[–] Flyingwrath 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

So why exactly did you Ban those people?


[–] [deleted] 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago 



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

Your reply makes sense and provides a simple solution to the problem. @she will never step down from the mod position because power and control.


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

Exactly this, if @she truly cared about that sub and wanted it to succeed she would've un-modded immediately to curb the outward flow of users. The fact that she didn't do this clearly shows she's in this for the power.


[–] Eshu_Eleggua 1 points 10 points (+11|-1) ago 

After reading more about this than I want to admit and a lot of thinking. I think it is more @Atko doesn't want a default sub that can't handle crowd control. I say this because of this line "Moderators need to calm their tits and focus on nurturing and growing their communities." It doesn't help a community and only spreads fear when a post that is hours old and on the front page gets deleted because it broke a rule about punctuation. At that point it would have been more prudent to give a warning to the user and then make a sticky post in the forum reiterating the need to follow said rule while listing the reasons instead of deleting it.

With a lot of users coming from reddit due to posts getting removed left and right the newer users are a bit more apt to get irritated when something like this happens than they normally would have. For many of them over moderation is what killed their experience. Voat is billing itself as the opposite right now and this didn't help at all.

The rules of this subverse seem to be very spot on and not really questionable. The reason why I find the "your post must end with a questionmark" a questionable rule is because people sometimes forget punctuation, especially if your posting from a phone, and never realize it till hours later so it is very easy to break. The mods here also understand that sometimes the rules can be bent if the community really wants the content which is something v/askvoat didn't do in this situation.



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

Biased post is biased, this doesn't include any of the removals of She, sometimes of threads with hundreds of comments. Well, you showed one, which was removed unjustly and had 40 comments.
Also, you add some comments for no reason, as >2015-08-11 16:17:10: @MCVoat posts a comment implying that an idea's merit is somehow affected by how controversial it is[ar].
Please try not to be so biased.

And what Atko probably meant is that removing threads with hundreds of comments for a single character is quite questionable.


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

WTF you can either adopt Robert's Rules of Order and follow them all or "discussions" will invariably become drunk brawls from time to time. Rather than a captcha, why not just adopt a speed math test to keep out the drunks. Better yet, why not adopt Gonewild style verification where you have to pose by your diploma to become a verified poster?

load more comments ▼ (2 remaining)