You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →


[–] truthwoke33 13 points 19 points (+32|-13) ago  (edited ago)

And as expected, you give non-answers to softball questions.

Why are you using resources on a feature that nobody requested? How does this benefit users?

Putt, honestly, from me to you. What is the point of this. Why bother with an AMA if you're going to be so aloof about it?


[–] fuckmyreddit 1 point 14 points (+15|-1) ago 

It looks like our angel wants to make Voat into his own private heaven. I dont like Secret Societies or Honeypots. My advice to our angel is to keep the formula that works. Unless you're trying to clean this house up and flip it immediately, you're on the wrong path, Angel.


[–] PuttItOut [S] 2 points 3 points (+5|-2) ago 

I think everyone agrees that a "clean up" isn't in the works, nor would it work in the first place.

We have no intention of compromising on Free Speech, for better or worse.


[–] ratsmack 1 point 12 points (+13|-1) ago  (edited ago)

The whole point of this is to gather information... it's just a discussion at this point, so there's no need to treat it as being set in stone.


[–] truthwoke33 2 points 10 points (+12|-2) ago  (edited ago)

Ok but

For internal reasons Voat needs to implement a private subverse feature in which only approved people have access to the subverse content

I don't understand how this benefits voat. He specifically said 'for internal reasons' meaning this feature was not a user request.


[–] PuttItOut [S] 15 points 6 points (+21|-15) ago 

Why are you using resources on a feature that nobody requested? How does this benefit users?

And you speak for everyone? You are one person and I take what you say as such. Back off with the absolutes and I'll take you seriously.

I said "internal" reasons earlier.


[–] truthwoke33 0 points 20 points (+20|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Ok, I respectfully ask what, in your opinion, the benefit of private subs is to the user base of voat. I'm on the website very frequently, including site subs so honestly, yes I'm pretty confident in saying that a very small minority may be requesting such a feature. Thanks for your reply.

Though, to be honest, I don't trust anyone who has mystery investors. I just can't, it doesn't make sense from a business perspective, not from a PR perspective.

Here's my feed back: If you need private subs to better organize voat, then great, do it. But keep it a private feature and don't release it to the general users. I don't think voat users need it, but if you do to help organize the site then you should forgo user requests and build it to be as effective for you as possible, specialize it for your needs.


[–] 16513498? 0 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago 

I mean you could answer the question.


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

What are the "internal" reasons for creating this feature?


[–] CameraCode 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

He speaks for me.


[–] Native 9 points 2 points (+11|-9) ago 

Stop attacking puts, he is looking to improve features. No everything is a great idea and hence why he is asking. Tone down your rhetoric it's not needed now


[–] weezkitty 0 points 12 points (+12|-0) ago 

It isn't an improvement if it's most likely use case is abusive. It is abused on Reddit. We don't need that shit here. Full stop


[–] SaveTheChildren 8 points -2 points (+6|-8) ago 

REEEEEEEEE 'mods are gods ' go back to plebbit