You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–] CameraCode 5 points 54 points (+59|-5) ago 

Oh man this is such a tough one. I looked through his submissions, and all of them to v/gaming seem to be of a character from a game, and are generally just a woman in a bikini or revealing clothing, not as bad as the ones he posts to v/lolicon.

https://voat.co/v/gaming/3102879

https://voat.co/v/gaming/3102839

https://voat.co/v/gaming/3102528

https://voat.co/v/gaming/3100784

They were all tagged as nsfw and as far as I can tell he didn't break anything rules of the sub besides potentially spam. I think it comes down to intent. Did he mean to devalue the site by posting low quality content, or did he just want to share pictures that he enjoys? Personally he doesn't seem malevolent like some other users. But he could also be a bot because he just posts a lot of submissions and hardly ever comments, which is certainly grounds for a ban.

Perhaps we need more defined rules like what exactly spam is, what a bot is, etc. Maybe users can vote on an acceptable definition.

[–] fusir 7 points 40 points (+47|-7) ago 

Even if he had meant to devalue the site that's not a bannable offense. What is shitposting? We can't ban people for our belief that we can know people's intent. We can ban them for what they do, against some clearly stated rules. If we don't like what someone does we can always change a rule.

Those who would sacrifice voat for some temporary moment of not being offended deserve neither.

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

Even if he had meant to devalue the site that's not a bannable offense.

Maybe it should be.

[–] VicariousJambi 7 points -3 points (+4|-7) ago 

It's spam. Are you all a bunch of fucking retards? Spam is when an entity continually makes posts the community obviously doesn't want, purposefully, to be disruptive.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spamming

Spamming is the use of messaging systems to send an unsolicited message (spam), especially advertising, as well as sending messages repeatedly on the same site.

[–] 9-11 7 points -5 points (+2|-7) ago 

Hey fusir, for full disclosure why don't you reveal the kind of hidden & anon subs you frequent?

[–] WhitePaladin 17 points -13 points (+4|-17) ago 

fuck off idealistic faggot

[–] kneo24 18 points 19 points (+37|-18) ago 

Personally he doesn't seem malevolent like some other users.

The guy is a pedophile.

[–] shrink 4 points 15 points (+19|-4) ago 

Or he's a dedicated shitposter determined to get exactly the kind of reaction out of users he's getting, by choosing what he thinks would most easily offend them, without technically being outside the bounds of the rules. There's as much a chance he's a pedo as he is a troll, trolling you to get a rise out of offending your sensibilities, which appears to be working.

[–] worthlesshope 6 points 9 points (+15|-6) ago  (edited ago)

Are you Australia? Since when has animated drawings been considered pedophilia? What's next banning everyone who has A cup breasts because they don't look adult enough for you?

Are you sure you belong here? Are you sure you don't lean left? Maybe reddit would be better for you.

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

Apparently, pedophilia is allowed on Voat as long as it’s legal since there are quite a few Loli subs that have been around for years.

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

That is completely irrelevant to whether he should be banned you book licking faggot

[–] VicariousJambi 10 points 4 points (+14|-10) ago 

Has this guy ever made one on topic post? Obviously the community doesn't like his content. They have judged it as spam and constantly down vote it. He hasn't changed. Banning him makes it so the users don't have to downvote him every single time.

Now the users don't have to deal with his bullshit anymore and he can still post his shit in the appropriate subs.

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

The subverse apparently has no sub rules just voat ones. https://voat.co/v/Voat/about/rules

I'm totally fine with them deciding that his posts are off topic, but like I said they were of video game characters and marked as nsfw. I'm also not calling for him to be unbanned, but this is a good instance of the need for some sub rules, like "gaming art is off topic, and banable" or "nsfw gaming art is bannable".

If the mods are unactive and don't want to take care of the sub, they should be replaced. Putt shouldn't have to do this.

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

Yes he made several but the most recent was 2 months ago. Just look at his comment history. Every single post of his got downvoted no matter what he said I assume because he likes loli. So people just auto downvote him whenever they see him.

Anyone wise enough would then stop commenting if they'd just continue to get downvoted by the angry mob of voat. You can even see people just replying to him on his NORMAL posts saying "fuck you go away. We don't want you here."

[–] cthulian_axioms 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Obviously the community doesn't like his content. They have judged it as spam and constantly down vote it. He hasn't changed.

The tribe has spoken.

[–] Mylon 8 points 3 points (+11|-8) ago 

Doesn't seem worthy of a ban. Unless maybe he was farming CCP for vote manipulation.

But if it's only a ban from /v/gaming, then it's no big deal. I come to voat for content curation and demanding higher quality submissions from "default" subs is fine.

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

Decent point. I still visit /r/anime on reddit and maybe 30% of the posts are "fanart". It gets a bit annoying. Sure some of them are nice, but if I wanted to see fanart I'd be part of a fanart sub.

If the guy has no post history of contributing to the sub besides posting game girls in skimpy outfits. Then a ban won't affect him much. But if he contributed and also posted the images then probably the rules should be more specific on the sub instead and he should be specifically warned where that kind of content belongs.

But I also dislike when rules are made because people abuse them. I've noticed flaws in doing things that way. My original opinion on this type of rule is not a clarification but only try to act when things get out of hand. Look the other way sometimes because the person could have good reason to do things that way. Still sounds good to me.

So in this case I say let him do as he pleases till it actually gets out of hand. Let him steal that apple, he might be starving, just warn him every day and hope he feels bad about it to stop when he stops feeling hungry.

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

I could get behind that, but those rules probably should be more clearly stated so that people won't need to bitch at putt at every ban.