1
56

[–] Atko 1 points 56 points (+57|-1) ago 

We've utilized vast amounts of caffeine working on implementing new moderator permission sets and have tested and pushed this feature live.

I have to say that this was all Putt. My daytime job is sucking out all the energy that I used to have for Voat and right now, things are mostly being worked on by Putt. He keeps putting in endless hours into Voat and I really have to admire him for doing so. I hope we can both make this our full time job and I can finally catch up to his efforts, but for now, I'll have to jump in whenever I have time and energy.

@PuttItOut: thank you.

3
12

[–] Disappointed 3 points 12 points (+15|-3) ago 

I think the majority will be happy to see you two on the same page, both literally and figuratively.

2
4

[–] Failure 2 points 4 points (+6|-2) ago 

Oh yeah, @atko, putt needs to know the date that Forbidme became Whoaverse. New badge stuff.

[–] [deleted] 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

[Deleted]

0
7

[–] bikergang_accountant 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Two L1s could be a mess. We've seen it where there are a team of multiple L2s and then only one sticks around and he turns out to be trouble. It's inviting more apples to barrel increasing the odds of it spoiling. Your top level needs to be singular.

I definitely think L1 should be assignable to an L*. Then the original L1 is no longer L1. Instant transfer. Multiple L2 solves any problem you hope to solve with multiple L1 because they can do anything besides fuck around with ownership and changes that can permanently fuck over a subverse. They can even assign new L2 from the look of it (which hint, if you are an L1 and need helpers by default use L3s). We need an L2.5 that can't do that.

1
0

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

i sincerely urge a way for us as a community to show our appreciation in bitcoin form! if voat's really running on donations, month after month, show us! and show us another tracker for "dev coffee"!

0
23

[–] 6470779 0 points 23 points (+23|-0) ago  (edited ago)

L2 / ModeratorPNG: Nearly unrestricted access. Can't add new Owners, can't Anon a sub, can't remove other L2 mods.

Can they add level 2 mods and why is that allowed? You didnt really address that in the last thread despite users making good points. IF that has been the vector of attack before why is it allowed? If system subs are meant to be protected from malicious users why is it allowed?

2
14

[–] PuttItOut [S] 2 points 14 points (+16|-2) ago 

I'll have to double check on this, but I don't think anything has changed in this area.

@Kevdude, would you mind maybe starting a single thread about this subject and the rules on system sub moderation so we can get input on how to handle these things?

If you do I'll update this post with the URL.

1
21

[–] 6470929 1 points 21 points (+22|-1) ago 

I cant see any reason why a level 2 would need to invite another level 2 to a system sub, can you? If I'm a level 1 mod Im going to be reluctant to put a level 2 mod on my sub because I know they can invite anyone they want. Askvoat was trashed by a group of users invited by a level 2 mod. v/pics recently had a mod added by the Mod of that sub who you know nothing about. The users weren't asked about it at all. Do you want users to have input into who is modding? Homersimpson down there mentions a rare case scenario where it may cause some inconvenience if a level 2 cant add users. You admins have had to intervene twice now on system subs and once on v/niggers because lvl 2 can invite as many level 2 as they want. Thats my input on it.

3
6

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

Sure. Where would you like me to post it?

4
4

[–] PokemonNigga 4 points 4 points (+8|-4) ago 

I don't understand. Wasn't the whole point of doing this to fix the very problem you just said you weren't sure this would fix?

You don't make sense. As the other guy said

" IF that has been the vector of attack before why is it allowed? If system subs are meant to be protected from malicious users why is it allowed? "

And you said you didn't know.

Wasn't the whole point of making these changes to address the very problem you're saying you aren't sure this will fix?

3
2

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

I have no idea where the new post is or if it has been submitted at all but I'd like to add my 20 cents on it: it's mandatory that moderators be able to add new mods. It's common for the owners of subverses to leave the site or be away for very long - they're not paid to be here so they needn't. As far as I can tell the owner of v/shortpoems hasn't logged in in over a month. And that's fine! He will come back at some point and I, as the only active mod, don't have to take the subverse from him via a take-over request since I can do pretty much all the important things as a mod if necessary. This is extremely common in smaller subs.

Talking about this scenario in general and not only about v/shortpoems: the only reason this is fine is because I can add new mods if I feel that managing the sub is too much for me alone and these mods can do the same as well if I ever go away. Take-over requests should be a last-resort scenario because not only it requires manual intervention by a human somewhere to make it happen (which should be minimized for efficiency) but it is also prone to abuse. A new owner can do anything he wants with the sub.

My point being: nowadays, as long as there is at least one active moderator the sub will be fine. If you take away the power of mods to add new mods this is no longer the case because the mod can't add new mods to make sure the subverse will stay healthy even if they stop coming to Voat or doing their job properly for any reason. I think most of the people criticizing this are thinking of system subs but the rules apply to all subs and I'm concerned about the small ones here.

Story time: the owner of another small sub which I sometimes post on contacted me recently and told me he was losing interest in Voat and wanted someone else to take over daily management of the sub (even if not a very active one) so he could step away from Voat knowing the sub was still cared for. I seemed like a good poster there and he saw I was modding a few other small active subs as well so he came to me in a PM. He said that he will be coming back once in a while to check the sub so he is still the owner. I myself do the same thing to a subreddit I left over when I came to Voat, I go there every couple of months to make sure it's fine.

What is wrong with this story? Absolutely nothing. But it would be wrong if I didn't have the power to add new mods because if the day comes I need to take the same actions as him I'd either have to 1. wait for him to come back which might take a month (or more, or never happen) and ask him to find a new mod; 2. take the subverse from him via a take-over request only to add a new mod which would end up in the same non-sense situation; 3. abandon the subverse entirely. Today I can just add a new mod like he did and be on my merry way, leaving the rightful owner of the sub in his proper place if he ever comes back to resume his activities.

If there really is potential abuse for mods, I suggest a new role is added ("L 2.5 lesser mod" or something), which should be easy to do since the entire permission system is now role-based. But I don't think it's necessary, I think the system is fine as-is: mods are supposed to be all-powerful entities which you trust entirely. Their only limitation is that they are not more powerful than the owner, which will override their decisions if need be and remove abusive mods from power. This is how things should be - why would you even mod someone you don't trust, to begin with?

2
4

[–] HarveyHarveyJones 2 points 4 points (+6|-2) ago 

I'd like a response to that as well.

10
-5

12
-9

2
16

[–] kevdude 2 points 16 points (+18|-2) ago 

What about limits on how many system subs a user can be on the mod team of?

0
8

[–] heili 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

Applies to everyone except @Cynabuns.

1
9

[–] pembo210 1 points 9 points (+10|-1) ago 

Can L4/Designers be allowed to be in more subs? maybe 5-10 additional.. The purpose of the limit was to keep people from owning too many and powermods blah blah blah... Since L4 can't remove content or ban users, they really are more of a support role.

0
2

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

Interesting! By going to this many more, are you suggesting that the new L4/Designer role should not be part of the overall count of subs at all? Maybe list them in a new category as non-moderator positions entirely?

1
4

[–] HomerSimpson 1 points 4 points (+5|-1) ago 

I get it was just easier to make a bunch of set positions but why not allow the owner of the sub be able to choose the permissions themselves? From full access like adding new mods to minimal access. Should just use reddit's system. It is close to perfect.

1
8

[–] PuttItOut [S] 1 points 8 points (+9|-1) ago 

This is the first step in that direction. This was a 12 hour refactoring, we'd need another 40-50 to do the full implementation.

0
4

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

Good to know that it is at least planned.

8
4

[–] SaneGoatiSwear 8 points 4 points (+12|-8) ago 

<3 you putt. can't wait for

Soon™

2
16

[–] PuttItOut [S] 2 points 16 points (+18|-2) ago 

Oh we are friends again now huh? Welcome back my friend. ;)

0
5

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

Thanks for snorting up all that caffeine and putting things like this in to place. There are those who walk among us that would like to contribute more...

6
5

[–] SaneGoatiSwear 6 points 5 points (+11|-6) ago 

i love voat, and have been grateful for all the hard work you two do - -

this is afaik the last bastion of free speech on the internet....

and it is out of love for free speech and voat that we must keep it honest for the sake of having it at all;

together, all goats keep the pasture green. divided, the pasture falls. or you know some goat reference that's better applied..

thank you, putt! :)

1
3

[–] DietCokehead1 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Great update, guys!

1
3

[–] PlasmaDistortion 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

Thanks guys! We appreciate all that you do!!!!

load more comments ▼ (16 remaining)