12
80

[–] CANCEL-CAT-FACTS 12 points 80 points (+92|-12) ago 

Can you please adjust the code so I can keep pinging @HenryCorp? Thanks.

@HenryCorp

2
34

[–] RJKRevived 2 points 34 points (+36|-2) ago 

While I love what you do to @HenryCorp, the User Block feature is useful for exactly this kind of thing though. To allow pings from people you've specifically blocked would defeat the purpose, wouldn't you think?

1
13

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

Then @HenryCorp 's little faggot ass is going to have to block pretty much all of voat.

2
5

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

Blocking @HenryCorp won't annoy it as much, so probably it'll be power tripping more than it already is.

17
-3

[–] SaneGoatiSwear 17 points -3 points (+14|-17) ago  (edited ago)

EDIT: LOOK BELOW FOR AN INSANE BRIGADE AGAINST CALLING THIS WHAT IT IS!!!

well if the "feature" stands, cancel shouldn't be exempt. but the feature is user-directed partial shadowbanning, or as we're calling it

partial shadowboxing.

it's censorship, like how google bubbles you, but you get to bubble yourself!

like how they couldn't follow around and listen to everyone,

so they got you to buy the spy device yourself!

also,

where's the canary | who replaced our admins | remove the shadowboxing censorship tool

4
10

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

This could work well though. If we all start pinging @HenryCorp and he blocks us all, what will there be left for him to see?

1
4

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

It sounds like he'll be able to reply to everyone but we won't be able to reply back?

1
3

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

I approve of this clever plan.

@HenryCorp can suck it.

3
3

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

This hopefully this catches on.

@HenryCorp

6
2

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

@HenryCorp needs to die in a fire

11
10

[–] weezkitty 11 points 10 points (+21|-11) ago 

How about no?

That completely defeats the purpose. Fuck Henry Corp. But I'm also sick of this stupid ping thing after every comment

8
24

[–] CANCEL-CAT-FACTS 8 points 24 points (+32|-8) ago 

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

[Deleted]

5
3

[–] I_like_paint 5 points 3 points (+8|-5) ago 

6
2

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

1
0

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

LMAO

6
39

[–] 0x4F 6 points 39 points (+45|-6) ago  (edited ago)

Voat, a niche social networking site founded by a CS student in his spare time at uni, gets a very simple concept right that Twitter, a multi-million-dollar mainstream social media (and, arguably, mainstream media) outlet for some reason can't figure out. Far easier to just nuke Milo and the Dilbert guy from orbit than to, I dunno, give the users the responsibility of switching off people they find objectionable?

Congrats guys, you beat Twatter at their own game. I mean that sincerely too.

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

[Deleted]

2
2

[–] 0x4F 2 points 2 points (+4|-2) ago 

Soooooooo... the answer is to just nuke SJWs, period.

I figured as much.

0
1

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

I dunno. I don't like this feature. You will hear opinions you don't like. That's part of life. That's what makes us better people.

Reddit pulled this shit a while ago too and it basically just creates an echo chamber.

10
1

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

enjoy your safe space

1
3

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

i thought you moved on from old usernames

12
-2

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

every time you click that button,

you make the world around you specifically, a little bit more of a lie.

it's hugboxing, although only partially... it's still a subset of self-censorship, a subset of censorship.

3
7

[–] tin_has_ten_isotopes 3 points 7 points (+10|-3) ago 

Who says I want a hugbox? I want to burn the fucking hugbox and dance on its ashes. I want to discuss the virtues of child pornography, alternative theories of physics, the application of the romantic realism style to architecture, the protein content of corpses and whether they should be recycled for ecological improvement, and a million other crazy things. Even Voat is too narrow minded for general purpose discussion. It is already infested with the same downvote-to-protect-the-public-sensibility scheme that ruined Reddit. Fuck it. If somebody doesn't want to read that South Park needs a kiddie porn episode, they can disappear into some morally pure echo chamber of their own creation. The community will naturally polarize into the Bohemian/renaissance/freethinker faction versus the also-rans. I'm pretty sure I can live with that if it means I get to converse with the next Voltaire and Benjamin Franklin and Oscar Wilde.

1
1

[–] 0x4F 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

AFAIK Voat's user base is a little more mature than Twitter's, so I don't think it'll be (ab)used to the level it would be over there. Just maybe for intentional spammers and obvious CTR shills as we lead up to the election. Then again, I don't know what this place is going to look like if Trump doesn't become POTUS.

1
0

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

"don't censor me because I spam the same manhood101 copy pasta 8 times in every thread! If you don't read my copy pasta 8 times in each thread that is censorship!!"

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

[Deleted]

[–] [deleted] 0 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

[–] [deleted] 1 points 7 points (+8|-1) ago 

[Deleted]

1
3

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

Dude, I will never block you.

1
0

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

arent you the tranny?

1
1

[–] Disappointed 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

I came in here to post this .

2
-2

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

i dont want to block you

i want to block the world from you

1
21

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

What about user following, can we subscribe to users?

[–] [deleted] 1 points 17 points (+18|-1) ago 

[Deleted]

3
20

[–] CANCEL-CAT-FACTS 3 points 20 points (+23|-3) ago 

You are now subscribed to cat facts.

@HenryCorp

0
7

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

Do you want cat facts or not?

11
-1

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

THAT'S a good idea. @puttitout @atko what about "user following" or "user subscribing"??

0
15

[–] PuttItOut [S] 0 points 15 points (+15|-0) ago 

On the TODO list

8
-5

1
14

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

This feature would be more accessible if there was a block button right on the page of a user I want to block. It should also provide different levels of blocking, from just ignoring their private messages/pings, to outright eliminating their comments from showing up. If I want to block an individual, isn't it my choice whether I want to see their comments? Without it, this feature is kind of pointless.

0
3

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

Agree about the button, disagree about the levels. Better to block everything than to offer adjustable blocking options - if you don't want to hear from someone you don't want to hear from someone and that's it. Semi-blocking people makes no sense for me, at least when it comes to what Voat should offer its users.

Also the blocking feature being in the "my subverses" is pretty weird. I'd say add the aforementioned button and move the rest to your settings page.

1
14

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

1
13

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

blocked

not really

0
13

[–] Anchy 0 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago 

1
10

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

The reason I wanted it was to avoid flood tactics. You know, when Amalek some guy is in a bad mood and posts the same thing like 300 times. Then I would be able to temporally ignore his posts. But I guess this will be useful for someone to avoid inbox flooding. Thanks for your effort.

6
1

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

I feel like a user who spams should just be banned or downvoated out of site, rather than introduce a Safe-Space MakerTM for everyone.

0
8

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

You rather Shadowban2000Mk2TM than the individual ability to block? I got it, you rather none. But take the @ HenryCorp thing as an example. I'm not defending his moderating style, idk what he did, but funny or not, the inbox flooding thing must be very annoying. Should voat ban @ CancelCatFacts for it? Or ban @ HenryCorp for moderating against other people's preferences? Or ban HPOP because he's a butt addict? The individual block will allow a surgical intervention to solve the problem, and the only person affected will be the one who blocked. Idk if he will use it, I'm just using the situation as an example. Talking about Amalek, downvoating him out doesn't work, he (they) will just create another swarm of fakes. Banning him it's the same and would put voat in the gray zone. If I could block his submissions, I would use it eventually to defend myself against his annoying habit of flooding the damn whole site. The day after, I would unblock him again. Do you know what I think would happen? People would stop brigading him (and they do it by self defense against the flooding, it's a lose-lose situation), his accounts would not be blocked anymore and maybe (just maybe) he would try to talk his ideas more naturally, instead of his brain-wash spam. I say this supposing that he is he, and not them. Sometimes I think that Amalek is legion, that a bunch of trolls, for the keks or with more malicious intents, created the character to flood voat. If this is the case, there's nothing we can do. But anyway, between sitewide banning and individual blocking, I take the second any day.

0
9

[–] lucabrasi 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago 

Does their Voat still count on your submissions?

0
7

[–] PuttItOut [S] 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

Yes.

1
4

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

Thanks. I had another question in regards to Voating, if comment voats are tied to ccp, why aren't submission voats tied to scp?

load more comments ▼ (50 remaining)