You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

2
33

[–] 7584144? [S] 2 points 33 points (+35|-2) ago 

Great point

2
15

[–] 7585326? 2 points 15 points (+17|-2) ago 

Just make it so raising the ccp limit of a sub limits up and downvoting. You need "x" ccp to VOTE in that sub (up or down).

0
5

[–] 7586005? 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

farming CCP is incredibly easy so this doesn't help. IP restrictions don't work because tor makes it all easy to bypass.

0
2

[–] 7585713? 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

That might not work too well, since the current requirements are for CCP amounts in a subverse. If you set even a tiny requirement before anyone can really comment there, then all posts there will also be worth 1 point for submissions and 0 points for comments. On the other hand, if a farm subverse creates a few bots, upvotes their comments on a new subverse a few times, and sets the CCP limit to some amount that they all have, then those active bots can upvote the comments of new bots, still creating the main problem of continued CCP farming.

0
0

[–] 7587505? 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

But that opens up the possibility of unfavorable opinions (like anti-trump stuff in politics) would limit your ability to take part in the community and downvoat shitty content. It would promote the echo chamber you see in voats like politics.

2
10

[–] 7589029? 2 points 10 points (+12|-2) ago 

How about giving people the ability to fully block the people spamming them. People like amalek and spartacus upvote so they can shitpost at will. You are moving towards involving the community more and removing mod influence so embrace it and give people that power. Then all you need is janitors to come along and remove the rest later. Yea some people dont like the block button because they mistakenly think most will use it to hide dissenting views but its more about giving people content control. Maybe even investors would like that too.

11
-7

[–] 7587909? 11 points -7 points (+4|-11) ago 

How so? Do you want to limit free speech @Puttitout? Voting on voat is surely free speech if liking on facebook is protected speech in the U.S. don't abridge it.

mashable story on it ew, archived

1
2

[–] 7595275? 1 points 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

The law says you can't be fired for making political statements on FB. No-one is getting fired here, the idea is to limit abuse of the CCP threshold, which was originally implemented in order to limit spam and brigading.

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

[Deleted]

27
-22

[–] 7584506? 27 points -22 points (+5|-27) ago  (edited ago)

How so? Do you want to limit free speech @Puttitout? Voting on voat is surely free speech if liking on facebook is protected speech in the U.S. don't abridge it.

mashable story on it ew, archived

1
17

[–] 7584621? 1 points 17 points (+18|-1) ago 

Bots don't have free speech. Yet.

3
9

[–] 7584851? 3 points 9 points (+12|-3) ago 

An upvoat isn't speech.