[–] fuckingmockies 9 points 41 points (+50|-9) ago 

There's a difference between off-topic posts and something that is completely and knowingly antithetical to the content of the sub. If anything could be posted everywhere, there would be no different subs, just one all encompassing sub. I guess it wouldn't even be called a sub at that point.

In short, if someone posts a picture of, say, a sapling, that might be better suited for v/nature or v/trees, but it's not antithetical to v/aww, so that shouldn't be censored.

Gore and porn, however, should not be permitted. Delete the posts and and ban the users.

If you want to embrace the spirit of transparency, sticky the modlog once a month for people to review.

[–] Artofchoke 0 points 27 points (+27|-0) ago 

I agree with this. Saying 'put your content where it belongs' is in no way censorship.

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

Mod delete? ... yes, thats their job. Mod actions are not hidden on voat because voat has tools in bottom right of every page. But...

I dont think people should get banned until maybe 3 gore posts. Mainly because every 7th grader will do it once and no need to break the spirit of voat other than deleting the submission.

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

Agreed. If there were any kind of ostensible purpose to the "rebellious" posts - other than to just disturb the intended content for the sake of it - I'd say let's discuss what the point could possibly be. But he had no point. None at all. The point of categorizing content on this site is to better organize and make access more efficient, i.e. people can get what they want where they want it. Flying in the face of those norms, and doing it with no bigger message in mind, is just creating noise.

Banning a person from an individual sub for this doesn't constitute censorship. This person had their chance to speak and demonstrated they were saying nothing, just poking at the sub with a stick. It's not a free speech issue at all. The user is free to post gore stuff in a gore sub still. And again, if there had been any kind of underlying point to it - perhaps some political response to horseshit moderation or something - it would have been another thing. This wasn't that.

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

My upvote doesn't mean I agree with you. But I do.

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

If you want to embrace the spirit of transparency, sticky the modlog once a month for people to review.

this is how we prevent abuse.

why not a site wide thing? fuck secrecy in an open forum.

[–] alphasnail 8 points 19 points (+27|-8) ago  (edited ago)

I recommend @Artofchoke , @gabara , @HateCumbuckets , @KatHarzso , @plankO for moderation of v/aww

They contribute a lot to v/aww and have helped drown out the gore when it was needed the most. I imagine their attention to this subverse would only enhance the v/aww experience and and help maintain its integrity.

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

5 mods on a system sub might be overkill, If not me I'll ping whoever absurdlyobfuscated picks

[–] think- 5 points 14 points (+19|-5) ago  (edited ago)

Imo there should be a clear rule that pics of nude underage people / children is child porn (well, it actually is), and the user will be banned immediately, and reported to the admins, who in turn will inform authorities. This is, in my understanding, a Voat wide rule already, and this is how we handle child porn in v/pizzagate (I'm a mod there).

Then please create a rule that prohibits posting gore. People who come here would like to see cute pics, they shouldn't stumble upon gore. And please also create a rule that gore comprises pics of tortured and dead animals.

So basically, in order to avoid the recent spamming attacks, you'd just need three or four rules:

1) Posting child porn (pics of nude underage girls or boys) is not allowed, the user will get banned immediately, and will be reported to the admins, who will inform US authorities.

2) Hentai pics (child porn anime) is also not allowed, the user will be banned immediately.

3) Gore pics are not allowed, the user will be banned.

4) Pics of tortured or dead animals are not allowed.

@KatHarzSo @gabara @srayzie @Shizy @Vindicator

[–] Vindicator 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

My understanding is that posting NSFW in a non-adult sub, whether as a submission OR a comment, is already grounds for removal and banning.

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

Yes. I think v/aww shouldn't accept NSFW posts at all.

@KatHarzso @gabara @Artofchoke

[–] gabara 4 points 6 points (+10|-4) ago 

I agree

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

Rule 1 is already there as those images are illegal.

Rules 3 & 4 are the same rule.

"No porn & No gore" takes care of it.

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

@kevdude @Artofchoke: please see parent.

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

I did and I replied.

[–] 2nddammit 9 points 13 points (+22|-9) ago 

Deleting non-tagged NSFW content from a default sub is completely reasonable when the content is off-topic to the sub.

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

Imo on a sub like v/aww there shouldn't be NSFW pics at all.

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

This is the correct answer. I feel like we're seeing the start of awwgate, just one more rule in this default sub just one. Then post gore in the next sub..

Nuke non NSFW tagged content enforce the system that's there.

[–] vaeax 13 points 13 points (+26|-13) ago 

the only people who don't understand that gore doesn't belong on aww are autistics who have a problem with authority and no concept of social rules. there's nothing wrong with banning people for posting gore in an aww sub.

and i say this as a gore and guro aficionado.

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

Doesn't it stem from people trying to block /v/aww and the option not working? If that issue is fixed I think much of the expired cuties pics would stop. Admittedly, I'm probably not as informed on the issue as others.

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

https://voat.co/v/ProtectVoat/comments/746415

We will have ZERO tolerance for moderation that attempts to subjectively enforce rules concerning deletion of submissions (Rules are fine, but they need to be CLEARLY defined and fairly/uniformly enforced).

Meaning make sure your no porn/no gore rule is clearly spelled out and evenly enforced.

There will be ZERO tolerance for any deletion of non-spam/non-dox comments that don't violate US law on ANY sub on Voat. (The one exception would be comments containing NSFW images in subs not marked "adult", some of us have jobs). This applies to "public-owned" or "private-owned". Mods are not discussion police.

Meaning stay out of the comments. (That said, porn and gore ARE considered NSFW, so if a troll decides to put links in the comments they would be required to put an NSFW next to it to warn people "This is not an adult subverse". )

I would also say come up with a clear "strike" system for banning users.

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

I'm in complete agreement with that set of standards, and based on that the only thing I think this place needs to formalize is the prohibition of untagged NSFW content. It's a universal forum standard, well understood, and objectively enforceable. I'm implementing this now. Thank you very much for the input.

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

No problem. I actually like working with mods to improve stuff for everyone.

[–] CrustyBeaver52 5 points 11 points (+16|-5) ago 

The posting of gore pics in v/aww is not free speech, it's weaponized propaganda deliberately used to disrupt the community. Said people should be banned on sight, and remove the disruptive posts. This is not censorship, it's community policing, and it is perfectly legitimate.

The proof of non censorship is simple, anyone who wants to post off topic posts is free to start their own community within which to do so.

The Reddit example of this is how the censorship started - well, that's how Voat started as well. Site owners can censor if they want to - they can also lose their customers too. That's the civil law, and it remains valid even here.

[–] redpilldessert 6 points 0 points (+6|-6) ago 

it's weaponized propaganda deliberately used to disrupt the community.

I'd hate gore on this sub, but you sound like Plebbit.

[–] CrustyBeaver52 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

I've no love for Reddit - they sold out to Jews who now use it to push an SJW agenda. That's their loss. They also ban free speaking subs that go off the narrative - something that has exactly nothing in common with what has happened here.

Policing a sub denies no one their ability to speak freely. It is more proper to view it as one user's freedom ends where another user's freedom begins. The line MUST be drawn somewhere. The borders of that freedom are defined within the sub, as our civilization has always done, even encoded within the law itself. Property rights, etc.

In the case of Reddit, they would deny you the ability to have a forum in the first place. That does not happen here... and it does not apply to banning a deliberately disruptive user either. Their freedom to speak and gather with like minded individuals is fully preserved. They even let those loli fucks skirt the boundaries of what is legal, which, as distasteful as that is, does also prove our commitment to freedom.

Law, order, boundaries, reasonable restrictions on freedom, are in fact the building blocks of greater civilization. They are what keeps us from anarchy. This is why they are attacked by our enemies. The posting of gore here is not about freedom of speech. It is about undermining our social stability. It is an act of war upon us that must be met and defeated without hesitation or mercy.

[–] plankO 3 points 11 points (+14|-3) ago  (edited ago)

Hey I can cover the night shift no problem. I won't bring unprofessional behavior here but also won't censor myself elsewhere. Alternatively I could just ping cumbuckets

load more comments ▼ (48 remaining)