[–] alphasnail 8 points 32 points (+40|-8) ago  (edited ago)

There seems to be a misunderstanding about what Voat is. Functionally, Voat is like any other message board where topics are segregated by forum or in Voat's case a subverse. That model seems to work well because a message board's life blood is defined by the users who interact with it.

Subverses aim to appeal to a diverse audience. People who like politics can go to the relevant subverse. Those who like awww stuff go to /aww. You get the picture.

So the state of Voat reflects that and clearly the above is how Voat was designed to be used or subverses wouldn't exist.

So when people say "that's forum sliding!" what they are actually saying is they think the content they post is more important and that other subverses don't have the right to be popular and dethrone their topic from the front page.

TLDR voat's sole purpose is not to be a red pill machine or all other subverses wouldn't exist.

[–] inthemickoftime [S] 8 points 23 points (+31|-8) ago 

I couldn't have said it better. The accounts crying about censorship are the same ones posting the gore so it's clear it's just dodge their doing. Their real intention is to demonize Voat's user base as inhuman. They want even our cute post section to be full of violent gore. Best way to shut us down.

[–] weezkitty 5 points 18 points (+23|-5) ago  (edited ago)

Kinda like when blacks Rob a store, threaten a cop and are like "didin do nuffin" when they're violently arrested.

Don't want to be treated like a nigger? Then don't act like a fucking nigger

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

Ehhh... Its a case by case basis. Ive got no problem with gore being removed. I think that falls under Severely off topic. But if ya start removing comments I think your a fucking kike.

Off topic while legitimate can be a slippery slope however. But doesnt mean it should never be used.

I think its safe to say Gore submissions in /v/awww are safely enough in the off topic category.

But whatever FPH is still the greatesy offender on voat I know of for censorship. And they get a free pass for some reason.

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

That is not their real intention. Gore is not illegal in any way, and plenty of websites hosts gore without any troubles at all. If they wanted to get voat shut down, they would use the anti-semitic and racist posts or comments to shut us down, which are actually illegal in some countries. Most likely their intention is to punish or demoralize the posters such as gabara who continuously post on /aww. I'm not sure why you are claiming this is their intention, perhaps it is to make the gore posters seem as if they are wrong for not wanting lots of /aww posts on the front page, even though everyone is free to vote however they please and free to want whatever they want on the front page, although the methods they used were wrong.

[–] fusir 0 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago  (edited ago)

This is true. I'm not a fan of aww posts, but I can always go browse a sub. In fact when people did browse subs in the beginning of voat we had amazing things going on.

I encourage you to browse a sub today.

[–] absurdlyobfuscated 2 points 12 points (+14|-2) ago 

So when people say "that's forum sliding!" what they are actually saying is they think the content they post is more important and that other subverses don't have the right to be popular and dethrone their topic from the front page.

Or they're saying that they think they should have more of a say and their vote have more weight than others'. Well said.

[–] Glory_Beckons 8 points 9 points (+17|-8) ago  (edited ago)

So when people say "that's forum sliding!" what they are actually saying is they think the content they post is more important and that other subverses don't have the right to be popular and dethrone their topic from the front page.

No.

That might have been true if this was happening organically. That is, if high quality cutesy content started being posted to /v/aww out of the blue, and the community suddenly developed an interest in high quality cutesy content, and started upvoting it because it is high quality and cute and they like it. But that's not what's happening, is it?

First of all, most of the spam from gabara et al is generic, low resolution junk with reddit-tier baby-talk titles a la "super dooper pupper pooper". This is not high quality content by any measure. It isn't even cute. It doesn't "make us look human" or "good", as they claim. It is entirely useless garbage and a complete waste of space.

Secondly, by their own admission, the reason they are posting and upvoting it isn't because they find it interesting or think it is good. The excuse they use to justify it is that "it's meant to offset the gore spam". This is nonsensical for multiple reasons:

  1. The gore is spam and should be removed.
  2. Combating spam with spam of a different sort is retarded.
  3. Upvoting junk just because you didn't like some other unrelated junk is retarded.
  4. The gore was already being downvoated to hell and barely anyone saw it or was affected by it.
  5. The trashy pseudo-aww spam has been far more disruptive than the gore spam it's supposedly "fighting" against.

This whole fiasco just highlights a major ideological weakness in Voat culture.

People's blind refusal to accept what is right in front of them here, because it conflicts with their overly simplistic dogma, is reminiscent of the "refugees welcome" lemmings cheering on their doom because "helping is nice" and "being mean is bad" with no regard for context or consequences.

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

Yep, but if you speak against it you are accused of being a goreposter.

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

Well said mate.

[–] gazillions 5 points 20 points (+25|-5) ago 

Let's be realistic. Gore posts are deliberate attacks. No one is required to sit on their ass through deliberate attacks.

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

What goreposts? Has a gorepost ever made the front page? Ever?

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

Nope, and it is just used as an excuse for them to upvoat farm.

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

The gore posting is just one guy fucking around. This submission calling for censorship of this site is a blatant attack though.

[–] wt1984yb 2 points 1 points (+3|-2) ago 

Yep. Awww spam to front page is an attack by you fags. No censorship

[–] C_Corax 0 points 18 points (+18|-0) ago 

Didn't Voat used to have the mod option to just toss post over to whatever if they didn't belong in the sub?

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

No

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

But it would be incredibly helpful if we did have something like that. Recategorizing content rather than removing is standard on other types of forums.

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

I could have sworn it happened to one of my posts ages ago. Anyway, it would be a decent solution I think.

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

If anything, I think that Voat has the opposite problem. Too many people tend to dump posts into /v/whatever, when that's really not the correct forum for most posts.

...like I don't mind if a teenager with AD/HD dumps a post there because they're just trying to express themself, but generally people should figure out the correct forum to file their post in.

[–] Glory_Beckons 6 points 16 points (+22|-6) ago 

Watch them brand you as a filthy SJW Fascist Crypto-Jew for making this distinction.

[–] gabara 4 points 5 points (+9|-4) ago 

That's a common Jewish trick. Diversity is Strength, Israel is our Ally, Removing gore from a non-gore sub is Muh Censorship!

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

I'm (pleasantly) surprised you're agreeing with me here. I really don't like your counter-spam campaign. It's more disruptive than the initial gore spam (that I didn't even notice until I saw your "counter-spam"). Makes me suspect your intentions.

[–] absurdlyobfuscated [M] 3 points 11 points (+14|-3) ago 

I agree. But a system subverse should not be curated, it should leave it up to the community to decide what gets up or down voted. If this were my own subverse then I would curate it with a minimal set of rules that would prohibit anti-aww content like gore, porn, and gross stuff - never with a bunch of highly subjective rules open to interpretation like on reddit, though. I more or less take on the role of a janitor here.

[–] PeaceSeeker 2 points 8 points (+10|-2) ago  (edited ago)

I think your caution is admirable, but I think you're misjudging the situation. If @system subverses are not meant to be curated, then why have any more than one @system subverse? Without curation, every @system subverse can become the same thing - a mess of unrelated content. The purpose of a subverse is to allow users to organize the content they perceive; if subverses are not curated, users lose this ability. @system subverses exist so the community knows there are certain generalized subverses under special protection from the admin. If you wanted to turn this subverse into a place where people post pictures of things that rhyme with "aww", the admin would step in and replace you, because the intention is for this subverse to host content that make people say or want to say "aww". Whereas if this were /v/aww2 and you wanted it to be about rhyming, the admin would not intervene because it would be your subverse, not the admin's. Being a @system subverse really just means the community belongs to Voat, not a user. Removing spam and content that any reasonable person would deem unrelated is perfectly fine, in fact necessary if your duty to protect this subverse is to be fulfilled.

In law, the "any reasonable person" argument is often used. Just because a gore-poster reacts with outrage after you remove their post, claiming that in their opinion the gore made them say "aww", is irrelevant, because that it unreasonable based on the stated intention of the subverse and the common perception of what is "aww" or not. Obviously if you remove a bunny because you don't think it is cute enough, that could be an issue, but no reasonable person is going to berate you for removing gore.

Voat has modlogs, so we will be able to judge whether you are using your power responsibly or not. And I agree that the ability to simply move the post elsewhere would be preferable. But none of that changes the fact that you are completely justified in removing gore from /v/aww, @system subverse or not.

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

this

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

yah mods need watched... But I think SEVERELY and obviously off topic. Is ok to be removed.

But if it has the SLIGHTEST whiff of relevance. Gotta keep it.

[–] Glory_Beckons 1 points 5 points (+6|-1) ago 

I more or less take on the role of a janitor here.

A janitor's job is to clean up filth and keep things working as intended.

You're actively refusing to do that.

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

We must accept the trash. Diversity is our strength!

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

@atko, was it your intention for v/aww to be full of gore posts?

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

I'd go so far as to say that the only things I've really seen removed are posts that are completely antithetical to the topic of the sub; most notably the removal of gore from v/aww.

The whole reason Voat has different subverses is for the efficient organization of content. That's not censorship.

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

yah Off topic should be used rarely. But gore submissiond in V aww.. ok.

But Id say I draw the line at comments. Some guy wants to caps lock "I wanna fuck that puppy." in the comments. Tough shit.

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

Agreed. Comments are sacrosanct.

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

I agree that those examples are not censorship but I'm not a fan of the idea that curation is not censorship in all cases because curation is often used as the guise for real censorship.

Removing off topic material from an on topic sub is not censorship. Following arbitrary rules on a smaller sub is not censorship. Reasonable and minimalist rules for a larger sub is not censorship.

[–] mralexson 1 points 5 points (+6|-1) ago 

How the hell is this controversial? No shit you have to stay on topic

load more comments ▼ (37 remaining)