[–] theoldones 2 points 7 points (+9|-2) ago 

then Voat stands for Free Speech, within the limits of U.S. law seeing as how Voat is a U.S. based Company and must abide by U.S. Law.

I HAVE A POINT TO MENTION HERE

voat operating on only the US law basis for child porn may be inadequate. clearly certain bad actors slipped through recently, and have been slipping through

can i make the suggestion of plundering poal.co's policy which bans all sexualized depictions of children, even the loli shit?

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

I agree with this sentiment. It's going to be a divisive one though unfortunately. Many claim the slippery slope effect, but god damn, it's a form of pedophilia. We do need to draw a line somewhere, and it seems to me that pedophilia would be a good spot to do it. If implemented it could come with some variety of clause that it is strictly a one time thing, and does not set precedent for future incursions of strict freedom of speech policy in regards to abiding US law.

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

[Deleted]

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

There are free speech issues with lolicon that go beyond morality, too. If you browse this article on the legal status of drawn pornography depicting minors, you'll notice it's illegal in Australia, Canada, the Philippines, South Africa, South Korea, and the United Kingdom. That's 5 of the 18 listed, or 28 percent of them. If there's loli that slips through here and there, Voat will probably be fine. If you have thousands upon thousands of submissions, in subverse after subverse, legal cases might be made in some of these countries this is a Voat problem and Voat might get banned there. People in these countries would then lose their freedom to speak on here. What do you think, virge?

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

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

I don't see why anon would need to be quarantined in order to make this work. You could pull this off and keep anon as is, two different ways. Either you could reveal voters within anon just as you would reveal them in any other post (your choice if you want to deanonymise and vote or not); or you could implement your change across regular Voat and leave anon votes anon.

It might be a good idea to have a little expando that reveals who voted how. But that's no good reason to smuggle in an anti-anon machination at the same time.

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

[Deleted]

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

On the other hand, if I saw how you voted and I didn't like it, I could put pressure on you the way some put pressure on those who make comments they don't like.

There's pros and cons. Maybe you could have a choice when you make a post, similar to "anon" or "regular", like "reveal voting" or "regular".

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

The only real problem I see with unmasking votes is that it doesn't address what I think it the biggest problem on Voat regarding voting; which is people using alts. Some assholes on this site have who knows how many alt accounts and use them to manipulate voting. Unmasking the votes won't mean anything if it just shows a long ass list of alts only belonging to 5 or 6 people. Limiting or eliminating the ability of people to create and use alt accounts is far more important for protecting the integrity of Voat's votes IMHO.

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

[Deleted]

[–] kjhasd758756 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Valid point. Dial_Indicator is an example.

This has been an idea of mine for years virge, everyone knows it... I have many other @puttitout @kevdude

And no I dont manipulate this is a kevdude lie

https://youtu.be/pIwguLNQ8Ws

to curb at least 80% manipulation would be to make comment history shown optional by user. Much like the "show subscribed verses" option

-dial

https://youtu.be/lmh79ACBRLU

[–] CRKT_M16Z 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Yeah, I'm not sure how I feel about anon posting. My experience with it so far has been mostly negative as it has been used as a means to pick on or harass other people.

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

I said long ago that I think we should be able to see who votes and how. It eliminates a lot of bullshit. Many sites have done this from the beginning. At the bottom of posts is the people who liked and who disliked. I'm honest in my voting so it wouldn't affect me.

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

Putt has explained that even he can't "un-mask" the anon posting.

I don’t believe this is entirely true, were he dedicated enough. But it is apparently rather difficult.

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

Not entirely. We have notifications ;-)

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

I heard that SBBH found a way to unmask users in anon subs anyway.

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

[Deleted]

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

I’m fairly certain it was by design. Resisting temptation is far easier if the thing you might be tempted to do is a pain in the ass.

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

It’s called not letting the cat out of the bag.

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

I think this is a good post. I think you put effort into it and that you care about Voat.

I'll defer to Putt, in the "Putt's house, Putt's rules" model, on two reasonable conditions that, one, those rules are clear, and two, I can continue to defend the truth on here. I defend the truth: that's what I'm here to do. I've debunked lies about Nazis and debunked lies about Jews. The first would get me banned on Reddit. Neither get me banned on here. The second gets me downvoated, but I can still express myself.

For the votes past a certain date to be transparent could help crowdsource probes into vote brigades. It would disburden site staff, who would then only need to look through reports that others have constructed and maybe post in a public forum. Here's an idea I have, that avoids retaliation against downvoaters but still lets people detect brigades: what if each user who votes is aliased, and only the staff of Voat could see through the alias? Like here. This would thwart vote manipulators, as each user could prove their manipulation this way, with little backlash against organic downvoaters.

What do you think, virge?

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

[Deleted]

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

No worries, virge. I apologize if my logic was flawed. I'm not perfect.

If it doesn't work, maybe it could be a starting point for better ideas.

Your edit is about a different discussion of mine, where I warn of dangers to Voat from lolicon:

There are free speech issues with lolicon that go beyond morality, too. If you browse this article on the legal status of drawn pornography depicting minors, you'll notice it's illegal in Australia, Canada, the Philippines, South Africa, South Korea, and the United Kingdom. That's 5 of the 18 listed, or 28 percent of them. If there's loli that slips through here and there, Voat will probably be fine. If you have thousands upon thousands of submissions, in subverse after subverse, legal cases might be made in some of these countries this is a Voat problem and Voat might get banned there. People in these countries would then lose their freedom to speak on here. What do you think, virge?

I express no want for global rules, but warn of a danger to the free speech of a huge number.

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

I know this account is pretty new but I've been here for just shy of four years as a fairly active user. I've made a few posts over the years suggesting making votes transparent, allowing everyone to see who voted on what, etc etc. I believe it would solve a lot of the problems the community experiences.

Now whenever I have brought it up the main negative response I get is that it would potentially induce a chilling effect type scenario. For instance, some people who say want to be seen as more serious wouldn't feel comfortable upvoating something that might be seen as embarrassing. However that's generally the only complaint I end up hearing about the suggestion, and it would in my opinion be a small price to pay.

If we were all sitting around a very large round table, we would all see who is agreeing and disagreeing with one another. I feel that it would actually bring a bit more humanity to the site. And I'm not saying that as code for positivity I just mean that it would be a more natural style of communication that we are inherently better adapted for.

This is of course just my opinion and I certainly recognize that people will have legitimate reasons for diagreeing. It's a divisive topic. The best answer is most likely going to be compromise, and I'm just hoping it will be one that both sides can tolerate because all of us here share one of the most important things in common; we give a damn about freedom of speech, something out ancestors were willing to sacrifice themselves for.

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

Just wanting to add, but not edit; I really hate seeing the community divided and infighting. I imagine it makes those we all oppose very satisfied.

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

[Deleted]
load more comments ▼ (5 remaining)