You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

44
-18

[–] SpaceRosa 44 points -18 points (+26|-44) ago 

Really? You want to say someone should be turned down for subverse because of their ideology? That's a slippery bloody slope.

1
45

[–] pikeymick 1 points 45 points (+46|-1) ago 

So if we don't like someone's ideology you should be allowed to speak louder and more often than anyone else and therefore represent everyone, and all of the counter opinions should be ignored, because you have a differing opinion? Why are you pushing so hard for this person to be a moderator?

16
-4

[–] SpaceRosa 16 points -4 points (+12|-16) ago 

I said nothing about loudness or frequency.

My point is that you can't claim to have a website based on free speech - everyone's equal ability to be heard - and then turn around and divide it up into the privileged class who can be mods, and the "accused of being an SJW" class who aren't allowed.

If the subverse is inactive, then it's up for grabs. The one who gets it should be the first one who asks. Ideology is irrelevant. Assuming beforehand that they're going to be a bad moderator because of specific opinions is prejudice, except in a few specific scenarios.

It's not about this user in particular. My problem is with people who think that because someone has a specific ideology, they shouldn't be allowed the same treatment as everyone else. That's wrong. If it becomes acceptable to discriminate like that here and now, it will happen again, and I don't want Voat to become like that.

13
32

[–] Scandinavian 13 points 32 points (+45|-13) ago 

Cancer isn't an ideology.

12
-2

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

What you're saying, at the end of the day, is this: "I don't think people should be allowed to claim subverses if they have opinions I don't like."