0
6

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

Because naughty kids get spanked. End of.

3
-2

[–] 8817856 [S] 3 points -2 points (+1|-3) ago 

I fail to see the point of your analogy. Are you saying that people should not have freedom of speech if they are being rude? If their ideas do not conform to the ideas of the majority?

I think they should. Others are under no obligation to listen to them, or to reply, but by all means the "naughty kids" should be able to speak their fill like anyone else.

0
4

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

I'm saying if people are in negative CCP, then typically they have been naughty and are being spanked. Breaking rules for spamming, posting obvious shill messages etc...

I have a premium spanking paddle if you would like to give it a try? Great stress reliever.

0
4

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

maybe, just maybe... its because if you choose to suck so much that you get voted down, then perhaps you should take some time off, sit by a river, skip some stones, and rethink your attempts to contribute to this community.

3
-3

[–] 8817802 [S] 3 points -3 points (+0|-3) ago 

And "sucking so much" is now justification for restricting one's speech?

Forgive me but I fail to see the argument for that approach.

0
2

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

maybe instead of whining about it, which annoys people, try discussing things in a different way while still keeping to your positions?

0
0

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

downvoting does not actually restrict a human's ability to speak, only a username's ability to speak. There is no physical restriction on using multiple accounts.

1
2

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

Mm. I think im against account restrictions at this point. Being negative they really only let you comment a few time a day? I get agitated when it tells me im commenting too quickly... not being able to comment at all is just fuckdf up. That said, i imagine the posting limit helps block out some of the spanmers who wouuld post a lot more spam if they could. But i bet lots of people with this effecting their account arent spammers at all

1
0

[–] 8817920 [S] 1 points 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

I have spoken personally in random encounters with a number of users who, as far as I can tell by looking through their comment histories, are not spammers at all. Sometimes they insult other users, or speak in condescending tones, or just have unpopular ideas, and these are the only kinds of things they post. Then they get downvoted by Voat's userbase, go into negative CCP, and can only post 10 or so times a day. It's absurd to me, and I think Voat would be a much freer platform if these restrictions were removed.

Sure the restrictions may help to slow down some spammers, but is that really worth defending the potential for innocent users to be limited in their speech? We are able to ban spamming accounts and we have an active and effective report spammers feature.

And if spam really becomes an issue as a result of removing the restrictions, we can introduce a different system where an account that 1) has accrued a certain number of downvotes within a given time-frame, and 2) has been reported a certain number of times for spam, will be temporarily frozen until PuttItOut has the chance to review the /v/ReportSpammers list (which he stays on top of rather well, by the way). This way spammers can still be stymied without sacrificing the voices of innocent people.