Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

204

So its been an interesting week for me, lots of new users and a few new problems to deal with. I believe we have come up with an effective solution for the problem. Thank you to all who suggested it.

In the spirit of maintaining Poal's integrity as a truly free speech platform, we are going to implement a blocking feature to give the individual users the choice to block whom they wish. Instead of us as the admins deciding for everyone who gets to speak to whom(it will be expandable) Admins' role is to make sure the site is running and handle people who break the ToS. Anything else should be left to users to decide. (assuming they have the right tools)

That being said in the mean time we have some problem users that have been generally assholes to everyone here on the site. I've got to do something as they are discouraging people from speaking. So until the feature is implemented these accounts and if you want specifics I'm happy to give them but I'm guessing everyone already knows who I'm talking about will be disabled.

It really sucks that a feature like this even needs to exist but it apparently does.

I don't want to see this site go the way of other similar platforms. So this is how we are going to try and prevent that.

So its been an interesting week for me, lots of new users and a few new problems to deal with. I believe we have come up with an effective solution for the problem. Thank you to all who suggested it. In the spirit of maintaining Poal's integrity as a truly free speech platform, we are going to implement a blocking feature to give the individual users the choice to block whom they wish. Instead of us as the admins deciding for everyone who gets to speak to whom(it will be expandable) Admins' role is to make sure the site is running and handle people who break the ToS. Anything else should be left to users to decide. (assuming they have the right tools) That being said in the mean time we have some problem users that have been generally assholes to everyone here on the site. I've got to do something as they are discouraging people from speaking. So until the feature is implemented these accounts and if you want specifics I'm happy to give them but I'm guessing everyone already knows who I'm talking about will be disabled. It really sucks that a feature like this even needs to exist but it apparently does. I don't want to see this site go the way of other similar platforms. So this is how we are going to try and prevent that.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (88).
[–] • 12 pts

It’s depressing to me that this is needed and I believe it does encourage echo chambers but I don’t see a better solution.

[–] • 7 pts

Also, I don't think rate limiting would be terrible but you can absolutely overdo it.

Voat's cumbersome restrictions on participation without first circle jerking are one of the worst aspects of it IMO.

Rate limiting is objective, and in a centralized environment you can make it pretty unobtrusive to average users as well.

[–] • 7 pts

I recall Putt saying the state of Voat wasn't what he had envisioned for a free speech platform and proposing alternatives to severe rate limiting of new accounts, but it's been some time and as far as I know the proposed changes were never implemented. I do think that's been a major contribution to the deterioration of Voat's quality. I did see some newcomers trying to reasonably contribute their perspective, who were down-voted to restricted status just because their perspective was unpopular. The people wanting to discuss (discuss, not just berate those they disagree with) differences of opinion seem to me the most important for a free speech forum.

When the climate becomes hostile enough to different views, you lose the main rewards of free speech, such as the free exchange of ideas and the ability to learn things that inconvenience or threaten the establishment. Some balance has to be met to prevent a critical level of harassment from driving off contributing members, vs censoring for merely being too unpopular.

[–] • 6 pts

We do have rate limits, they may need to be adjusted but they are there.

[–] • 2 pts

It's sad to say but those rate limits have twice at least prevented Voat from essentially being taken over or held hostage.

There are some really screwed up liberal groups on Reddit that see the writing on the wall as far as that site is concerned. It didn't help that myself and others mocked them a couple of years ago about it.

Danger Hair Reddit mod: Why don't you fuck off to Voat already with the other asshole blah blah blahs already.

Me: I already am there and modding a few subs. I still come to Reddit for a few specific subs. But yes keep telling everyone to leave the site. Eventually you'll be here alone until the site is shutdown then all of you will come to Voat and try to ruin that site next. Just like the Digg migration to Reddit.

[–] [deleted] • 6 pts

I agree it’s sad. Necessary, but sad.

[–] • 1 pt

I don't see it as depressing. People who want an echo chamber will always either seek one out or create one for themselves.

Some will abuse it and create their own echo chambers, but everyone will use it to drown out the spammer.

[–] • 2 pts

See we disagree and we can still get along.

[–] • 1 pt

Don't forget, I'm secretly planning to murder you orami

[–] • 0 pt

This is a solution to echo chamber.. when you give them-less you make decisions. He is giving you the rights to hear what you want which is free speech otherwise it is forced speech which creates echo chambers that no one escapes. Feel like a Jedi.

[–] • 0 pt

It’s depressing to me

Dude, you need to toughen up, Man. You did the right thing. You should feel good about yourself. A weight has been lifted from your shoulders. Tonight you should sleep the sleep of the just. Smiting assholes is God's work. There is no greater task for you in life.

[–] • 3 pts

Shouldn't bans be used sparingly on a free speech platform?