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

©2025 Poal.co

934

I'm really starting to wonder if Voat is now an Alphabet company. It seems that the changes being abrupt and major might be because of a powerful hand from a powerful company is pulling the strings. The angel investor might be an Alphabet big wig instead of the main company to keep it off the radar. Putt did say we piss of some powerful people, but he never said they were government people. Maybe it's not Alphabet but it could be some other tech giant. I think they found Putt's price. Does this seem plausible?

I'm really starting to wonder if Voat is now an Alphabet company. It seems that the changes being abrupt and major might be because of a powerful hand from a powerful company is pulling the strings. The angel investor might be an Alphabet big wig instead of the main company to keep it off the radar. Putt did say we piss of some powerful people, but he never said they were government people. Maybe it's not Alphabet but it could be some other tech giant. I think they found Putt's price. Does this seem plausible?

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (44).
[–] [deleted] • 8 pts

Plausible, but he specifically said when the canary was last updated that it was a US Gov agency that was giving him trouble.

[–] • 6 pts (edited )

He first mentioned that contact around the same time 8ch people were posting "friendly" visits from the FBI.

Literally within 1-2 days of each other. It seems obvious to me that he's under some pressure to either reign in some activities or snitch on people in some capacity.

Edit:

https://voat .co/v/Voat/3178819 04/24 7:15 PM

https://voat .co/v/videos/3180129 04/25 11:18 AM

https://voat .co/v/whatever/3181862 04/25 (according to youtube, posted to voat later)

[–] • 0 pt

I wish there was a way to watch that video without visiting youtube

[–] • 0 pt

Hooktube

[–] • 0 pt

Tube.poal.co is A fork of invidio.us

[–] • 4 pts

Didn't know that. Still it could be a government agency asking the questions and forcing the takeover/buyout from another larger tech company. How better to gain control of a site than to push it into an already controlled new owner?