meanwhile of voat, still no further details on the Angel investor, but let's introduce a feature change nobody wants

[–] • 6 pts

I'd like to respond to that comment, I really would but I won't. I will not encourage those people to promote censorship and continue down the path they are on. People can call this site whatever they want but I'll make for damn sure censorship doesn't happen here.

link

[–] • 4 pts

We’re holding you to that pledge.So far,so good. Keep up the good work.

parent
link

[–] • 3 pts

If you ever think I'm not holding too it, call me out on it.

parent
link

[–] • 0 pt

You KNOW with all the miscreant rabble here,you’ll get called on it.lol

parent
link

Load more (1 reply)

[–] [deleted] • 2 pts

I was thinking about suggesting two instances of voat, one for staff only, with all the private shit, and the open one without them. The advantage would be that any accidental leakage would be contained. But I'm not participating there enough to be part of the community, there were similar suggestions, and even peaceseeker, I shit you not, trashed the idea. I guess we'll see if voat has gone full reddit soon.

parent
link

[–] • 6 pts

And they're using internal company usage to justify it? I'm sure there's plenty of better ways to run internal stuff like that, that doesn't involve compromising your product...

link

[–] [deleted] • 3 pts

Like, running a separated instance in another server, minimizing the risk of leakages and vulnerabilities.

parent
link

[+] [deleted] • 6 pts

[–] • 5 pts

I asked Putt for clarification which is why he added the context section at the bottom of his post, it appears that he is taking the site more mainstream.