draft

The FAQ gives you formal explanations of the rules but lets talk about the controversial ones in depth for a minute

>Your question must include a question mark

Oh boy; A question mark is almost universally required for a question. This is a baseline standard. This is staying, application of the rule is changing. Now preferably a bot would handle this and it would never be an issue, any post without a question mark gets removed and a comment left saying repost with a question mark. This will follow the leniency policy. We will not be removing threads that have sparked discussion and gained traction. I’ve talked to many people and the issue was like 90% the application of the rule rather than the rule itself. So this is our current solution

>grandstanding, rhetorical or declarative questions, are not allowed. AskVoat is not your personal mouthpiece or advertising platform. Posts attempting to promote a specific agenda to gain publicity, promote a cause or charity, or to publicly shame a person or entity will be removed.

This concerns many of you, I understand why. It’s open for abuse, that’s why we have to construct a mod team who is applying it fairly, y’all will be able to judge that as time goes on so please give the team a chance first.

This rule has an important purpose it is the difference between “Why do the nutters on the left support this cuntbag Hillary?” and “If you support Hillary, why?”. One of these promotes discussion and asks a clear and direct question. Some will respond to that with “Let the votes decide” which sounds all well and good except when the majority of users think that Hillary is indeed a cuntbag and upvoat it because they simply agree with OP’s assertion in the title, this doesn’t promote discussion this sets a negative tone for the discussion and doesn’t promote Hillary supporters to actually answer the question, instead you drive out minority view for your Hillary is a cuntbag circle jerk.

In the second example you’re free to go into the comments and call her a cuntbag all you want, discuss it, yell at each other if you want, but the titles need to be as neutral as you can make them and ask an actual direct question and promote discussion.

I’ll expound more using the less extreme example from the FAQ

"Nestle has spent $2 million saving the rainforest, while the U.S.  government contributes nothing, why are Americans so aloof to environmental action?"

What’s the purpose of this title? Appears they want to discuss America’s involvement in environmental issues yet also while promoting Nestle and making a claim that americans are aloof to the environment. ⅔ of this title are completely unnecessary for the discussion they want to take place, it’s their opinion which belongs in the comments.

"Are Americans doing enough to protect the rainforest?"

What’s the purpose of this title? Clear and to the point wants to discuss America's involvement with environmental issues.

I hope y’all can see what I’m saying. I don’t expect you all to agree with what I’m saying or the rules, I am saying at least give it time before casting judgement.

##THESE RULES ARE SUBJECT TO THE LENIENCY POLICY

These rules are not designed to silence or censor any opinion, you can say what you want about whoever in the comments as your opinion but the topic questions need to be more neutral in order to promote and encourage participation from the community, including those with minority viewpoints. Voat is a place where everyone gets a voice not just the majority. Remember the modlog is public if you want to watch for legitimate abuse and ask us about it over at /v/AskVoatMeta