The SearchVoat Forum

As I understand, @SearchVoat will remove information from old Voat archives if the user who originally posted it can verify their identity/relation to the acct in question

My question to @SearchVoat is if they will announce or confirm which users have asked for this to be done.

Specifically I'd like to know if any or the Admins, former Admins, or employees of Voat have requested to have any of their comments or posts removed or excluded from the archives?

A secondary question is if this data is ever subpoenad by any court, does searchvoat intend to cooperate with law enforcement or pull a lavabit?

Lastly, do we have a warrant canary?

Savesequim wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 10:37 pm As I understand, @SearchVoat will remove information from old Voat archives if the user who originally posted it can verify their identity/relation to the acct in question

My question to @SearchVoat is if they will announce or confirm which users have asked for this to be done.

No

Savesequim wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 10:37 pm Specifically I'd like to know if any or the Admins, former Admins, or employees of Voat have requested to have any of their comments or posts removed or excluded from the archives?

Not saying

Savesequim wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 10:37 pm A secondary question is if this data is ever subpoenad by any court, does searchvoat intend to cooperate with law enforcement or pull a lavabit?

Will cooperate as far as I'm able

Savesequim wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 10:37 pm Lastly, do we have a warrant canary?

Not yet. Happy to provide.

Copy that.

Will you remove posts in which we demonstrate certain users have removed posts/comments/search functionality?

Re: Warrant Canary I think it's a good idea. Would it be moot considering I already initiated law enforcement visitation? Or was your post removal voluntarily initiated?

Savesequim wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 10:59 pm Copy that.

Will you remove posts in which we demonstrate certain users have removed posts/comments/search functionality?

Re: Warrant Canary I think it's a good idea. Would it be moot considering I already initiated law enforcement visitation? Or was your post removal voluntarily initiated?

The reason I ask is it potentially could provide more insight into why Voat was taken down.

But it also would counteract the idea that a user controls their information. If I quote a removed post and link to an internet archive of it, I could make the removal moot.

Similarly If I created a post indexing links to an excluded user's comments or posts I could counteract their desire to hide their post history.

The indexing concern is more food for thought, not planning on doing so, just bringing it up. But I would like to expose a user's deleted posts as it shows their mindset/potential involvement in duplicitous internet operations

SearchVoat wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 10:44 pm

Savesequim wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 10:37 pm As I understand, @SearchVoat will remove information from old Voat archives if the user who originally posted it can verify their identity/relation to the acct in question

My question to @SearchVoat is if they will announce or confirm which users have asked for this to be done.

No

Savesequim wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 10:37 pm Specifically I'd like to know if any or the Admins, former Admins, or employees of Voat have requested to have any of their comments or posts removed or excluded from the archives?

Not saying

Savesequim wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 10:37 pm A secondary question is if this data is ever subpoenad by any court, does searchvoat intend to cooperate with law enforcement or pull a lavabit?

Will cooperate as far as I'm able

Savesequim wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 10:37 pm Lastly, do we have a warrant canary?

Not yet. Happy to provide.

This. Right. Here. Pay attention to this, any dedicated SearchVoat cucks out there still clinging to the fantasy that this place can "heal".

In the same breath he said a warrant canary would be a good idea, he's admitting he will rat you out to law enforcement and he will "Help in any way I can".

This coming from the guy who says pedo hate is "bs" and anyone that hates pedos must be a pedo themselves, and questions if we should be blaming them "if they can't help it".

This is the admin who threatened the entire user base with a ban to protect the Jew pedophile trolling his site...

The same admin with an open court case in which he lost his kids amid abuse accusations.

Do you see the picture yet?

Savesequim wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 10:59 pm Copy that.

Will you remove posts in which we demonstrate certain users have removed posts/comments/search functionality?

I don't see why I would, if those posts don't contravene another rule.

Savesequim wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 10:59 pm Re: Warrant Canary I think it's a good idea.

Canary Notice

Savesequim wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 10:59 pm Would it be moot considering I already initiated law enforcement visitation? Or was your post removal voluntarily initiated?

The police weren't interested in SVF at all, other than the fact that I had posted here. Certainly no requests for data or to remove content. And I'm not expecting any. Edit: yes I removed that content because it's a liability for me in my personal life.