As a curator I don't really agree that that's a rule that should be revisted and eventually allowed to happen because some people think so, not to mention because it happens on other platforms. It's hard enough to curate posts and giving them the benefit of the doubt that they're not attempting to abuse or all the other things you listed that are plain @hivewatcher material, because even those are hard to track often and there's many times some that get away for some time with it before they're found out. If manual curators would need to check each time for reposts and how much a post earned way back, etc, it would be a nightmare if such practices would be allowed. Not to mention how quickly it would become overwhelmed by many others and suddenly you'd have a repost fest ongoing with those who do often get a lot of autovotes or votes making the most of it - that's just how it is, many who do get autovotes tend to often degrade in quality and effort behind the posts too and make sure to consistently post daily to get those votes. Either way, I'm not against putting it up for a vote and seeing how many would actually think reposts should be considered okay to be curated again but I wouldn't just think it's many or judge the amount based off of comments in this post as it seems to have attracted many who either have had altercations with hivewatchers in the past and a grudge about it or have reposted themselves.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from: