/mlpol/ - My Little Politics

>>15494
Don't worry. There's plenty of racism to go around. Just read in the threads

>>15494
Stop being a nigger.

Being banned for racism for the sake of being an edgelord faggot isn't a ban on racism, it's a ban on being 14

>>15498
>no real scotman policy
>edgelord
Literal reddit language
now ban me

>>15500
If you'd like to have an actual discussion about your concern instead of posting feels faces and using buzzwords, I'm all ears

>>15503
We should be able to have threads hating on races of people without being deleted. That's all really.

>>15504
>>>/qa/419 →
First time testing if you can quote crossboards on here so let's see if this works

>>15504
You are more than welcome to have discussion threads, but low quality image macro threads where you dump le ebin nignog memes are not. I apologize if I didn't make that reasoning clear before.

Tldr "this is why I hate niggers" not "nigger hate general"

>>15504
I disagree for two reasons

The first is that these threads are low in quality. They look like the image the Left likes to paint of all people right of center - as irrational, hateful people, with no substance to their beliefs, with no arguments to back up their positions, and no greater rationale to their plan than the desire to oppress marginalized peoples. These threads always look to me like they were planted by leftist shills so that they could make any half-normals who happen upon our site think that we are nothing other than hateful people. If you want edgy jokes like that, go to websites like Niggermania. Here, we accept thoughtful discussion about racial issues, even of the sort that leftists call "racist," but we do not ourselves describe it as mere hate.

The second reason is that I'm not a racist and I have limits, and I think a sizable minority of this board does as well. Yes, half of this board are literal white nationalists. A third are literal nazis. At least half are zooaphiles. That's enough edginess for me, and maybe for a lot of other members. It's enough to visit a site with horse porn and liberal use of the "happy merchant" meme. I don't feel quite clean visiting a site with "x hate" threads. As I said before, thoughtful-if-racist discussion is welcome, and if you want to post x-hate threads, there are other websites available

>>15509
/pol/ was pure hate back before trump like the fact or not. Either allow minority hate threads or be like 4chan.

>>15511
This is a false dilemma. There are many positions between "allow all low quality hate threads" and "allow no freedom of expression. I'm choosing one fairly close to the first.

>>15513
>These posts i don't like are low quality *banned*
Mentally retarded. This site needs new mods already.

>>15514
Now be nice

>>15514
There is a difference between ban and deletion.

>>15514
on 4chan standards I'm a newfag, and even I've seen the fact that ___ hate threads are /b/ quality.

>>15514
You dont have to throw a tantrum when you don't get what you want.

I've got a business to run and I believe my position is clear on this matter. I'll be checking in throughout the night but you have your answer and it is final. I and my team are moderating on quality, not content.

This site already has rules governing quality, including a ban on generals, a ban on "e-celeb" threads, and a requirement to check the catalog first. 4chan /pol/ had bans on "is x white" and other threads. And I always want to remind people that the first ever sincere ban handed out on mlpol was for a "japan hate thread"

>>15520
Low quality = fuck racism
don't try and fool me with the shit

>>15521
You dont seem to be listening.
The community decided those kind of threads weren't up to standard, mate. Not the mods. The mods only try to get a feel of what people here want and try to implement it.

You are free to make a nigger hate thread but it should be a thread that provokes discussion. What discussion would come out of your thread?

>>15521
It's a delicate balance between allowing the maximum freedom possible and providing a cohesive community that is an enjoyable experience for as many members as possible. I think a general prohibition on "x hate" threads is a good balance, because it doesn't prohibit racism, but also doesn't put the "movement" - for those users who feel that /pol/ is like a movement - in an unnecessarily bad light to outsiders

>>15522
>>15523
see>>15519
Quality = the new >>>/stormfront/

>>15511
I actually don't mind these threads. There's plenty of board space and if the community doesn't deem certain boards necessary to respond to, then they will elect to not post on them and it will slide off. It's not like its making my eyes bleed or anything. Plus I also dislike niggers.

I look at blind racism as something similar to horse porn. It seems to me like it would be good repellant, and its not like we're worried about what liberals think of a natsoc horse board with pony porn anyways.

>>15524
Again, it's because what user posts is also experienced by other users. 70% of users hated generals, so we banned generals
>>15525
Not a bad idea. Make an x hate thread on >>/r/ and not the main board

>>15524
quality = not some nig doodles but some statistics, a news article or maybe a story from your life.

>>15525
We do have a lot of users who are decently to the left of Nat Soc, like that Jap user who is an anarchist. Let's have some concern for their preferences as well.

Let's see if >>r works

>>15530
I can confirm that /r/ is very lightly moderated. Mostly because I'm only ever there with one hand on the keyboard

I've started more than one thread on /r/ that I would never start on the main board because I know it would have triggered the snowflake NatSocs on this board. And I'm far too polite for that.

>>15498
>it's a ban on being 14
kek why haven't you banned yourself yet?

>>15541
Lurk moar

To be fair nigger hate threads are pretty low quality posts, but they have always been part of /pol/'s culture. I think this is why we need a /b/ board on this site. So we can have a place to shitpost and get it out of our system.

>>15546
If you asked me i'd say make a racism and bigotry board
/r&b/

>>15546
>>15549
our /qa/ and /r/ boards are sufficient for that purpose

>>15549
>>15552

The /b/ board could also host all the other shit many users don't want on this board, like writefags. Also /b/ has always been a huge part of chan culture it would be interesting to see what a /b/ board would create here.

>>15554
I think our existing /qa/ and /r/ boards are probably suited to that purpose though

>>15557
/r/ is for requests and /qa/ is for meta discussions. A random board would allow us to post just about anything.

>>15560
We already have more boards than we can use. I don't think this community is big enough

>>15564
A random board could attract more users. /b/ is popular board on just about any chan site.

>>15566
But these users are not likely to be interested in ponies and politics. And imagine if we had to start enforcing "off topic" rules to keep a segregation?

>>15552
This. As much as I hate renaming /r/ again, that would be a good purpose for it

>>15574
Fug

>>15574
"r" is really small and much harder to click on than "nsfw" was. I didn't like the name change

>>15575
Also, should we be concerned about duplicative redpill threads?

>>15579
Nevermind. It was just deleted

>>15580
We never sleep.

>>15574
Renaming it to /b/

>>15581
Why was that other thread deleted? The "never be like 4chan" thread?

>>15584
not sure, but it was made by the same guy complaining about the Moderation in this thread.

>>15583
mlpol kind of has a distinct character and purpose. Encouraging loli or whatever posting on one part could degrade the culture for the whole board

>>15586
I disagree. I think having a place to dump our shitpost will help us maintain the quality of the board.

>>15586
loli encourages cp. Enjoy getting the site shut down

>>15494
All fuckin Ziggers must hang!

There, happy?

Also, I WANT THIS PLUSHIE!!!

I think it was me who raised the initial concern over N-Hate threads. I had seen on 4chan these thread were pure pasta and photo albums and zero substance. I think outright pure hated is fine if:
1. It is funny
2. It is extremely offensive and therefore funny.
3. If it is genuine, making the poster uber ignorant and therefore funny.
4. If it is genuine and informative and therefore interesting.
Basically I find repetitive low level shit boring and expect the poster to make a minimal amount of effort to entertain me. As for the mods I know at least one of the hates Jews which is definitely old pol.

>>15593
That

>>15519
Philosophers have for thousands of years considered what is and is not quality and never came to a consensus. But apparently, if you disagree with someone what they perceive to be quality, it must necessarily not be quality. If we're gonna go on by your logic we won't be able to ban threads consisting entirely of blankposting, because someone might see quality in them. The truth is mods decide what they want on their boards - and we have all gathered here because mods on here are inarguably better than those on 4chinz.

>>15602
>Philosophers have for thousands of years considered what is and is not quality and never came to a consensus.
axiology a shit

>>15514
they kinda are though. We could just as easily become 4chan by allowing low quality threads.

>>15528
this fam.

>>15525
I agree that I don't mind them, but the same thread ends up being posted every day which is low effort, and falls under the "no generals" rule

>>15608
>axiology a shit
True tbh.
I only wrote that to make a point that quality is subjective.

>>15660
Even so what's nice about this site is that it's not covered in images of fucking brown people like /pol/ always is. We can talk about real world stuff and how nogs aren't people without having them shoved in our faces 24/7.

>>15494
I had a post deleted, it was in the RWSS thread and was calling attention to the fact that it's very alive in nu-/pol/ and morphed now past the just safety aspect of the original run. Something I thought should be considered as people pushed to try to bring in more /pol/acks who might start serious raids that would bring a lot of attention and notoriety. No input or reason for the deletion, just "fuck you what post. "

It really took a lot of the comfy from this board. Enough so that I lurk nu-/pol/ again as at least there you pretty much know what to expect. I don't expect this post to stay up either. I'm sure it lacks quality too.

>>15795
If you had a post deleted it was probably because it was made at around the time we were being raided, and it looked like it could be the product of some alt-brony or /jp/sie who was raiding the board with hostile intent

>>15795
I made that thread in hopes that it would attract moar /pol/acks. It's been pretty low energy lately though…

I am from /pol/ myself, I think I know why there is a lack of "political discussion". If you look on /pol/, 90% of the discussion is fueled by bait, which we don't have. I feel as if this is a good thing. When I want a place to go and yell at retards and fall for bait, I go to /pol/. When I want to discuss certain topics at a slower pace and have fun with mlp stuff, I come here. There is no real need to "get more /pol/acks on this site", because /pol/acks like me come here when I want to avoid bait.

>>15818
Forgot to reply to >>15801

>>>/b/
There's no point for such threads here. There was never a point for such threads, it's like a porn thread but instead of fun you get rage.

>>15818
Ah. I agree.
I guess I meant I wanted moar high-energy current events threads and happening circle-jerks that stimulated the production of OC.
It might be better to wait until the archive is established though.