/qa/ - Questions and Answers

>>8347
oh come off it, we all know why the Hi Anon threads piss you off so much.

>>8351
>two spam posters
Slander is not welcome. My posting is not spam.

>>8355
You both are literally identifying each other as spam. It isn't coincidence my friend. You are different forms of the same problem. You both need to post what you want and damn anyone that says to compromise the style. You are literally the same.

>>8356
>general dumps where virtually no conversation
And why is that. So you would blame the poster instead of the readers?

>>8359
>blaming the readers
You are free to reply to each of those HI ANON threads if you wish

>>8360
>comparing news to identical 0 effort threads
Really?

>>8361
>""""news"""
>implying
There is a reason why hardly anyone ever replies to the links in those generals.

>>8359
>>8360
In both of your cases, both of your posting styles are suitable in moderation, which is the main contention. Why this is a problem for you both, I have no idea.

News threads are nice when you don't desire to make generals on the site where the only discussion goes into three or four threads where one poster dominates, actively squashing debate because OP knows best.

Hi Anon is cute, but for fuck sake, you can't have a million of them and get replies on any significant portion of them. Tone it down.

>>8363
>Tone it down
Okay.

>>8358
>>8359
The problem is that your excessive autism prevents you from evaluating reader interest. You post content that nobody is engaging with because they're not interested, and instead of tailoring your content to make it better, you double down and insist that everyone else is somehow at fault for not being interested.

If you ever run out of Facebook memes, you could always get a UK proxy and start ranting about Naruto.

>>8362
>""""news"""
Yup, they were and are literal news.

>>8365
>If you ever run out of Facebook memes
More slander. My memes are /pol/ tier faggot.

>>8366
The reason why nobody replies to those posts is because the conversation is not worth having.
A bunch of one-off posts in a single thread whom nobody replies to is by volume the same as a bunch of individual threads with no replies.
At least the HI ANON threads have ponies in them.

>>8367
nu-/pol/ tier maybe.

>>8367
Lmao, no they aren't.

>>8368
>The reason why nobody replies to those posts is because the conversation is not worth having.
Fine. I moved to /sp/. Now leave me alone.

>>8367
>>8370
>responding twice to make it look like more than one person agrees with you
kek, another classic. I also like the way you keep replying to your own posts in your "news" thread to simulate engagement.

>>8372
>I moved to /sp/.
And I posted HI ANON threads on /sp/.

>>8373
>kek, another classic.
It is in your mind I'm afraid.

>>8375
Nah, I saw it too. It's pretty transparent.

>>8376
>It's pretty transparent.
For you might be because you see a reflection of your wickery. For me nothing funny has been made.

>>8377
Lmao

Again, I have no idea why the two of you are opposing each other so fiercely. You are two sides of the same coin and you should try to actually team up and learn from each other to make good posts on the site.

>>8380
Why is that a bad idea?

>>8381
I'm the victim here. I don't suffer from Stockholm Syndrome and I won't cooperate with my oppressor.

>>8382
Victim of what?

>>8383
I and my threads are under attack. And it is not the other way around.

>>8382
>I'm the victim here
Blow it out your ass.

>>8384
So? You just post more in your thread and it bumps to the top. You have the copy/paste speed to do it too, I have seen your work.

>>8385
Kek

>>8384
All of your threads are at the top of the catalog.

>>8384
Your threads are under attack because they suck, and you are under attack because you keep acting like a little bitch. Welcome to the internet, retard.

>>8390
This

>>8390
>Your threads are under attack because they suck
Your opinion.

>>8392
Yeah. Him saying you suck is an opinion, just like you saying you don't. If you actually worked alongside the site instead of against it, you would be a lot happier and get opinions saying you aren't that bad.

>>8393
>If you actually worked alongside the site instead of against it, you would be a lot happier and get opinions saying you aren't that bad.
Unacceptable.

>>8394
Why?

>>8392
Mine and just about everyone else's. Notice how nobody is defending you? Notice how almost nobody replies to your threads except you? Seriously, you should just get yourself a UK flag and start posting angry rants about games you don't like, it's the only way to make yourself appear less ridiculous.

>>8395
My posting won't adapt to cater some faggots. It is what it is.

I only use top-quality, high-resolution image macros in my HI ANON threads, an assortment of both niche And popular mares, and make sure not to use redundant images too often. I do not appreciate being compared to the slew of sewage that I'd the resident boomer's Facebook feed.

>>8397
Why?

>>8398
Scram.

>>8400
No u

>>8402
So be it.

>>8403
You're silly

>>8404
I'm done for tonight.

What the fuck.
>>8357
>You both are literally identifying each other as spam. It isn't coincidence my friend. You are different forms of the same problem. You both need to post what you want and damn anyone that says to compromise the style. You are literally the same.
What Anon said.
>>8372
>>8374
... I don't get it.
I don't understand.
This... whole website is one website.
Fuck it.
>>8379
Here's your good idea (You)
>>8408
Sarcasm doesn't translate well through typing.

>>8417
Wait, is TOR banned now? I've seen onion posters here.

>>8317
>Boom Boom has been banned for less in /sp/.
What was he banned for?

>>8416
>>8417
These were deleted?

>>8416
>>8317
This screencap really does seem to imply that the post was made to /sp/: you can tell by the post number.

Idk if "go rogue" really counts as a threat either. Anons here say worse all of the time; in Minecraft, of course.

>>8421
I forgot the image.
Notice how the post number is 22799: that thread was made to /sp/, not /mlpol/.
There's a lot of annoying messages here, and I'm not fond of the topic, but idk what the rule violation is. It's normal to make a new thread once an old one hits bump limit, although he seems to have been mistaken for why the thread slid.

>>8422
When was this change made? I saw a TOR poster just last month.

Will whoever's deleting the posts answer my question about TOR?

How long is TOR going to be banned?

>>8428
I didn't ask you, tbh.

Oi, jannies.
If you have time to delete posts, you have time to answer my questions.

>>8418
Sadly TOR posting had to temporary be blocked due to some persistent banevading via TOR. Hopefully we can turn it on again soon.

>>8432
We block entire browsers to stop one shitposter? Isn't that a bit excessive? We have native posters who use TOR. How long is this going to last?

>>8434
>>8432
Evidently, blocking TOR doesn't even actually stop the poster you're trying to stop, so there's no point in blocking it.

>>8418
TOR was disabled this morning as it was being used for ban evasion, and simultaneously a presumably unrelated samefagging incident with VPNs was occurring.

>>8420
Ban evader posts are deleted.

>>8423
>>8421
Okay? It looked like /mlpol/ when I saw it. It was deleted, presumably by a different moderator, before he was banned. I do not know how many threads like that he made and if it’s the only one.

>go rogue
He made multiple threats in reports, and “go rogue” was not one of them. I am not going to go through the reports and publicly disclose them.

In any event, Ninjas more than earned his ban.

>>8433
It is similar to when we had to stop persistent CP being posted via Tor. Tor has it's positive and negative sides. One of the dowsides with Tor is that many uses that network in nefarious intents which affects all Tor users.

>>8438
A CP scourge makes it seem like the appropriate response, but blocking it to stop a shitposter ban evader feels like scorched earth, tbh. Just my opinion though.

>>8434
>>8436
>>8439
See, all this is evidence that blocking TOR has not fixed the problem here.

>>8437
>I am not going to go through the reports and publicly disclose them.
You could just describe them if you want. What kind of threats were they?

>>8437
>simultaneously a presumably unrelated samefagging incident with VPNs was occurring
That's odd. What threads were they in?

What was the samefagging incident related to?

If TOR is blocked, what other alt networks are allowed?

It has come to my attention that several of the above questions are tangential and disruptive to the conversation. I will later make separate threads, grouped by topic, to continue discussion on these matters elsewhere.

>>8443
Wtf, what did the furry do? It seems pretty serious.

I'm seeing some complaints about JT links.
Can I post a jewtube link in /mlpol/ without Fasces banning me?

>>8453
Threats, allegedly. Idk what they were though.

>>8454
Helloooo.

Hello everypony. I'm back after being banished.
May I start again my activities without (((somepony))) kvetching?

>>8726
Can you just not be around here anymore? You always come here, post like shit, then cry out as you strike everyone that criticizes you. Everyone would be happier, including yourself. If you are compelled to be here, you have to follow the rules. If this is beyond your capacity, you will run into the exact same outcome.

Everyone has tried to negotiate with you, repeatedly. It went nowhere by your own fault alone. You have refused to talk on board, on Teatime, with mods, with users, with everyone. You aren't on thin ice anymore. You are in the water. Are you going to tread carefully or plunge?

>>8727
>You aren't on thin ice anymore. You are in the water. Are you going to tread carefully or plunge?
>threats
Unacceptable.

>>8728
Cool. I don't give a shit about what you find acceptable. The choice remains.

God fucking damnit, the boomer is back. One fucking day after his ban expired.
I was about to drink to his departure.

>>8728
>Unacceptable.
You don't have to accept it: you're free to leave.

>>8726
>May I start again my activities
You mean your endless stream of shitfiller that nopony asked for?

*looks left and right*
It looks like he's actually gone this time.
A toast!

>>8733
>It looks like he's actually gone this time.
Not so fast commie.
I would like to remind everypony that even if a hostile psycho jannie is cockblocking the basic shitposting, this is MY board and always will be.

>8754
>basic shitposting
Oh yeah, it's basic alright.

>>8754
Based and Boomer-pilled

Regarding rule 12 of Policy, that lolicon pornography is not allowed:
Lolicon is defined as sexual depictions of underage females, right? Anime images of young girls that are not sexual are allowed, am i right?

>>9104
Correct. Non-sexual loli is perfectly permissible especially on /a/

>>9105
>>9104
Bronya Alexeievna Zaychik is not for sexual anyways.

Why was the site down recently?

>>9107
From what others have reported, the server hardware went down

>QTDDTOT
y helo thar, fellow /k/ommando. Is /k/ still a magical place?