/qa/ - Questions and Answers

Can we range ban Vietnam? That's where all the CP spam is coming from.

While we are at it could we also range ban Israel?

>>7957
You know what proxies and VPNs are. Right?

>>7957
Pupper can give you a better and more technical answer, but my understanding is that because we hash user IPs we are unable to rangeban. If we stopped hashing IPs we would be able to cut down on the spam, but it would also mean that there would be a record of every user's posts that could be correlated to a real IP and potentially expose the user, in the event that the site was ever compromised or the Feds demanded our logs, or something like that. Basically it's a tradeoff between convenience and security.

>>7959
I'm a mod on another board and we get the same spam as any other of similar size and software, and as far as I can tell there's no consistent pattern in the IPs that post short women pix. The third world countries from which this spam comes that didn't get real internet going until recently don't have large sequential ranges for their ISPs, but rather a scatter of random leftover IPs. The only thing all the IPs do have in common though is what >>7958 suggests; our lookup system says the IPs that post the pizza are all registered in a VPN database. So even if rangebans were possible, it wouldn't do much to quell the spam.

>>7960
>>7959
Imo, the only way to control CP spam is to fill gaps in active moderation, either by appointing more mods or by having the existing mods divide their workloads/hours more efficiently. There is quite visibly a "graveyard shift" in the late evening and early morning where CP lingers for hours because mods are asleep; if there were at least mod active at that time every night it wouldn't stay up.

Short question.
The post >>>/sp/21367 → might actually belong to the Garbage Can thread at >>>/mlpol/362938 → but given that that thread is not wanted, then I didn't bump it and posted at /sp/ instead.
So, is that fine?

>>7964
/sp/ is a shitpost board. It doesn't matter what gets posted there.

>>7965
Understood.

Gentlecolts, I was thinking about how much energy you engaged to oppose me yesterday, pretty impressive indeed. So I'll retreat for a while to give (you) some breathing room and time to temper your animosity.

>>7979
Kindly don't pretend to act retarded or illiterate.

>>7980
I knew it that my intentions would be misconstrued!
Well, be well and calm down, in the end, everypony has the right to shitpost, remember that.

>>7981
Execution could use work. /mlpol/ is a high quality site.
The intentions to increase post count via adversarial techniques isn't sustainable.
Riveting engagement using observations, shitposts, humor and questions do work.
And this is like the friendly mono-'ethnic' horspainter enthusiast neighborhood of chat sites, high quality no redditards or shills or jdf in sight amidst a people would engage intellectually with intellectual posts.

>>7982
>The intentions to increase post count via adversarial techniques isn't sustainable.
Yes, it works pretty well for a while, but I see the exhaustion.
F

>>7979
>I'll retread for a while
>>7981
>two hours later
Welcome back
https://youtu.be/CUwCmh2J2N4

>>7984
Okay. Bye.

>>7985
You have to admit that was funny.

>>7979
Stop making these announcements every time you leave to touch grass.

>>7985
Literally just go.

>7979
>7981
>7985
If you're gonna make this thread about your ego too, then let's rename it to /FTDDTOT/.

>>7785
Working on the link disabling in JS (or rather turn links to clickable links).
Going to need some extra work to get Media embedding working in conjunction as I for some reason were transforming links to clickable when generating the pages and not using JS (I probably had some reasoning behind it when I did it). So I am changing how it is done on backend and moving the link generation to frontend.
But just wanted to give update that it should be done in not too long, I just have to do some testing and hopefully not too many areas will be affected by moving link transforming to frontend (javascript).

>>8019
Super, thanks Pupper.
using No JS by only using the backend sounds like a feature for older browsers... As in positively ancient or esoteric ones.

So, are y'all gonna ban/404-prompt me - again - if I start arguing that horsefuckers are de-facto furries?
Like last time?

>>8268
Hi Ninjas.
That would be low-key bait, but I don't think it's against the rules.

>>8268
Maybe phrase the OP as a question, so that it opens the floor to debate.
And if you think it's too shitposty from /mlpol/, /sp/ should be fair game. They let the resident boomer post his general threads there.

>>8270
It WAS /sp/,....
>>8269
(You)
>tips fedora

>>8268
>So, are y'all gonna ban/404-prompt me - again
Heh, no wonder this site is dead. If the dissenters are gagged and banished... /s
BTW, this is not an endorsement of furries or their degeneracy.

>>8272
In fairness, it (the ban/404) was evidently temporary. Additionally, as assholes are concerned I AM exceptional, both historically (wrt site) and generally. While not excusable, the decision was understandable.

Why spamming /sp/ is allowed with threads that are clearly posted to cause disruption? Is board sabotage funny perhaps?
Another question. Is the responsible already banned? I don't see the management taking action at all, the threads are still up, like they were posted by it.

>>8277
I’m assuming you’re talking about the guy posting all the Hi Anon threads.

If he were doing the same thing on the main board the threads would be deleted. /sp/ is generally a looser board more conducive to funposting. Also, the only active threads there at present are a random meme dump thread, a random link dump thread, and a mildly entertaining troll thread about whether or not horsefuckers are furries. No huge loss if any of that junk gets bumped out of the catalog.

> Is the responsible already banned?
No.

>>8278
>I’m assuming you’re talking about the guy posting all the Hi Anon threads.
Yes.
>Is the responsible already banned?
>No.
The responsible by posting simultaneous multiple threads obviously looks to mess the catalog up. That is not fun posting, but it has a clear malicious intent. He did it before at /mlpol/ and after killing that board is doing it now at /sp/ where most of the action is happening.

>>8279
> The responsible by posting simultaneous multiple threads obviously looks to mess the catalog up.
Again, there’s not much going on there that he can mess up. /sp/ is basically this site’s /b/, it’s designed to be anarchic and all threads should be viewed as temporary.

> He did it before at /mlpol/ and after killing that board is doing it now at /sp/ where most of the action is happening
It happened once before on /mlpol/ to my recollection. As I explained, on that board the quality control is tighter, so the threads he posted were either deleted or moved. It did not “kill the board” or even have much of an effect; the issue was dealt with and that was that.

> That is not fun posting, but it has a clear malicious intent.
I can’t speak as to the user’s intent, but I can confirm he is a regular site user and not an invader causing trouble. Again, since this behavior took place on /sp/, it’s not really breaking any rules or causing serious trouble, so I see no reason for staff action here.

>>8280
I see.

>>8277
>Why spamming /sp/ is allowed
"Spam" threads like HI ANON have been native /sp/ content since its conception. It's only in recent years that it's become full of e-celeb threads, generals and other dubiously policy-legal threads.
>>8279
>obviously looks to mess the catalog up
Now the catalog has ponies on it. Instead of completely-dead non-pony threads. An improvement, imo.
>killing that board
As if, lmao.
>where most of the action is happening
Only like two or three posters even post to the random generals that take up /sp/'s front page. It is not most of the site's content.

>>8280
>Again, there’s not much going on there that he can mess up. /sp/ is basically this site’s /b/,
Lotus still banned me for trolling.

>>8283
I'm not behind the hi anon threads btw. I simply trolled around in the furry thread and that got me banned.

>>8279
>looks to mess the catalog up
On what basis do you say this? How is the catalog worse than it was before?

>>8283
>banned for trolling
If he's anything like fasces...

>>8282
>"Spam" threads like HI ANON have been native /sp/ content since its conception.
<He doesnt know Hi Anon threads were censured
>It is not most of the site's content
By post count? Not counting Lotus' pony dating sim, that is
>>8286
Worse is a matter of perspective. You dont want mine.
>>8287
<He also doesnt know
Not the thread for it.

Serious question; I wont claim the furry thread isnt deaigned to rustle jimmies, but the YT spam is lgbt-tier obfuscation. I assume cuz "its /sp/" that its 'acceptable', and if so fine. Is there a line on /sp/, and if so, where is that line? (illegal contrnt, obvs not acceptable)

>>8288
><He doesnt know Hi Anon threads were censured
No?
I was there the whole time. When were the censored?
>By post count?
By users.
Post count alone doesn't make it the majority of most of it is one guy.
>You dont want mine
Try me.

>>8288
The question of what is or isn't allowed on /sp/ sounds like it could be it's own thread.

>>8288
>I wont claim the furry thread isnt deaigned to rustle jimmies
Flooding /sp/, possibly to slide a thread you don't like is one thing. Banning an user because he trolled you is another. I remember you got a lot of shit for abusing your authority as a mod.

Thats it from me ITT, head to the pony pub if u wanna hear. Not trying to derail, and not trying to make it about me.
Srsly just trying to avoid getting banned - again - for trolling about ponies being furries which they are btw

Why is the maximum threads per hour so low, but the bump limits so high?

>>8296
Spam protection measure. A bot can't be set up to post thousands of threads that we would have to combat as it keeps posting.

>>8297
I remember those days.
Hasn't been relevant in a long time though.

>>8298
It apparently is if you are hitting the limit and people are complaining. Just spread out your posts a bit and it won't be hit.

>>8288
>Where is the line drawn?
Honestly, it's all pretty fuzzy as to where the line is drawn.

In general, on /mlpol/ the standard is intent. Is a post, or series of posts, intended to disrupt? Autism is generally allowed, although when it gets to the point that it completely derails threads and is intolerable, it isn't.

On /sp/, we're more lenient in general. It's more of a question of what is tolerable. The "hi anon" threads, the "bronies are furry" crap, and the youtube links are all questionable.

It isn't a settled question.

>>8296
Well anon if you look through your ghost threads you've been spamming you'll see there's practically no posts in them.

>>8296
KYS faget.

>>8302
This. Deadass, no cap, fr fr

>>8292
I responded to this post, but it was deleted and I was warned.

>>8292
Oh, you mean trying to get Nigel - my legit FRIEND - to stop shitting up the board with his sperging? Yes, I used mod powers to try and get him to post acceptably

>>8300
I have to wonder is there a rule that prohibits trolling in /sp/

>>8308
There is no such rule, iirc.

>>8304
At least you got warned. Lotus kicked me out without any notice. I guess he must be getting desperate.

>>8310
>Lotus
And what about the nigger spamming Hi Anon threads?

>>8309
And yet, if you happen to rub that guy the wrong way, he'll swing the hammer ban in no time. No matter if its /sp/ we're talking about.

>>8311
If it doesn't offend him personally, he won't move a finger.

Okay Ninjas, you've finally gotten what you wanted.

I know I live rent free in your head, and to you I'm the author of all bad things that happen to you, or something, but for the record: Fasces wanted to ban you from nearly the beginning, Elway wanted to ban you since last night, I was the last "yes" vote with Pupper not saying anything on the matter. Elway made the ban.

>>8308
>Samefags 3 different posts, posts multiple unequivocal bait posts against site users generally, and has a consistently hostile attitude throughout

>>8314
>but why are you so mean?!
Is that the best you've got? In fucking /sp/?

>>8304
And what was this even about, dude?
What even got you so paranoid? Lotus?

>>8315
>Nothing I do is wrong so long as its /sp/
I don't care to argue with you. Boom Boom has been banned for less in /sp/.

>>8316
We've been over this drama many times over the past 5 years, and we're not doing it anymore, which is what I said to Ninjas.

I'm not relitigating ancient shit.

If there's any confusion; Ninjas was banned for using the report system to make threats to staff, and for posting his furry troll thread in /mlpol/.

The Hi Anon thread have served their purpose. Enough of them have been posted, and we may start trimming a few of them should Elway deem it so

>>8317
Nope, that was spam mostly. And he was warned. Speaking of which, time to keep the same energy with our current spammer. Don't you think?

Should we also ban the YouTube link spammer? Booms was banned for less. Oh, that's right, he's Elway I think. Better forget about that.

>>8319
>Speaking of which, time to keep the same energy with our current spammer. Don't you think?
Hell yeah. Hi Anon nigger must be dealt with.

>>8321
Who decides what's too spicy for /sp/ anyways. As long as it is perfectly legal. It can't be how butthurt any given mod is.
Rent. Free.

>>8322
>Who decides what's too spicy
It is not about spicy at all. It is about delivered sabotage.

>>8321
Come and get me, fag

>>8324
Some day you'll pay.

>>8325
~Ooh, that sounds spooky

>>8326
We'll see.

>>8323
Whatever the case, everyone should be judged the same way.

>More Hi Anon threads
Alright, time to cull the herd. The Aryanne thread is cute, so I'm deleting the griffin instead

>hi anon threads verboten
>generals and e-celeb threads get to stay
We live in a society.

>>8330
You are being deceitful.

>>8331
Elaborate

>>8330
>hi anon threads verboten
That's a lie. There are enough of those threads, and more of them are clogging the board. The poster knows that and doublesdown instead of stop for common sense's sake.

Welcum to your grave staff of Thoma. You will not be missed.

>rent free
Fifth time you use the same cope. In any case, the month-long ban says I got real pissed.

>>8330
Part of the art of shitposting involves knowing when it's time to stop.

>>8333
>clogging the board
Clogging the board from what? Dead threads that have been on the catalog for 4+ years?

>>8335
got you* real pissed

>>8339
>implying the ride ever ends
It is actually (you) who wants to end the ride for everypony else with those threads.

>>8340
What about posting threads ends the ride?

>>8339
Like, I get it, but 49 threads out of a 100-thread catalog is enough.

>>8341
Those Hi Anon threads are not for fun, but to suppress and send to archive other threads.

>>8343
All of the threads that slid hadn't been posted to for literal years.

>>8344
Perhaps, and yet they enriched the catalog with assorted themes. Hi Anon threads don't do that.

>>8339
Just throwing this out there, if you want to screw with boom-boom without disrupting the rest of the site, you can always just dump the Hi Anon posts directly into his containment threads until they hit bump limit.

>>8342
Flip flopping as per the course lol.

>>8347
They are just jealous of your numerous contributions.

>>8349
I know. They are 120% reactive and 0% proactive.
They cannot stomach anypony rising above.

I find it humorous that the two spam posters are fighting over the right to spam in only the way each sees fit.

>>8345
>they enriched the catalog with assorted themes
So dead threads are to be kept around just for show?
I didn't see you bumping any of the dead threads when the hi Anon threads were being posted.

>>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?