/qa/ - Questions and Answers

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?