/qa/ - Questions and Answers

>>7329
>IDs would be neat, but irrelevant.
Poster IDs are not irrelevant. They're necessary for coherent political discussion, as they prevent doublespeak, sockpuppeting, and self-contradictory arguments. That's why /pol/, and by extent /mlpol/, had them in the first place.

>>7320
is that anne frank?

>>7330
Fair point when people keep to the same IP address.

>>7332
Even with IP switchers, it still minimizes that. IDs exist for a reason, at least for political threads. For pony threads or other sorts it's fine to switch them off.

>>7330
I agree completely. They're can significantly improve a /pol/ thread. Maybe not necessary for /mlp/, though.
>>7333
Checked.

I'm OP from most (not all) of the "undesirable" threads.
My choice not to use IDs is because of shills having unlimited IPs to burn, so to try to engage them is mostly pointless. On the other hoof, IDs make vulnerable the shitposter (mostly myself) by showing shills a particular ID to target, so my preference is to remain fuzzy.
In any case, be patient with me and I will try to accommodate my shitposting behavior to minimize collisions with pone posting.

>>7335
It's not just shills who do doublespeak and nonsense. IDs improve political discussion across the board.

What if general threads had their own board? They're clearly not meant for /1ntr/, but perhaps the site could benefit from a /vg/ type board.
It would solve the issue of rule #9 being ignored/poorly-enforced too.

I personally don't like the generals on /1ntr/. Idk what moving the threads was really supposed to accomplish. They're still generals that absorb attention to various topics; which is something this site was created to escape. They still lack poster IDs, which leads to dismal quality of discussion and samefagging.
That aside, they have nothing to do with the topic or purpose of /1ntr/; they'd be more fitting on /sp/ if anything. We can have a discussion on whether or not generals should actually be allowed on /mlpol/, but /1ntr/ is obviously not the place for them.

>>7335
>IDs make vulnerable the shitposter (mostly myself) by showing shills a particular ID to target
What do you mean by "vulnerable" or "target"? Your IP is hashed. You have nothing to be afraid of.
Poster IDs exist to avoid samefagging in political discussions, and to allow Anons to link separate posts from the same speaker to point out obvious flaws in arguments. There are obviously ways to circumvent them, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't exist at all.
>>7334
They are the standard for /pol/ threads. They were made optional to make pony posters more comfortable.

Can we get an answer to this question soon please?

A response, please.

>>7377
Troublemaker.

>>7378
No u.

It's been 10 days. Can we get a reply?

>>7381
>(we)
Ahem.

>>7382
"We" as in the community.

>>7384
Idk what you're insinuating. I mean users of the site, preferably those who have been here 5+ years. I want an answer, and I believe others want one too.

>>7385
I've been here since the usenet group. There is no "community" or "we".
It's an idea, not a community. newfag.

>>7386
M8, I really don't care how much you want to nitpick the grammar. I expect the question to be addressed in due time, as per the staff policy that has been here since the beginning.
>newfag
How cute.

>>7387
>I demand that that mods and admins acknowledge my shit stirring!
Do you feel accomplished in your efforts?

>>7387
It has already been interacted with by staff, and no conclusion was delivered by OP or other users. Please scroll to the top of this thread to see I specifically tried to engage with the users to determine what to do and no one said anything.

If you wish to pick back up discussion now, we can do so. Please engage an argument for or against the current situation so staff can appropriately respond, because for now there is no opinion by staff that anything is in violation of the rules. If you feel there is, then bring it to our attention and perhaps our interpretation of the situation has been wrong.

>>7390
Perhaps it wasn't clear. I am the OP, and I thought I made my position on the subject clear. Perhaps it wasn't absorbed due to a switch in my IP.

>>7390
>there is no opinion by staff that anything is in violation of the rules
Well, for starters, there's a rule against generals, and putting them on /1ntr/ has somehow made the problem even worse (neither flags nor IDs now), and the threads are no better there. Not only that, but they're also clearly not on-topic for /1ntr/. While off-topic posting isn't against the rules, mods have previously enforced it as if it were one. I, personally, am not satisfied with the way things are going, and I'm more concerned by what effectively amounts to a change in rules without proper procedure/discussion.
These patterns represent a clear and drastic change in what is acceptable to post on this site, as well as the intended use of /1ntr/. If this change is being made intentionally, I would like there to be some discussion on it first.

>>7392
>These patterns represent a clear and drastic change in what is acceptable to post on this site, as well as the intended use of /1ntr/
/1ntr/ was a ghost board and is coming to life again from exiled /polacks/
Why that bothers you?

>>7393
>exiled /polacks/
Go back to bunkerchan, tranny. This whole division between /pol/ and /mlp/ is obviously artificial.

>>7392
Off topic is against the rules, but I am not seeing what makes it off topic. I am against generals, and I am open to nuking them. However, the posting on other boards is permitted last I remembered and does not violate any rule or change anything. I don't recall a restriction on who can post on the /1ntr/ board. I will agree the content needs to be better.

Will a compromise of nuking generals work, or do we need to discuss the finer details of what threads need to be allowed to exist in that board?

>>7395
I'm fine with nuking generals, imo. There have been talks about it before.
I just think putting them on /1ntr/ is worse than leaving them on /mlpol/. At least on /mlpol/ they're on-topic.
>Will a compromise of nuking generals work
I would agree with this, although:
>do we need to discuss the finer details of what threads need to be allowed to exist in that board?
Could have it's own thread. I've been meaning to open that can of worms for a while, because it's questionable if it's really fulfilling it's purpose rn.

>>7393
>exiled /polacks/
Exiled from where? /pol/? What exile?
>ghost board
That's true, but that doesn't mean the threads go there.

>>7396
>I would agree with this
I would not.
What happens in /1ntr/ is mainly the business of the anons posting there.

>>7393
>coming to life again
Just because it's cluttered with dump threads that were previously on /mlpol/ doesn't mean it's "coming back to life". None of those threads are on topic.
>>7398
It's the business of the site users. And just because 1-3 Anons started dumping Facebook memes there 2 weeks ago doesn't give them agency to change the board all on their own.

>>7398
Though you are free to post, generals are still against the rules. You need to make some unique threads for topics and stop relying on an overarching topic to repeatedly bump. Get creative. If you do that, it doesn't even need to go into that board in the first place.
>>7396
I will inform the rest of the staff for their input on the situation, and we will take action against generals.

>>7400
>stop relying on an overarching topic to repeatedly bump.
The topics are overarching because it is a constant happening.

>>7395
>nuking generals
Please do. It's a rule for a reason, and I'm seeing the same discussion decline we had on 4chan that made the rule necessary in the first place. /mlpol/'s relatively small size gives it very little resistance to the effects of this sort of thing.

>>7401
Make individual threads and start new conversations pertaining to them. That's what was agreed to when this site was made.

>>7400
>I will inform the rest of the staff for their input on the situation, and we will take action against generals.
Not fair. /1ntr/ is out of the scope of the main board.

>>7401
>a constant happening
Seriously? Anything sounds like a "constant happening" if you throw a wide enough net.
>American politics
This one is particularly shameless. It's a general even among generals. At least /ptg/ has some degree of specificity.

>>7405
And what about it?
You have the whole /mlpol/ board to post as you wish.

>>7401
>>7404
Then make happening threads. You specifically label them generals and you hardly put more content in them than a general update and bump. Make some more than a copy paste of a news article and what you find on facebook. Form discussions.
>>7404
It is completely fair to govern all of our site under the rules we have set up.

>>7407
>what you find on facebook.
Outrageous. Sources posted don't point at any MSM sources.

>>7406
Generals contribute to an overall decline in discussion quality, and that's evident from how it's been going on this site for the past 2 years. The rule exists for a reason; I was there when it was written. It shouldn't be broken without due cause, and it's about time that it's enforced.

>>7408
It is not outrageous to ask more from your posting than finding an article and copying the text it contains, even if it isn't mainstream.

>>7410
Fine.

>>7410
It would be better if there were real arguments and discussions around aforementioned articles, and not just a constant meme-dump in a thread with no coherent conversation.

>>7411
Good. Given the quality increase that will provide, and forming new threads around interesting updates and topics, you will find you don't need to post in /1ntr/ as /mlpol/ is just fine for a political happening.

>>7413
>Good. Given the quality increase that will provide
Nope. Fine means not posting at all.

>>7412
What else do you expect from a dead site?

>>7414
So be it.
>>7415
I'm not dead.

>>7414
Ok then. I can't force you to post. However, the community has spoken, and the rules do state you can't keep making generals. Throwing a fit about it won't change anything. Arguments will.

>>7417
>Throwing a fit about it won't change anything. Arguments will.
Also fine. I accept that and we conclude the divorce. No hard feelings.

>>7417
Once the generals are gone, I'll pick up the pace and make a bunch of fresh threads (tomorrow, I'm tired rn). Admittingly I don't make as many threads as I used to, but that's in part because it felt like the generals were sucking up all of the conversation.

>>7418
We will still be here when you get back around to feeling better.

>>7417
>>7420
Perhaps there could be a one day grace period before all the generals are nuked.

>>7421
Meant for >>7419

>>7421
Sure. I'll let staff know so we can wait.

>>7414
>>7418
Holy fucking based.
I've been salivating for this moment since 2019.
Good fucking riddance. I hope you get kicked out from everywhere you go till you're forced to learn smoke signals. Bring us another ice age from your facebook, boomer smoke.

>>7424
He called me a newfag, but it's clear to see that this style of posting has only been present since 2019-2020

>>7421
I think the grace period is over now.

You faggots bitch more about the site than contributing any content, what with all this divisive bullshit.
You can either tolerate the boomer shit or have a dead site with only a handful of special spergs posting, apparently in some ironically pretentious attempt at being a good board while totally missing the point that this place is declining due to a lack of interest rather than low quality posts. Any effort to improve the site by fucking with its organization is like putting a bandaid on a broken limb.
No amount of sperging or trying to "fix" this place is going to invite new users or bring back "muh heckin' oldfags" that aren't retards. If content quality and generation is such a concern, then why not look to expand to broader horizons and let the community with its preexisting culture sort out the trash?
I really think some of you take this place for granted and love to moan about it for brownie points while doing fuck all for the site as a whole.
Should administration and mods listen to popular opinion if the average users are now hopelessly retarded spergs that'll cut their own nose to spite their face? No, not in my opinion. And that's being generous by assuming that this recent push isn't due to a vocal minority of 'tards who may not have the best interest of the site as a whole as a concern.

Cry your eyes out.

>>7428
I'm not one of the ones moaning about how the site needs to change. You're the ones screaming about how much your assholes ache in the wake of some low effort boomer posts.

Seethe & Dilate to sleep.

>>7431
No, I don't think I will, retard.

>>7427
>You can either tolerate the boomer shit or have a dead site
False dichotomy. It's already been explained how low-effort generals suppress discussion, and this site was made with intent to escape exactly that.
Moreover, a site that primarily occupied by low effort boomer shit effectively IS a dead site. If volume were the intent, there'd be no reason to be here instead of 4chan. Everyone here was content to have a slow board, but nobody agreed to have a board full of trashy generals.
>fucking with its organization
The organization got fucked up because nobody spoke up earlier when changes were being made. We had a very clear and concrete rule against generals. Anonfilly and /sg/ got specific acceptions after days of debate, pleas for permission, and welcoming threads. This is a return to prior organization.
>let the community with its preexisting culture sort out the trash?
That's what's happening now.
>>7430
>I'm not one of the ones moaning about how the site needs to change
(You) are moaning about how people are rejecting changes that have already been made to the site. The site was not always like this.

>>7426
Alright. I was unavailable. I will lock the threads and allow a couple hours to move info to a better thread before deleting.

>>7434
thank you fasces

>>7434
Thank you.

I think we should address the problem as to why people are posting politics on /1ntr/ in the first place; there is too much spam on /mlpol/. It's difficult to have serious discussions when half the catalog is "hi anon" threads. Sometimes horse pussy is also spammed unnecessarily even when the OP is just a retard instead of a shill. I'm not saying to crack down on ponies, just crack down on spam. Spam makes real discussion damn near impossible.

>>7437
>Sometimes horse pussy is also spammed unnecessarily
Isn't that kind of the point of the site? The porn makes the site unpleasant for newfags, redditors and tourists.
The reason why we got rid of the porn board was because it "ruined the pornshield", since we wanted multiple porn threads on the catalog.

>>7437
>It's difficult to have serious discussions when half the catalog is "hi anon" threads.
>Spam makes real discussion damn near impossible.
I disagree. The threads you refer to as "spam" mostly just push months-old threads off of the catalog, so they're not really taking up any space. It's not hard to just scroll past them to find the threads you're trying to post in.
Even if posts are spammed within threads, it's not hard to just hide/ignore them. It's technically encouraged, as per rule 10.

>>7438
There's a difference between posting a few pics of horse porn whenever vs spamming a thread you don't like to the point where discussion is impossible.

>>7439
People seeing the same thread over and over reflects poorly on the site. We are a proud race of Nazi horse fuckers and we should take care of the sites image.

>>7440
>spamming a thread you don't like to the point where discussion is impossible.
That's unironically rule 10. It's a silly rule, hence why it went unwritten.
>We are a proud race of Nazi horse fuckers and we should take care of the sites image
When people come here, they want to see a catalog that has ponies on it, and isn't covered in months-old threads and shitty generals. Pony threads are an improvement.

>>7441
>That's unironically rule 10. It's a silly rule, hence why it went unwritten.
Then it needs to be better enforced.

>When people come here, they want to see a catalog that has ponies on it, and isn't covered in months-old threads and shitty generals. Pony threads are an improvement.
Seeing what is essentially the same post over and over just makes it look like we tolerate spam.

>>7442
>Then it needs to be better enforced.
Pornspamming shitty threads to bump limit became unfeasible once the limits were raised to 700.
>makes it look like we tolerate spam
It makes it look like we tolerate fun, unlike post-scruffening /mlp/.
Besides, having months-old dead news threads on the board is even more of an eyesore. Remember when the /jp/ raiders came and started screwing with us by necrobumping the dead threads on the bottom of the catalog?

I'm back after a week and the board is unrecognizable, I can't believe you destroyed mlpol because of muh generals.
Now all I see is low effort pony dumping to fill the vacuum left by no longer pol discussion, plus a couple of attempts to post greens.
2 or 3 hysterical faggots kvetching like SJW are regrettable, but the mods joining in to kill undesirable shitposting blow my mind.
By the way, the critical mass to recover political discussion is gone, and you niggers kicked out the last fags keeping it going.
UNBELIEVABLE.

>>7444
>It makes it look like we tolerate fun, unlike post-scruffening /mlp/.
Fun is a couple of these threads not the entire first page
>Remember when the /jp/ raiders came and started screwing with us by necrobumping the dead threads on the bottom of the catalog?
I wasn't here for that.

>>7443
There is a difference between tasteful posting and spam and you know it.

>>7447
In ideal conditions, this board would be covered in porn threads of all kinds, with posters making threads for specific kinds of porn or just casually hornyposting to pass the time. That's how it was in 2017. That's how it was the day of the merge. That's how it was intended to be. Do you not remember that?
Ponies allowed, NO EXCEPTIONS!

>>7445
What threads are missed?

>>7447
It’s pretty well known that the posting of porn is a way to signal that the poster considers the OP, or at least the current course of discussion, to be bait. I have t seen anything that hasn’t fallen into that, but then again, I haven’t seen every thread.

>>7445
>destroyed mlpol
Lmao, you're so dramatic. It's like you don't even remember the days when we had our catalog nuked by /jp/ and /qa/ every week.
>By the way, the critical mass to recover political discussion is gone, and you niggers kicked out the last fags keeping it going.
So long then. Don't let the door hit you in the butt on your way out.

>>7445
>no longer pol discussion
I said it myself that I'd start new happening threads once the generals are gone. Until then, I have abstained from posting in the generals.

>>7448
I'm not saying don't allow ponies I'm saying don't allow spam. You know the difference faggot.

>>7451
Maybe those of us interested in /pol/ content should post anyways. Be the poster you want to see on this board. I remember that was the philosophy back in 2017.

>>7453
I am interested in /pol/, and the kind of poster I want to see doesn't bump crappy generals. Things have gotten dire, to the point where I've slowly begun to reconsider all of the efforts I put into this board over the years.
There was a time when I was making 40-60 percent of the political threads on this board, and I can go back to that if need be, but I'm going to wait until the generals are gone first.

>>7454
I know that feel anon. I've been here since 2017 off and on. There were times I felt like I was just blowing on hot coals trying to keep the fire alive. Maybe we should try making fishing trips again.

>>7455
I've been here every day, since the minute Atlas posted his first link to /qa/. Things have changed though.
What's more, in the past ~2 years, some retards have been calling ME a newfag, just for not agreeing with them.
That's unrelated to the topic though.

Fishing feels like cope/grasping at straws, but it wouldn't hurt to remind people that this place exists as somewhere they can move their discussions when 4chan gets too shitty. There are some oldfags still around who just forgot about this place, and went to discord or whatnot.

>>7456
>some retards have been calling ME a newfag, just for not agreeing with them.
I know that feel. This site went through a phase where half the users thought everyone was a shill and I got called a shill every time I disagreed with them. It was certainly frustrating.

>There are some oldfags still around who just forgot about this place, and went to discord or whatnot.
We could try advertising on altchans there are lots of oldfags on those sites. I know alogs.space/robowaifu has an embrace thread one of our mods should make a thread there advertising /cyb/.

>>7458
>This site went through a phase where half the users thought everyone was a shill and I got called a shill every time I disagreed with them.
Ikr?
It got bad around the time that one shitposter kept detracting in the Jewish Crime Thread, and gradually because /ptg/-tier. Posters kept throwing around baseless accusations of "shilling", diminishing the severity of the term, while also playing into the hands of what Glowniggers and detractors want most of all: to shut down discussion and free thought through paranoia and shitflinging.
>altchans
Could be worth a shot. There are several pony altchans with userbases about the same size as ours. Friendly outreach wouldn't hurt.
>one of our mods should make a thread there
You could also do it yourself. Nobody is stopping you.

>>7459
>Posters kept throwing around baseless accusations of "shilling", diminishing the severity of the term, while also playing into the hands of what Glowniggers and detractors want most of all: to shut down discussion and free thought through paranoia and shitflinging.
I half suspect glow niggers or raiders may have been involved.

>You could also do it yourself. Nobody is stopping you
I figured I'd let a mod do it because it would be more official, but sure I'll go make a post.

>>7460
>I half suspect glow niggers or raiders may have been involved
Perhaps, although I feel it was also largely due to newfags taking the bait and oldfags not doing enough to fix the situation as it was devolving.
>I figured I'd let a mod do it because it would be more official
You've never needed permission to do that, lol. I raid alt-chans in the name of /mlpol/ every couple months, and I never once asked for permission. We're not a top-down hierarchy.

>>7461
The only reason I felt it might be different is because the thread is supposed to function like an embassy.
https://alogs.space/robowaifu/res/2823.html

>>7462
You sound like you know what you're doing. Go shoot your shot.

>>7463
Done.

>>7434
The generals are still there...

>>7466
That Cadence reminds me a bit of Daki.
Except much cuter cuz no thot.