For calm interpersonal discussions and questions and answers.
Also didn't deserve their own thread, but is geared for community engagements.
Also for community input and other things that happen to not be a question or an answer.
/qa/ - Questions and Answers
Keeping the community together by giving you a voice
1690948814_2.gif (854.8 KB, 340x213, 9ECDA514F9170D903A7E1DC01352C58E-875324.gif)
361 replies and 120 files omitted.
>>8103
A Fasces's answer about the dilemma is due. He has to take responsibility on what is decided and stand for it as he stood for banning generals in /mlpol/.
A Fasces's answer about the dilemma is due. He has to take responsibility on what is decided and stand for it as he stood for banning generals in /mlpol/.
>>8103
A general thread with only 5 or six replies independent of the actual newslinks is worse than a bunch of actual discussion threads with a few replies.
A general thread with only 5 or six replies independent of the actual newslinks is worse than a bunch of actual discussion threads with a few replies.
>>8104
Generals have always been banned in /mlpol/. Technically they're banned sitewide, but enforcement is low.
Generals have always been banned in /mlpol/. Technically they're banned sitewide, but enforcement is low.
>>8107
Nobody's going to complain if the threads are actually good.
And they would still complain if they kept seeing the general thread on /sp/ on the overboard.
Single-topic news threads are the intended site format.
Nobody's going to complain if the threads are actually good.
And they would still complain if they kept seeing the general thread on /sp/ on the overboard.
Single-topic news threads are the intended site format.
>>8108
>Nobody's going to complain if the threads are actually good.
This is a crappy answer about a moving target. Rule 3 is a fixed post where the mod and acolytes shield behind. I want the same assurances.
>Nobody's going to complain if the threads are actually good.
This is a crappy answer about a moving target. Rule 3 is a fixed post where the mod and acolytes shield behind. I want the same assurances.
>>8109
I mean, are you going to make a thread for every vaxxed retard that dies? I think we can all agree duplicates need to be deleted.
I mean, are you going to make a thread for every vaxxed retard that dies? I think we can all agree duplicates need to be deleted.
>>8110
>I think we can all agree duplicates need to be deleted.
>deleted
This a trap and you know it. I remember when I asked permission to post in /int/ and was granted. then months later all threads where deleted.
By the way, accountability is nowhere to be seen, the staff has not been sacked yet.
>I think we can all agree duplicates need to be deleted.
>deleted
This a trap and you know it. I remember when I asked permission to post in /int/ and was granted. then months later all threads where deleted.
By the way, accountability is nowhere to be seen, the staff has not been sacked yet.
>>8092
>>8093
Does nobody read the policy page?
You're both saying one rule but referencing a completely different one.
What the fuck.
>>8103
Is it an actual HAPPENING?
"HAPPENINGS" are the first responder threads to world events, and are required to have basic information; who, what, when, where, how, why, and a citation or link to an article or direct video of the event itself
>>8110
At this point every time that occurs feels less like an important event as its been covered repeatedly just with different deceased people.
>>8103
Is it actually important?
>What about the garbage no response spam posts that have literally zero content with ten new threads every minute.
Hmmmmmm.
>>8111
I, an anon with faulty memory, remember that a bit differently. Some other anon was bitching about something, ya'll said sure thing broski and did it. As the duplicate 'Rona thread there and on the main board didn't actually get addressed just some random anon.
Not an admin or a mod going in depth about any of that. Just some random anon. I could very well be incorrect.
I think I disagreed with that other anon back then because thw points didn't make sense at the time. Not you, the other anon. I think.
Anyway.
Jumping to action doing it. As in really fucking fast.
The talking peters out because something else comes up.
As you've said months later, they see a duplicate thread about a topic just about the same. Look and see it's a copy as in one for one repost. And ax the no response duplicate.
I think it was also around the time the shit wave was there for retarded reasons as that was the bigger overreaching issue at the time. I think it was
<HI ANON
<I've hijacked this alzheimer medalist's post.
<Did you know peetzer is considered enough of a vegetable for the USDA to put it on school lunches
<Like many Earth vegetables they don't belong on peetzer and neither does USDA pizza while also not counting as peetzer.
<Did you know world power status only belongs to those who have the best peetzer currently?
<One key ingredient many Earth Peetzers miss in Love!
<Did you know like peetzer this post took over an hour to type since the first viewing.
<Not my part, and that's why I'll hurry and sign off before he checks back in.
<May the peetzer be with you all and God bless you.
Princess Mi Amore Cadenza
-- ♡ Peetzer Pony
>>8112
I will post news exclusively in a containment thread in /sp/ so every hater can gladly fuck off.
I will post news exclusively in a containment thread in /sp/ so every hater can gladly fuck off.
1693716736.png (40.4 KB, 418x603, FFF40203DE360736A48AF0C684D3E3FB-41413.png)
>>8113
<That doesn't solve the inherent issues.
<The problem stems from hyperactivity compared to the lethargy of all other responses.
<Like good peetzer it'll stand up to being left out over night or over a week as the party winds up and down across the time.
-- ♡ Peetzer Pony
>>8115
<You have to put that cock into a mare.
<Many mares can do with quick shots but long lasting love huddles.
<Love huddles aren't a one pony show, I would know.
<It can't be a quick shlick because like friendship love huddles need time and care.
<As you've currently seen it takes time for responses from others.
<Three Anons and myself responded and none of them are who you actually wanted to hear from.
<So prepare the pre-pony pile peetzer platters you have time.
<As of yet nothing has actually occurred and don't miss the mare with Applejackulate.
<Background ponies or the pony prize?
<Don't shoot so quick and savor the peetzer.
Princess Mi Amore Cadenza
-- ♡ Peetzer Pony
<That means wait a week as everypony is busy that way a proper response is had. Also keeping an eye on when there is and read in detail.
[Read more] <You have to put that cock into a mare.
<Many mares can do with quick shots but long lasting love huddles.
<Love huddles aren't a one pony show, I would know.
<It can't be a quick shlick because like friendship love huddles need time and care.
<As you've currently seen it takes time for responses from others.
<Three Anons and myself responded and none of them are who you actually wanted to hear from.
<So prepare the pre-pony pile peetzer platters you have time.
<As of yet nothing has actually occurred and don't miss the mare with Applejackulate.
<Background ponies or the pony prize?
<Don't shoot so quick and savor the peetzer.
Princess Mi Amore Cadenza
-- ♡ Peetzer Pony
<That means wait a week as everypony is busy that way a proper response is had. Also keeping an eye on when there is and read in detail.
>>8116
>You have to put that cock into a mare.
Exactly, they lost their Equestrian graces and are bitter about that.
>You have to put that cock into a mare.
Exactly, they lost their Equestrian graces and are bitter about that.
>>8117
<Are you messing with me?
<I would be disappointed if nothing what I typed is read.
Princess Mi Amore Cadenza
-- ♡ Peetzer Pony
<Are you messing with me?
<I would be disappointed if nothing what I typed is read.
Princess Mi Amore Cadenza
-- ♡ Peetzer Pony
For a while, the Coronavirus thread was shut down, which made sense as the issue was dead and there was nothing more that really needed to be said. But then, it popped up in the news with several new events, like a "new strand" and companies making regulations over it again, so it's a relevant news topic again.
So where could news about it be posted? Is the thread created for coronavirus discussion a """general"""? Well if it's banned from being posted there, where do you post it? To the random news thread, or other amalgamation of news? No, that too is declared a """general""". So do you make a new thread? No, we already have a thread for coronavirus, so that makes any new thread a rule 11 violation. And that rule actually makes sense, because duplicate threads reduce the quality of the catalogue. So then where could new updates and news about the Coronavirus be posted? It would seem the answer is nowhere; every possible location on /mlpol/ would be a "rule violation." And just like that, /mlpol/ has rules banning discussion about coronavirus that are actually stricter than Youtube or Twitter had at the height of censorship. That is stupid, and everyone should see that that is stupid.
So where could news about it be posted? Is the thread created for coronavirus discussion a """general"""? Well if it's banned from being posted there, where do you post it? To the random news thread, or other amalgamation of news? No, that too is declared a """general""". So do you make a new thread? No, we already have a thread for coronavirus, so that makes any new thread a rule 11 violation. And that rule actually makes sense, because duplicate threads reduce the quality of the catalogue. So then where could new updates and news about the Coronavirus be posted? It would seem the answer is nowhere; every possible location on /mlpol/ would be a "rule violation." And just like that, /mlpol/ has rules banning discussion about coronavirus that are actually stricter than Youtube or Twitter had at the height of censorship. That is stupid, and everyone should see that that is stupid.
>>8121
It seems to me that you're thinking about this a little backwards. Instead of worrying about how to post low-engagement content without getting banned, maybe you should be putting a little more thought into what you post to begin with. From what you've been saying, it seems like the content you want to post mainly consists of news articles and memes that are generating little meaningful discussion. The issue for you seems to be whether it's preferable to dump all of this content into a single containment thread or make a separate thread for each article. Imo this question completely misses the point.
This is a discussion site, not a news and meme aggregator. If you come across a news article that you think would provoke some meaningful discussion on the board, then the thing to do would be to make a thread with a meaningful subject line, a link to the article, and maybe a brief summation of what the article is about. Since not every news article is a discussion-worthy event, it's probably worth putting some thought into whether or not the article you want to post is worth posting.
As you've pointed out, in the past we've had complaints about slower pony-related threads being pushed out of the catalog by large floods of news-related threads that receive few replies, and this is a valid complaint. However, taking the same amount of threads and dumping them into a single neverending general isn't really a solution either, since the core problem is that if the threads are not receiving replies, it probably means that no one is interested in discussing these topics in the first place. So if that's the case, why post any of it at all?
The overall goal here is not to restrict content, but to improve the quality of content. In general we don't like to tell anyone what they can or can't post, but if an individual user is flooding the board with low-quality content that generates little meaningful discussion, it brings down the quality of the site overall and ruins the experience for all users. So, while in general we prefer that it be a last resort, we do reserve the right to hand out bans or to delete content as we see fit.
[Read more] It seems to me that you're thinking about this a little backwards. Instead of worrying about how to post low-engagement content without getting banned, maybe you should be putting a little more thought into what you post to begin with. From what you've been saying, it seems like the content you want to post mainly consists of news articles and memes that are generating little meaningful discussion. The issue for you seems to be whether it's preferable to dump all of this content into a single containment thread or make a separate thread for each article. Imo this question completely misses the point.
This is a discussion site, not a news and meme aggregator. If you come across a news article that you think would provoke some meaningful discussion on the board, then the thing to do would be to make a thread with a meaningful subject line, a link to the article, and maybe a brief summation of what the article is about. Since not every news article is a discussion-worthy event, it's probably worth putting some thought into whether or not the article you want to post is worth posting.
As you've pointed out, in the past we've had complaints about slower pony-related threads being pushed out of the catalog by large floods of news-related threads that receive few replies, and this is a valid complaint. However, taking the same amount of threads and dumping them into a single neverending general isn't really a solution either, since the core problem is that if the threads are not receiving replies, it probably means that no one is interested in discussing these topics in the first place. So if that's the case, why post any of it at all?
The overall goal here is not to restrict content, but to improve the quality of content. In general we don't like to tell anyone what they can or can't post, but if an individual user is flooding the board with low-quality content that generates little meaningful discussion, it brings down the quality of the site overall and ruins the experience for all users. So, while in general we prefer that it be a last resort, we do reserve the right to hand out bans or to delete content as we see fit.
>>8120
>And just like that, /mlpol/ has rules banning discussion about coronavirus that are actually stricter than Youtube or Twitter had at the height of censorship. That is stupid, and everyone should see that that is stupid.
Or maybe, just maybe, the OP is not even willing to have a discussion to begin with. So his thread ends up becoming a spam dump.
I suggest you take your time to analyze the situation more thoroughly before making a judgment. This shit has been going on for quite a while now. Your mods didn't act arbitrarily.
Alternatively, you can just ignore it like you've done so all this time. And go back to the designated neckbeard thread.
>And just like that, /mlpol/ has rules banning discussion about coronavirus that are actually stricter than Youtube or Twitter had at the height of censorship. That is stupid, and everyone should see that that is stupid.
Or maybe, just maybe, the OP is not even willing to have a discussion to begin with. So his thread ends up becoming a spam dump.
I suggest you take your time to analyze the situation more thoroughly before making a judgment. This shit has been going on for quite a while now. Your mods didn't act arbitrarily.
Alternatively, you can just ignore it like you've done so all this time. And go back to the designated neckbeard thread.
>>8121
First of all, everything that Fasces said about not posting dumps of memes without comment, and of the need to generate actual discussion, applies.
What Elway says in >>8122 is on point as well and you should read that post thoroughly.
Second, posting of news where relevant and not redundant, is not banned from /mlpol/, and we are not going to interpret in such a way as to ban all discussion about political topics.
A news post must at minimum have a link to a news article, and multiple lines of text (usually green text) quoting the linked article, or summarizing it in enough detail that the content of the article can be understood by reading the post. The news must have some connection to politics or the culture wars, and should not be duplicative.
When posting news, first check and see if there is a thread on that topic, and if there is, post it in that thread. If there is not, you should make a new thread. The proper organization is by topic. Generalized news threads like Random News, and American Politics, are not allowed
>>8123
This is not just a Boom Boom issue; we need generalized rules concerning news, so I think it's worthwhile to clarify. Making a rule that accidentally bans all discussion of Coronavirus just because you hate and want to contain Boom Boom is not wise. We have other ways of constraining him that don't have such collateral damage.
[Read more] First of all, everything that Fasces said about not posting dumps of memes without comment, and of the need to generate actual discussion, applies.
What Elway says in >>8122 is on point as well and you should read that post thoroughly.
Second, posting of news where relevant and not redundant, is not banned from /mlpol/, and we are not going to interpret in such a way as to ban all discussion about political topics.
A news post must at minimum have a link to a news article, and multiple lines of text (usually green text) quoting the linked article, or summarizing it in enough detail that the content of the article can be understood by reading the post. The news must have some connection to politics or the culture wars, and should not be duplicative.
When posting news, first check and see if there is a thread on that topic, and if there is, post it in that thread. If there is not, you should make a new thread. The proper organization is by topic. Generalized news threads like Random News, and American Politics, are not allowed
>>8123
This is not just a Boom Boom issue; we need generalized rules concerning news, so I think it's worthwhile to clarify. Making a rule that accidentally bans all discussion of Coronavirus just because you hate and want to contain Boom Boom is not wise. We have other ways of constraining him that don't have such collateral damage.
>>8123
>Or maybe, just maybe, the OP is not even willing to have a discussion to begin with.
But you can have a discussion with everybody else, don't you?
And if nobody replies, then what? Every post is a testimony of how the psyop developed and still is developing and is rich enough for every faggot interested on digging in the truth.
Shutting down posting only favors the conspirators. Also if it is not of your liking, just ignore it, but silencing threads is not how it works.
>Or maybe, just maybe, the OP is not even willing to have a discussion to begin with.
But you can have a discussion with everybody else, don't you?
And if nobody replies, then what? Every post is a testimony of how the psyop developed and still is developing and is rich enough for every faggot interested on digging in the truth.
Shutting down posting only favors the conspirators. Also if it is not of your liking, just ignore it, but silencing threads is not how it works.
>>8126
There is a big chunk of generals that are a reflection of the current political times, memes included, if those threads have little engagement is because the board is deserted, don't blame me, I do my part and very well.
There is a big chunk of generals that are a reflection of the current political times, memes included, if those threads have little engagement is because the board is deserted, don't blame me, I do my part and very well.
>>8125
Post a zip file then. Preferably an external link so you don't waste server storage.
/s
I don't think this site's supposed to be your blogpost/repository.
Post a zip file then. Preferably an external link so you don't waste server storage.
/s
I don't think this site's supposed to be your blogpost/repository.
>>8125
>Every post is a testimony of how the psyop developed and still is developing and is rich enough for every faggot interested on digging in the truth.
The problem here is that this is not why this site exists. As I stated above, this is a discussion site, not a news aggregator or a site for archiving news articles. If you simply want to keep a detailed public record of every development in the Corona/vaccine conspiracy, you may want to consider creating your own private site to contain it.
>Also if it is not of your liking, just ignore it, but silencing threads is not how it works.
The problem here is that we have a limited amount of space in the catalog, and people get tired of seeing megathreads that are nothing but huge information dumps with no discussion going on being constantly bumped to the top of the front page/overboard. There is also a concern about slower-moving threads with better discussion and content getting crowded out by large dumps of memes and information. Again, this is a discussion site, not an aggregator. If your project is simply to document the coronavirus issue, you should consider creating your own site or hosting an off-site backup of corona-related information as >>8128 suggests.
[Read more] >Every post is a testimony of how the psyop developed and still is developing and is rich enough for every faggot interested on digging in the truth.
The problem here is that this is not why this site exists. As I stated above, this is a discussion site, not a news aggregator or a site for archiving news articles. If you simply want to keep a detailed public record of every development in the Corona/vaccine conspiracy, you may want to consider creating your own private site to contain it.
>Also if it is not of your liking, just ignore it, but silencing threads is not how it works.
The problem here is that we have a limited amount of space in the catalog, and people get tired of seeing megathreads that are nothing but huge information dumps with no discussion going on being constantly bumped to the top of the front page/overboard. There is also a concern about slower-moving threads with better discussion and content getting crowded out by large dumps of memes and information. Again, this is a discussion site, not an aggregator. If your project is simply to document the coronavirus issue, you should consider creating your own site or hosting an off-site backup of corona-related information as >>8128 suggests.
>>8128
>I don't think this site's supposed to be your blogpost/repository.
I agree, that's why your claim is untrue. My posting is not about me, but the current political situation. When you demand my engagement in discussion, you indeed want to make it about me.
>I don't think this site's supposed to be your blogpost/repository.
I agree, that's why your claim is untrue. My posting is not about me, but the current political situation. When you demand my engagement in discussion, you indeed want to make it about me.
>>8130
Bro, you literally namefag half the time.
Anyways, address Elway or something. Maybe they'll get tired after a while. Not that I blame them.
Bro, you literally namefag half the time.
Anyways, address Elway or something. Maybe they'll get tired after a while. Not that I blame them.
>>8129
>Second, posting of news where relevant and not redundant, is not banned from /mlpol/
I wish that would be slightly close. I'm getting banned just for sniffing.
>Second, posting of news where relevant and not redundant, is not banned from /mlpol/
I wish that would be slightly close. I'm getting banned just for sniffing.
>>8132
The first pic is a heavy handed ban, the second is a ruthless application of Rule 3. Even posts that a well within of the rules are fought with controversies to make me desist and retire from the board. Sorry, that won't happen.
The first pic is a heavy handed ban, the second is a ruthless application of Rule 3. Even posts that a well within of the rules are fought with controversies to make me desist and retire from the board. Sorry, that won't happen.
I kinda like meme, news dumps and such even if I'm not replying, I still end up lurking stuff.
I kinda like to when threads don't need to be overwritten in order to exist. Also, I think so long as the post fit the thread, there is no problem if it is a simple meme.
Perhaps there is more to it. I haven't really managed to follow what's going on here but that's my two cents.
I kinda like to when threads don't need to be overwritten in order to exist. Also, I think so long as the post fit the thread, there is no problem if it is a simple meme.
Perhaps there is more to it. I haven't really managed to follow what's going on here but that's my two cents.
>>8134
>I haven't really managed to follow what's going on here
Simple, some ponyfags decided by themselves that the board belong to them only and /pol/ fags are unwanted. They managed to expel most of them
>I haven't really managed to follow what's going on here
Simple, some ponyfags decided by themselves that the board belong to them only and /pol/ fags are unwanted. They managed to expel most of them
>>8132
>>8133
First of all, what you're quoting is from Lotus's post, not mine. Second, you're taking these ban screens out of context.
>The first pic is a heavy handed ban, the second is a ruthless application of Rule 3. Even posts that a well within of the rules are fought with controversies to make me desist and retire from the board. Sorry, that won't happen.
This is pure gaslighting. Your bans are the end result of a much larger pattern of obnoxious spamming that multiple anons have complained about. As I stated earlier, we prefer not to ban people or to delete posts if we don't have to, but you're leaving us little choice at this point.
>>8133
First of all, what you're quoting is from Lotus's post, not mine. Second, you're taking these ban screens out of context.
>The first pic is a heavy handed ban, the second is a ruthless application of Rule 3. Even posts that a well within of the rules are fought with controversies to make me desist and retire from the board. Sorry, that won't happen.
This is pure gaslighting. Your bans are the end result of a much larger pattern of obnoxious spamming that multiple anons have complained about. As I stated earlier, we prefer not to ban people or to delete posts if we don't have to, but you're leaving us little choice at this point.
>>8136
>Your bans are the end result of a much larger pattern
I agree, your campaign against my posting is long and widely known.
>Your bans are the end result of a much larger pattern
I agree, your campaign against my posting is long and widely known.
>>8138
>Try not to get lonely up there on your cross
I hope not for long and some fags will join my crusade.
>Try not to get lonely up there on your cross
I hope not for long and some fags will join my crusade.
>>8132
Well, you’re not going to be banned for the second kind of post anymore. If you’re banned, it’ll be because of shitty behavior. Again, everything else said by Fasces and Elway applies.
Also, see >>8131
Personally, I don’t care about meme dumps or “””spam””” nearly half as much as I do about the namegagging. This is an anonymous imageboard. The point is for anons to not have an identity. You have an American geolocater flag, so you have an easier time remaining anonymous than some posters. You should take advantage of that.
Well, you’re not going to be banned for the second kind of post anymore. If you’re banned, it’ll be because of shitty behavior. Again, everything else said by Fasces and Elway applies.
Also, see >>8131
Personally, I don’t care about meme dumps or “””spam””” nearly half as much as I do about the namegagging. This is an anonymous imageboard. The point is for anons to not have an identity. You have an American geolocater flag, so you have an easier time remaining anonymous than some posters. You should take advantage of that.
>>8140
Thanks, but I doubt that will last long. They have take it personal and will look for way to circumvent the directives and suppress my posting. That is guaranteed.
Thanks, but I doubt that will last long. They have take it personal and will look for way to circumvent the directives and suppress my posting. That is guaranteed.
>>8132
>First Pic
Wow necro bumping a thread with zero content how could this have happened.
Instead of posting on /qa/ where that post you posted belongs, you posted it on the page ten almost dead thread.
>>>/ub/6917 →
Then you go totally off topic continually smugging at anyone and always denying any meaningful response.
Deflecting everything and leaving a toxic pit in your wake.
>>>/ub/6923 →
And you just ask some random anon for SITE WIDE IMPLEMENTATION out of the blue. It's like you think everybody is an admin or mod so the first response is the truest response.
So take a moment and look at the ID mods and admins use. You'll notice they don't have numbers.
>>>/ub/6925 →
Then when somebody says why not put the SITE related META thread QUESTION where it's supposed to be. It's brushed off that anywhere and everywhere else is just as good to shit up almost dead threads with a post of little In-Topic value.
The reactions continue till the last post
>>>/ub/6936 →
So I as a random user think that first ban is deserved. But apparently the obvious meaning of why has escaped your impeccable reading skills.
It has 35 total posts and 19 (20) of them are new. And it's necro'd at the very end of its life for something that goes in /qa/.
That means 16 posts not including the original poster's post. Every post has nothing to do with the OP in and of itself.
[Read more] >First Pic
Wow necro bumping a thread with zero content how could this have happened.
Instead of posting on /qa/ where that post you posted belongs, you posted it on the page ten almost dead thread.
>>>/ub/6917 →
Then you go totally off topic continually smugging at anyone and always denying any meaningful response.
Deflecting everything and leaving a toxic pit in your wake.
>>>/ub/6923 →
And you just ask some random anon for SITE WIDE IMPLEMENTATION out of the blue. It's like you think everybody is an admin or mod so the first response is the truest response.
So take a moment and look at the ID mods and admins use. You'll notice they don't have numbers.
>>>/ub/6925 →
Then when somebody says why not put the SITE related META thread QUESTION where it's supposed to be. It's brushed off that anywhere and everywhere else is just as good to shit up almost dead threads with a post of little In-Topic value.
The reactions continue till the last post
>>>/ub/6936 →
So I as a random user think that first ban is deserved. But apparently the obvious meaning of why has escaped your impeccable reading skills.
It has 35 total posts and 19 (20) of them are new. And it's necro'd at the very end of its life for something that goes in /qa/.
That means 16 posts not including the original poster's post. Every post has nothing to do with the OP in and of itself.
>>8141
>look for way to circumvent the directives and suppress my posting
What is that even supposed to mean?
>look for way to circumvent the directives and suppress my posting
What is that even supposed to mean?
>>8111
>accountability is nowhere to be seen, the staff has not been sacked yet
What are you asking for?
>accountability is nowhere to be seen, the staff has not been sacked yet
What are you asking for?
>>8092
Rule #3 is ponies allowed. Posting news in a general violates what you agreed to, no generals, which is Rule #9 and reads as follows:
9. "HAPPENINGS" allowed, but not "GENERALS"
"HAPPENINGS" are the first responder threads to world events, and are required to have basic information; who, what, when, where, how, why, and a citation or link to an article or direct video of the event itself
"GENERALS" are circlejerks that stew like-minded opinions without room for dissension, recall that originally Trump threads were an interesting place to get up-to date on the election and eventually became 30 awoo posts, 10 copy-pasted link posts, 20 posts about memeing energy, and and 200+ posts talking about dubs with little actual discussion talking
To prevent the kind of closed-minded thinking that was basically meme petri dishes "GENERALS" are forbidden, first post is edited to a happening, second is deleted with a warning, third is bannable
I already discussed with you at length about violating this rule multiple times. You have been warned time and time again. You were banned for once again ignoring me and posting to a general.
>>8098
Regardless of looks, that is the rule. If you want the rules to change, please set up a call for a change and discuss it with staff and anons to make your case.
>>8103
Then don't post garbage. Put effort in your posting and don't post every single thing you run across. Fucking hell.
>>8109
Rule #3 is ponies. Rule #9 is what you are referring to. Try pulling up the Policy page that is located at the top of your screen once in a while and make correct arguments.
You are assured that if you post to a general, you will be banned as of Rule #9. This is not going to change because you bitch about a ban. You have to actually attempt a rule change motion.
>>8120
That is where #9 comes in. Happenings are allowed while still appearing to be a general. There is no major happening and so the general needs to go and a specific thread would need to be made like:
"Attempts to reignite a lock down like during corona virus"
This would be more specific, touch on news events, and is not just posting anything at all related to vaccines, people getting sick and passing out, tweets from random people that support or deny corona virus stuff and can be engaging by discussing the movements of nations to reinstall a certain economic and political system of lock down.
It isn't censorship to be more specific. This way you can post and not violate a rule. We can accept multiple threads of the same general topic if they actually discuss different things. We are not limited to a singular topic of a singular subject. That is why there is a thread about G5 plot and a thread about G4 background stuff. It doesn't actually overlap.
>>8121
Listen to any one of my endless suggestions and not ignore literally everything I say. What I have suggested is not unreasonable in the slightest.
>>8132
>>8133
Read the ban descriptions. You violated rules. You decided to violate on multiple occasions to keep reports in /qa/ and the report feature, instead commenting in threads you wished to be banned, then were told directly to stop posting in generals and you then proceeded to post in a general. You were banned correctly.
>>8135
If /pol/fags refuse to follow rules on /pol/, they get banned instantly. If /pol/fags refuse to follow rules on /mlpol/. they get banned after extensive negotiations and attempts to solve the problem peacefully. You have no excuse.
>>8136
As Elway has stated, you are attempting to garner support for behavior that has been dealt with reasonably throughout months of trying to talk to you about this.
>>8137
Lotus and Elway have never been against your posting and have been completely disinterested in the whole situation up until just now. I have been the only one you have been against. Leave them out of your ire and direct it at me, since I am the one actually taking issue here.
>>8140
Another good point. It is counter-productive to make a name for yourself on the site and throw weight around. Just make good content.
>>8142
Thanks for coming here with the facts anon.
>>8111
So, we are left ultimately with this. This is the core issue. You are mad about your threads being extremely off topic in /int/ and being deleted, thus you want staff removed so you may do what you wish. This is your position and this explains why you refuse at every turn to engage in conversation to deal with this peacefully. You do not wish for peace. You want blood. You want to see people removed for opposing you.
You need to admit defeat and resign to discussion and figuring out a practical solution. You failed to convince any of the staff that were completely neutral of your side and instead pissed them off. There is no other solution to this. Talk it out with me or just continue to be angry, I guess.
[Read more] Rule #3 is ponies allowed. Posting news in a general violates what you agreed to, no generals, which is Rule #9 and reads as follows:
9. "HAPPENINGS" allowed, but not "GENERALS"
"HAPPENINGS" are the first responder threads to world events, and are required to have basic information; who, what, when, where, how, why, and a citation or link to an article or direct video of the event itself
"GENERALS" are circlejerks that stew like-minded opinions without room for dissension, recall that originally Trump threads were an interesting place to get up-to date on the election and eventually became 30 awoo posts, 10 copy-pasted link posts, 20 posts about memeing energy, and and 200+ posts talking about dubs with little actual discussion talking
To prevent the kind of closed-minded thinking that was basically meme petri dishes "GENERALS" are forbidden, first post is edited to a happening, second is deleted with a warning, third is bannable
I already discussed with you at length about violating this rule multiple times. You have been warned time and time again. You were banned for once again ignoring me and posting to a general.
>>8098
Regardless of looks, that is the rule. If you want the rules to change, please set up a call for a change and discuss it with staff and anons to make your case.
>>8103
Then don't post garbage. Put effort in your posting and don't post every single thing you run across. Fucking hell.
>>8109
Rule #3 is ponies. Rule #9 is what you are referring to. Try pulling up the Policy page that is located at the top of your screen once in a while and make correct arguments.
You are assured that if you post to a general, you will be banned as of Rule #9. This is not going to change because you bitch about a ban. You have to actually attempt a rule change motion.
>>8120
That is where #9 comes in. Happenings are allowed while still appearing to be a general. There is no major happening and so the general needs to go and a specific thread would need to be made like:
"Attempts to reignite a lock down like during corona virus"
This would be more specific, touch on news events, and is not just posting anything at all related to vaccines, people getting sick and passing out, tweets from random people that support or deny corona virus stuff and can be engaging by discussing the movements of nations to reinstall a certain economic and political system of lock down.
It isn't censorship to be more specific. This way you can post and not violate a rule. We can accept multiple threads of the same general topic if they actually discuss different things. We are not limited to a singular topic of a singular subject. That is why there is a thread about G5 plot and a thread about G4 background stuff. It doesn't actually overlap.
>>8121
Listen to any one of my endless suggestions and not ignore literally everything I say. What I have suggested is not unreasonable in the slightest.
>>8132
>>8133
Read the ban descriptions. You violated rules. You decided to violate on multiple occasions to keep reports in /qa/ and the report feature, instead commenting in threads you wished to be banned, then were told directly to stop posting in generals and you then proceeded to post in a general. You were banned correctly.
>>8135
If /pol/fags refuse to follow rules on /pol/, they get banned instantly. If /pol/fags refuse to follow rules on /mlpol/. they get banned after extensive negotiations and attempts to solve the problem peacefully. You have no excuse.
>>8136
As Elway has stated, you are attempting to garner support for behavior that has been dealt with reasonably throughout months of trying to talk to you about this.
>>8137
Lotus and Elway have never been against your posting and have been completely disinterested in the whole situation up until just now. I have been the only one you have been against. Leave them out of your ire and direct it at me, since I am the one actually taking issue here.
>>8140
Another good point. It is counter-productive to make a name for yourself on the site and throw weight around. Just make good content.
>>8142
Thanks for coming here with the facts anon.
>>8111
So, we are left ultimately with this. This is the core issue. You are mad about your threads being extremely off topic in /int/ and being deleted, thus you want staff removed so you may do what you wish. This is your position and this explains why you refuse at every turn to engage in conversation to deal with this peacefully. You do not wish for peace. You want blood. You want to see people removed for opposing you.
You need to admit defeat and resign to discussion and figuring out a practical solution. You failed to convince any of the staff that were completely neutral of your side and instead pissed them off. There is no other solution to this. Talk it out with me or just continue to be angry, I guess.
>>8149
>So, we are left ultimately with this. This is the core issue. You are mad about your threads being extremely off topic in /int/ and being deleted,
Yes, I'm upset. Threads take effort and time to build and being destroyed is not something to wish to anybody.
>thus you want staff removed so you may do what you wish. This is your position and this explains why you refuse at every turn to engage in conversation to deal with this peacefully. You do not wish for peace. You want blood. You want to see people removed for opposing you.
This needs a clarification ASAP. I'm not that petty and understand very well that anyone in the staff will never be sacked because a disagreement with a user, but very probably might be possible if they enter in collision course with the top stallion, which this is not the case. You are confusing a saber-rattling rant with real hurtful intentions.
>So, we are left ultimately with this. This is the core issue. You are mad about your threads being extremely off topic in /int/ and being deleted,
Yes, I'm upset. Threads take effort and time to build and being destroyed is not something to wish to anybody.
>thus you want staff removed so you may do what you wish. This is your position and this explains why you refuse at every turn to engage in conversation to deal with this peacefully. You do not wish for peace. You want blood. You want to see people removed for opposing you.
This needs a clarification ASAP. I'm not that petty and understand very well that anyone in the staff will never be sacked because a disagreement with a user, but very probably might be possible if they enter in collision course with the top stallion, which this is not the case. You are confusing a saber-rattling rant with real hurtful intentions.
1693790323.png (1.1 MB, 1616x1616, 8C4E6241CF0444FEF27C34FE6C9A1DCE-2287864.png)
>>8149
>You are assured that if you post to a general, you will be banned as of Rule #9. This is not going to change because you bitch about a ban.
Everything comes down to the above. F
>You have to actually attempt a rule change motion.
F
and F
and more F
>You are assured that if you post to a general, you will be banned as of Rule #9. This is not going to change because you bitch about a ban.
Everything comes down to the above. F
>You have to actually attempt a rule change motion.
F
and F
and more F
Breaking news: man puts self on cross, bemoans his suffering, returns to doing what he was doing before ten minutes later. More at 7.
Boom:
>Look guys I'm so cool I don't care about how you see me
Also Boom:
>LOVE ME, AGREE WITH EVERYTHING I SAY, PLATFORM ME OR YOU'RE EVIL
>Look guys I'm so cool I don't care about how you see me
Also Boom:
>LOVE ME, AGREE WITH EVERYTHING I SAY, PLATFORM ME OR YOU'RE EVIL
>Threads take effort and time to build
Yeah. Threads also die when it's time though. Some are reborn.
There's some posting behaviors that improve the longevity of threads.
Most call it positive engagement.
Threads are built upon mutual engagment.
Decent threads are built either vertically and horizontally.
Vertical threads rely on a single source such as a specific story or green text posted by some Anon. Other Anon's tend to imput greater depth.
Horizontal threads rely upon every contribution by each Anon having a wide breadth. Each interaction increasing the interconnected knowledge of topics usually not brushed upon.
Most threads are some mix of both.
The shape and structure of threads isn't covered here.
This applies to both additive and refining and destructive interactions.
Additive interactions increase something of the communication.
Refining interactions refine and hone something of the communication.
Destructive interactions burn communications down. That is burnt bridges.
Threads subsist on Additive and Refining interactions.
That's positive engagement.
Destructive interactions are the reply to Additive and Refining interactions. The end result is punishing Additive or Refining interactions. Which means threads die. Which also means decreased trust.
As Additive and Refining interactions are the heart and soul of communication thus positive healthy relationships. There is too much of a good thing or one or the other which can also degrade interpersonal relationships.
[Read more] Yeah. Threads also die when it's time though. Some are reborn.
There's some posting behaviors that improve the longevity of threads.
Most call it positive engagement.
Threads are built upon mutual engagment.
Decent threads are built either vertically and horizontally.
Vertical threads rely on a single source such as a specific story or green text posted by some Anon. Other Anon's tend to imput greater depth.
Horizontal threads rely upon every contribution by each Anon having a wide breadth. Each interaction increasing the interconnected knowledge of topics usually not brushed upon.
Most threads are some mix of both.
The shape and structure of threads isn't covered here.
This applies to both additive and refining and destructive interactions.
Additive interactions increase something of the communication.
Refining interactions refine and hone something of the communication.
Destructive interactions burn communications down. That is burnt bridges.
Threads subsist on Additive and Refining interactions.
That's positive engagement.
Destructive interactions are the reply to Additive and Refining interactions. The end result is punishing Additive or Refining interactions. Which means threads die. Which also means decreased trust.
As Additive and Refining interactions are the heart and soul of communication thus positive healthy relationships. There is too much of a good thing or one or the other which can also degrade interpersonal relationships.
>>8152
Allow myself to be super clear then. If you cannot stand how we run things, make a thread asking for things to be changed and be open to discussion.
If you do not wish to do this, engage in conversation about how you are not in violation of any rules.
If you do not wish to do this, alter you posting behavior to one of many suggestions to better fit with policy.
If you do not wish to do this, you are left with two choices: deal with our judgement when you fall out of line when you refuse to obey the policy page, or stop posting.
Obviously, stopping posting is not desirable in itself, but if you refuse all other options it is not off the table for you to decide.
>>8154
Literally yes. You must demand a change or we will continue current enforcement. That is just how it works. You bitching at me building some secret cult of anti-you posters does not make any change to the policy page.
>>8155
Again, who is the irrational person here? I have said to talk this out and you are out here demanding I be tortured and killed for opposing your intolerable behavior. Fucking talk it out pussy.
[Read more] Allow myself to be super clear then. If you cannot stand how we run things, make a thread asking for things to be changed and be open to discussion.
If you do not wish to do this, engage in conversation about how you are not in violation of any rules.
If you do not wish to do this, alter you posting behavior to one of many suggestions to better fit with policy.
If you do not wish to do this, you are left with two choices: deal with our judgement when you fall out of line when you refuse to obey the policy page, or stop posting.
Obviously, stopping posting is not desirable in itself, but if you refuse all other options it is not off the table for you to decide.
>>8154
Literally yes. You must demand a change or we will continue current enforcement. That is just how it works. You bitching at me building some secret cult of anti-you posters does not make any change to the policy page.
>>8155
Again, who is the irrational person here? I have said to talk this out and you are out here demanding I be tortured and killed for opposing your intolerable behavior. Fucking talk it out pussy.
>anon posts a doctoral dissertation on post quality
>"And yet (you) aren't posting"
Fucking kill yourself. I'm serious.
>"And yet (you) aren't posting"
Fucking kill yourself. I'm serious.
>>8164
>anon posts a doctoral dissertation on post quality
I agree, it is top notch and deserves praise, I even took a screenshot ans save it. That said, he is not posting.
>anon posts a doctoral dissertation on post quality
I agree, it is top notch and deserves praise, I even took a screenshot ans save it. That said, he is not posting.
>>8165
How the fuck do you know he doesn't post? He is an anon. Do you have the post history?
Oh wait, you don't. I do though. Let's see. Oh, would you look at that, over 500 posts on this IP alone. Stop being the arbiter of who is or is not a poster.
How the fuck do you know he doesn't post? He is an anon. Do you have the post history?
Oh wait, you don't. I do though. Let's see. Oh, would you look at that, over 500 posts on this IP alone. Stop being the arbiter of who is or is not a poster.
>>8167
My post counting surely crossed the 50K mark long ago, no kidding. That said, I referring to the lack of board activity, there is sporadic posting only, then hardly I will take any advise from fence sitters.
My post counting surely crossed the 50K mark long ago, no kidding. That said, I referring to the lack of board activity, there is sporadic posting only, then hardly I will take any advise from fence sitters.
>>8168
I really don't give a shit if you had 50 billion posts and were the only active user and this guy showed up randomly just now to hit you with this. You have no power from your position.
You now have an ultimatum. We discuss this now or I will take action until you decide to.
I really don't give a shit if you had 50 billion posts and were the only active user and this guy showed up randomly just now to hit you with this. You have no power from your position.
You now have an ultimatum. We discuss this now or I will take action until you decide to.
>>8168
How about you go sit on a barbed wire fence you useless fucking geriatric piece of shit. Better yet, impale yourself on the top of a fencepost ass-first and die like you lived: a massive fucking faggot.
How about you go sit on a barbed wire fence you useless fucking geriatric piece of shit. Better yet, impale yourself on the top of a fencepost ass-first and die like you lived: a massive fucking faggot.
Every goddamn burst of activity comes from this walking sewage pipe who seems to think being showered with liquid shit every day is better than getting small bouts of seasonal rain. And he is actually PROUD of the fact he has 50,000 posts where all he does is post a bunch of shit off his drive or mindlessly tell others that they aren't posting enough for his tastes -- nevermind that those people are actually putting thought and care into their posts once in a red moon. This is what I get for even looking at this site while I wait for eviction. I have less reasons to be mad with doorcampers in Rust than I do for people like Boom.
>>8162
>am blind
You can work on it.
>>8170
It's this weird anti-social stubbornness for no rhyme or reason. You could literally have what you want if you asked. Most problems go away by talking.
I hate talking over many forms of mediums.
It's boggling.
Your solution is there free for the taking.
I only understand via my own shortcomings. I know what I need but I don't know how to obtain or if it's even in my grasp to do so. To actually do what I want.
From this position seeing it play out again yet in a different perspective and coat of paint.
I think you can have your solution and the means to your solutions. You'd be even more able to accomplish whatever you set your heart to.
It's at the core trying to stone wall people rather than address the metaphysical powers.
I don't know how to teach social skills, but I'm sure it does exist somewhere. Psychology and Sociology is as close to checkmarks one can get to, but in this day and age there are a plethora of resources. Many that are free.
[Read more] >am blind
You can work on it.
>>8170
It's this weird anti-social stubbornness for no rhyme or reason. You could literally have what you want if you asked. Most problems go away by talking.
I hate talking over many forms of mediums.
It's boggling.
Your solution is there free for the taking.
I only understand via my own shortcomings. I know what I need but I don't know how to obtain or if it's even in my grasp to do so. To actually do what I want.
From this position seeing it play out again yet in a different perspective and coat of paint.
I think you can have your solution and the means to your solutions. You'd be even more able to accomplish whatever you set your heart to.
It's at the core trying to stone wall people rather than address the metaphysical powers.
I don't know how to teach social skills, but I'm sure it does exist somewhere. Psychology and Sociology is as close to checkmarks one can get to, but in this day and age there are a plethora of resources. Many that are free.
>>8132
Not using the report function is kinda of a weird thing to get banned for. If someone is helpful to point out that, or just ask the question whether or not a thread might be better suited on another board, isn't this just good for the mods since it helps make their work easier.
>generals
Yes, it always been in the rules but I don't think we actually have use that rule up till this point. I should know because I have been in favour that we should have been using it more in the past. To reiterate my point for clarity: I pretty sure we haven't used the "no generals" rule much up until this point but there has been many instances where we could have, imo.
And did he get banned for posting to a general? But wouldn't it make more sense for him to be banned for posting a general not to a general, since the first one should be lock or remove anyway?
I see that our guy uses a vpns and such so a ban probably means nothing to him. There might also be some context to this that I'm missing. I haven't read all this thread because it's kinda of a lot.
I'm just giving you my limited opinions.
[Read more] Not using the report function is kinda of a weird thing to get banned for. If someone is helpful to point out that, or just ask the question whether or not a thread might be better suited on another board, isn't this just good for the mods since it helps make their work easier.
>generals
Yes, it always been in the rules but I don't think we actually have use that rule up till this point. I should know because I have been in favour that we should have been using it more in the past. To reiterate my point for clarity: I pretty sure we haven't used the "no generals" rule much up until this point but there has been many instances where we could have, imo.
And did he get banned for posting to a general? But wouldn't it make more sense for him to be banned for posting a general not to a general, since the first one should be lock or remove anyway?
I see that our guy uses a vpns and such so a ban probably means nothing to him. There might also be some context to this that I'm missing. I haven't read all this thread because it's kinda of a lot.
I'm just giving you my limited opinions.
>>8177
See >>8142
Plus that's what the report function is for. The report function is there for something that the administration can see easily a suggested course of action for the description of the reported post.
If something isn't ever supposed to be it'll be able to get whacked efficiently whenever they are online.
A regular post does none of that.
A regular post doesn't alert, isn't a call to action, and degrades a thread to being more like /qa/.
There's also /qa/ which the administration checks and responds as administrators.
As in /qa/ is where questions are answered. For dialogue with the administrators and moderators about tangentially related topics.
Such as threads, site related stuff, rules, post modification or deletion, conduct, features, possible new stuff and more.
The key is the Talking with.
A post outside of /qa/ about things that should be in /qa/ (or a report) will have anons know its not supposed to be in that thread as it is. Which in turn leads to posts that are off topic and could in theory generate more reports or /qa/ thread/posts.
Necro bumping an actual thread with totally off topic that by all intents and purposes is dead (saying it should be dead in another section), isn't great. Again all things considered in the situation at hand.
Instead if you have an actual project post that as that new thread once the old one dies in the new location.
Or use the /qa/ or report to ask for it to be moved to somewhere more appropriate.
(I mean it was page 10 dead on /ub/ that's about as dead as it gets. Just let it die.)
[Read more] See >>8142
Plus that's what the report function is for. The report function is there for something that the administration can see easily a suggested course of action for the description of the reported post.
If something isn't ever supposed to be it'll be able to get whacked efficiently whenever they are online.
A regular post does none of that.
A regular post doesn't alert, isn't a call to action, and degrades a thread to being more like /qa/.
There's also /qa/ which the administration checks and responds as administrators.
As in /qa/ is where questions are answered. For dialogue with the administrators and moderators about tangentially related topics.
Such as threads, site related stuff, rules, post modification or deletion, conduct, features, possible new stuff and more.
The key is the Talking with.
A post outside of /qa/ about things that should be in /qa/ (or a report) will have anons know its not supposed to be in that thread as it is. Which in turn leads to posts that are off topic and could in theory generate more reports or /qa/ thread/posts.
Necro bumping an actual thread with totally off topic that by all intents and purposes is dead (saying it should be dead in another section), isn't great. Again all things considered in the situation at hand.
Instead if you have an actual project post that as that new thread once the old one dies in the new location.
Or use the /qa/ or report to ask for it to be moved to somewhere more appropriate.
(I mean it was page 10 dead on /ub/ that's about as dead as it gets. Just let it die.)
>>8177
>Not using the report function is kinda of a weird thing to get banned for.
Instead of necro-bumping a thread to suggest it should be moved to another board, he should have either used /qa/ or the report feature.
>But wouldn't it make more sense for him to be banned for posting a general not to a general, since the first one should be lock or remove anyway?
He's OP of multiple generals. And he brags about it constantly. You'll be made aware of this fact if you simply use the site regularly.
>I see that our guy uses a vpns and such so a ban probably means nothing to him.
I dunno, he's royaly pissed whenever it happens. And he backs away whenever it happens. I think it's worth a try. It must be at least quite the annoyance if he reacts like that.
>There might also be some context to this that I'm missing. I haven't read all this thread because it's kinda of a lot.
As always.
>Not using the report function is kinda of a weird thing to get banned for.
Instead of necro-bumping a thread to suggest it should be moved to another board, he should have either used /qa/ or the report feature.
>But wouldn't it make more sense for him to be banned for posting a general not to a general, since the first one should be lock or remove anyway?
He's OP of multiple generals. And he brags about it constantly. You'll be made aware of this fact if you simply use the site regularly.
>I see that our guy uses a vpns and such so a ban probably means nothing to him.
I dunno, he's royaly pissed whenever it happens. And he backs away whenever it happens. I think it's worth a try. It must be at least quite the annoyance if he reacts like that.
>There might also be some context to this that I'm missing. I haven't read all this thread because it's kinda of a lot.
As always.
>>8169
>"ultimatum"
>until you decide to
Why do you keep moving the goalpost? Either ban him or don't. He's been a scourge on this site and has never once shown intention to change. He thinks he's Jesus Christ just because he posts more than others, with no regard to the quality of content that he posts or that nobody is engaging with it (in fact, I think it suppresses other posters, because it feels like he's the only one they're talking to). He randomly calls other Anons "newfags" (even when they've been around longer than him) or "shills" (as if) when they dare to disagree with him or consider nuance in conversation. He derails discussions that don't go his way by burying them in memes from this Facebook algorithm. He drives other users away because when they log onto the site under the presumption that it's "better quality than /pol/" all they see is his shitposts drowning out everything else. He openly scoffs at standards of etiquette and quality that have been customary on /mlpol/ and 4chan since long before he started posting here.
Of course, none of the above things are banable, but they're reasons why it's not worth giving him more slack when this behavior is coupled with his willful and repetitive violation of this site's rules. He is not willing to change, so why keep forgiving him or applying impotent one-day bans?
[Read more] >"ultimatum"
>until you decide to
Why do you keep moving the goalpost? Either ban him or don't. He's been a scourge on this site and has never once shown intention to change. He thinks he's Jesus Christ just because he posts more than others, with no regard to the quality of content that he posts or that nobody is engaging with it (in fact, I think it suppresses other posters, because it feels like he's the only one they're talking to). He randomly calls other Anons "newfags" (even when they've been around longer than him) or "shills" (as if) when they dare to disagree with him or consider nuance in conversation. He derails discussions that don't go his way by burying them in memes from this Facebook algorithm. He drives other users away because when they log onto the site under the presumption that it's "better quality than /pol/" all they see is his shitposts drowning out everything else. He openly scoffs at standards of etiquette and quality that have been customary on /mlpol/ and 4chan since long before he started posting here.
Of course, none of the above things are banable, but they're reasons why it's not worth giving him more slack when this behavior is coupled with his willful and repetitive violation of this site's rules. He is not willing to change, so why keep forgiving him or applying impotent one-day bans?
>>8182
Boom Booms is like Saul Goodman at Davis & Main. Even if he weren't breaking the rules and flipping off the cop that pulled him over, he's still doing his damnedest to get into trouble, all because his Telegram buddies said that chans are mean and he assumed that's all he has to do to be one of the anons. Every rule of etiquette to him is an obstacle to be circumvented or bruteforced. Not one time since I first saw a post that I knew was from him did he seem interested in doing anything but shit on everything and everyone and tell them it's good for their skin.
Boom Booms is like Saul Goodman at Davis & Main. Even if he weren't breaking the rules and flipping off the cop that pulled him over, he's still doing his damnedest to get into trouble, all because his Telegram buddies said that chans are mean and he assumed that's all he has to do to be one of the anons. Every rule of etiquette to him is an obstacle to be circumvented or bruteforced. Not one time since I first saw a post that I knew was from him did he seem interested in doing anything but shit on everything and everyone and tell them it's good for their skin.
>>8180
I agree that that necro-bumping was unnecessary.
>>8179
Yes, it makes sense to use the report function but I disagree that you should be banned for trying to be helpful to mods. It seems like that was the intention of the post, unless he just did it to be annoying.
>>8180
>He's OP of multiple generals.
Okay, but was he OP of that thread?
>he's royaly pissed whenever it happen
Not to say that he needs to be correct because of this but he seems the least pissed off in general, ITT and elsewhere.
I agree that that necro-bumping was unnecessary.
>>8179
Yes, it makes sense to use the report function but I disagree that you should be banned for trying to be helpful to mods. It seems like that was the intention of the post, unless he just did it to be annoying.
>>8180
>He's OP of multiple generals.
Okay, but was he OP of that thread?
>he's royaly pissed whenever it happen
Not to say that he needs to be correct because of this but he seems the least pissed off in general, ITT and elsewhere.
>>8184
>he seems the least pissed off in general
The retard said he was being "crucified", over a one-day ban and some other Anons calling him out.
>he seems the least pissed off in general
The retard said he was being "crucified", over a one-day ban and some other Anons calling him out.
>>8185
Hmm, yeah maybe I retract that. I think I just wanted everyone to calm down, I guess.
You guys can probably have fair points and I will reveal my bias: I kinda like a lot of his threads and posts. Not everything but to call it all sewage doesn't ring true to me.
Hmm, yeah maybe I retract that. I think I just wanted everyone to calm down, I guess.
You guys can probably have fair points and I will reveal my bias: I kinda like a lot of his threads and posts. Not everything but to call it all sewage doesn't ring true to me.
>>8182
Maybe because he isn't an admin?
>>8184
>unless he just did it to be annoying.
He was told necro-bumping the thread was wrong. And then he went on a smug tirade against it. He also can't stfu about fasces. And implied he wanted him sacked.
So, I don't think his intentions were good, but regardless of intentions, it was wrong to necro-bump. If he had just moved on after he was told it was wrong, it would've been different.
>Okay, but was he OP of that thread?
Yes, and multiple others.
Sorry for being mean anon. But can you get the full context by yourself before hopping in? At least this once? You aren't staff, so there's no problem if you stay out of this. You know?
>>8186
Yeah, I've seen you post similar memes in the books thread. Bussineet Doggo?
[Read more] Maybe because he isn't an admin?
>>8184
>unless he just did it to be annoying.
He was told necro-bumping the thread was wrong. And then he went on a smug tirade against it. He also can't stfu about fasces. And implied he wanted him sacked.
So, I don't think his intentions were good, but regardless of intentions, it was wrong to necro-bump. If he had just moved on after he was told it was wrong, it would've been different.
>Okay, but was he OP of that thread?
Yes, and multiple others.
Sorry for being mean anon. But can you get the full context by yourself before hopping in? At least this once? You aren't staff, so there's no problem if you stay out of this. You know?
>>8186
Yeah, I've seen you post similar memes in the books thread. Bussineet Doggo?
>>8187
>And implied he wanted him sacked.
Booms implied that he wanted fasces sacked. That's what I meant to say.
>And implied he wanted him sacked.
Booms implied that he wanted fasces sacked. That's what I meant to say.
>>8187
>Maybe because he isn't an admin?
Is it only admins that can ban users or make definitive decisions? I don't think so.
Also, all the staff have admin access now. They have for years.
>Maybe because he isn't an admin?
Is it only admins that can ban users or make definitive decisions? I don't think so.
Also, all the staff have admin access now. They have for years.
>>8187
>not trying to be mean
Thank you.
I mean its kinda hard to have the full context of this; its a converation spamming over many different threads so I don't think there's any problem with my questions so long as Im transparent that I don't have the full picture.
>at least this once
I disagree, I usually have mostly full context in the conversations I engage in.
The reason I involve myself is because, as I said, I do appriciate some of his posts. But the same can be said for Nigel's posts but they can definitely be improved upon so if its just the way he posts not the substance, then its not that big of a deal to me.
>not trying to be mean
Thank you.
I mean its kinda hard to have the full context of this; its a converation spamming over many different threads so I don't think there's any problem with my questions so long as Im transparent that I don't have the full picture.
>at least this once
I disagree, I usually have mostly full context in the conversations I engage in.
The reason I involve myself is because, as I said, I do appriciate some of his posts. But the same can be said for Nigel's posts but they can definitely be improved upon so if its just the way he posts not the substance, then its not that big of a deal to me.
>>8193
They do it through dicksword I think. I'm mostly talking based off the dynamics I've observed these last years.
>>8194
>its a converation spamming over many different threads so I don't think there's any problem with my questions so long as Im transparent that I don't have the full picture.
That's fair.
>I disagree, I usually have mostly full context in the conversations I engage in.
Alright then.
>Nigel
I'd prefer if we keep him out of this.
They do it through dicksword I think. I'm mostly talking based off the dynamics I've observed these last years.
>>8194
>its a converation spamming over many different threads so I don't think there's any problem with my questions so long as Im transparent that I don't have the full picture.
That's fair.
>I disagree, I usually have mostly full context in the conversations I engage in.
Alright then.
>Nigel
I'd prefer if we keep him out of this.
>>8195
>thats fair.
Aw thanks^^
Tho, Im actually gonna do what u said. I might lurk from time to time tho. Both because my computer broke and im phoneposting but also because i said everythimg i wanted to say.
Lets see how this turns out.
>thats fair.
Aw thanks^^
Tho, Im actually gonna do what u said. I might lurk from time to time tho. Both because my computer broke and im phoneposting but also because i said everythimg i wanted to say.
Lets see how this turns out.
>>8188
The mod wanted booms out first, and he did nothing wrong, he has his own threads and didn't messed with other threads up like you people are doing.
Let's face it, this place went to shit when some anons begun to police content like jewtube or jewbook.
The mod wanted booms out first, and he did nothing wrong, he has his own threads and didn't messed with other threads up like you people are doing.
Let's face it, this place went to shit when some anons begun to police content like jewtube or jewbook.
>8197
>Bunch of accusations without any backing or elaboration
Average boomer post.
>>8196
Sorry for mistaking you fams.
>Bunch of accusations without any backing or elaboration
Average boomer post.
>>8196
Sorry for mistaking you fams.
>>8201
>Bunch of accusations without any backing or elaboration
I'm >>8197
I don't know what the fuck is wrong with you people, you already got a dead site and shit on the only poster begging to post because muh whatever excuse to pull out your ass. Every time I drop by there are these threads going on turning off any lurker.
Pupper, get real, if shutting down /mlpol/ is your wish then do it, but you cannot play with users that want to post while Fasces are blocking them.
The toxicity here is off the scale. These niggers don't want you to post and as you were saying post nothing. Fucking unreal.
Booms better go other place, they are toying with you and this shitshow never couldn't happen if was not allowed by Pupper.
>Bunch of accusations without any backing or elaboration
I'm >>8197
I don't know what the fuck is wrong with you people, you already got a dead site and shit on the only poster begging to post because muh whatever excuse to pull out your ass. Every time I drop by there are these threads going on turning off any lurker.
Pupper, get real, if shutting down /mlpol/ is your wish then do it, but you cannot play with users that want to post while Fasces are blocking them.
The toxicity here is off the scale. These niggers don't want you to post and as you were saying post nothing. Fucking unreal.
Booms better go other place, they are toying with you and this shitshow never couldn't happen if was not allowed by Pupper.
>>8202
What's wrong with us? I don't know what's wrong with (You)! How can you see a single post from that guy and see anything positive? Nothing he's done here is worth anything. And if you can't see it then you weren't around when the site actually had a purpose and motivation. All he ever does is spam articles he hasn't read, dump low end "I'm smarter than you nanna nanna boo boo" bottomtext memes, and proclaim the superiority of his beliefs without ever actually arguing his case. If any of these three things is questioned, he moves on to do one of the other two, ad nauseum.
This site used to have some semblance of order. I don't care how often posts are made as long as there's at least one decent conversation a week, but instead all I ever see is pissing contests from our lovely guest from Telegram or DnD campaigns from the staff. /ub/'s got about as much self improvement advice as Boom's meme folder does by now. /sp/ is indistinguishable from /mlpol/. All that any of us have actually done is regurgitate talking points and memes from before the site was founded, which for some reason warrants creating new thread after new thread which we promise isn't spam you guys.
What's wrong with us? I don't know what's wrong with (You)! How can you see a single post from that guy and see anything positive? Nothing he's done here is worth anything. And if you can't see it then you weren't around when the site actually had a purpose and motivation. All he ever does is spam articles he hasn't read, dump low end "I'm smarter than you nanna nanna boo boo" bottomtext memes, and proclaim the superiority of his beliefs without ever actually arguing his case. If any of these three things is questioned, he moves on to do one of the other two, ad nauseum.
This site used to have some semblance of order. I don't care how often posts are made as long as there's at least one decent conversation a week, but instead all I ever see is pissing contests from our lovely guest from Telegram or DnD campaigns from the staff. /ub/'s got about as much self improvement advice as Boom's meme folder does by now. /sp/ is indistinguishable from /mlpol/. All that any of us have actually done is regurgitate talking points and memes from before the site was founded, which for some reason warrants creating new thread after new thread which we promise isn't spam you guys.
>>8202
>What the fuck is wrong with you people
Maybe we just wanted a fucking conversation and not someone being a shitty bot.
Maybe instead of denial and Reeeeing about counter points or even basic observations, but maybe actual bants.
But no.
No when some makes any kind of interactive statement it'll be shut it down by Mr Hotshot himself 50k posts a second.
Good gracious who can talk to the rabble who doesn't post 50 thousand times a second. No just give them the picure from a smug folder that'll have to do.
Much too important to even attempt to give any others due time and effort too many 50k posts and so little time.
Why without those 50 thousand posts oozing from every thread and interaction how else would anyone possibly interact online.
Inconceivable.
Those peasants arguing about trifles like 'coherent discussion' or 'what the fuck this is retarded explain yourself' truthfully they can't even begin to grasp the Fifty thousand post per second. They'll just need to watch others five hour video diatribe and the playlist and that playlist's playlist and if they can't even comprehend his genius let alone my own 50k genius they ought to just make do with second best.
Oh? The argument makes no sense? Well just watch it again idiot.
Still is this so called big retard energy? Well checkmate reverse uno it you who has the big retard energy. I'm 50 thousand posts ahead of you.
Ah ha trying to argue that one of my posts makes no sense? I have twenty more checkmate but with checkers.
Go ahead I'm very busy with my heady 50k posts per second per second so little peon tell me what those silly /mlpopol/'s think about this. Can't? Because you arn't an admin or mod.
C H E C K M A T E.
Silly little egotripping narcissists it is I who has the biggest 50 thousands per thousands per second posts who make up this website. It I the 50k posts Anon who make up the life blood and user count.
Without me the 50 thousand gorrillion posts a day anon you'd be left with your twenty posts every half week. How absolutely dreadful would that be.
For you see I the 50 grand anon will enlighten you all by replying to myself and others as if I'm different other 50 grand anons.
Yes bask in my glory. How do you even know all those other 50 thosand posts resemble each other. How could anyone possibly figure out patterns of behavior, for my color ID is different!
Foolish peons did you not witness the terrifying shock of losing the 50 thousand posts per picosecond in which I so graciously left for you all to stew in your lacking of 50 thousand posts per plank-second.
What's that? Talking with the rabble ugh disgusting, I must leave to go puke. Puke hard, I do these 50 thousand pukes for you.
Finally one of the little people outright made a post saying that one of my 50 thosand posts per second³ is decent and they looked at it. Those other ungrateful mental midgets they wouldn't even begin to survive if I began to debate them in any capacity.
This whole site something is wrong about it, ah of course, it's not centered around I the 50 thousand posts anon. They ought to rejoice it is I who brings threads and this site to life.
How could anyone possibly live without my 50k posts.
Quality? Hahaha quantity is good enough for them that's the most important quality.
Incorrect post? Hahaha surely you've at least read my 50k other posts supporting what I've already assured is true.
My 50k posts are tingling I must go and absorb an image from Farcebook and post it on this backwater site.
Then I go eat a caviar cake, when these troglodytes forget I'll be there with my 50 thosands of posts.
[Read more] >What the fuck is wrong with you people
Maybe we just wanted a fucking conversation and not someone being a shitty bot.
Maybe instead of denial and Reeeeing about counter points or even basic observations, but maybe actual bants.
But no.
No when some makes any kind of interactive statement it'll be shut it down by Mr Hotshot himself 50k posts a second.
Good gracious who can talk to the rabble who doesn't post 50 thousand times a second. No just give them the picure from a smug folder that'll have to do.
Much too important to even attempt to give any others due time and effort too many 50k posts and so little time.
Why without those 50 thousand posts oozing from every thread and interaction how else would anyone possibly interact online.
Inconceivable.
Those peasants arguing about trifles like 'coherent discussion' or 'what the fuck this is retarded explain yourself' truthfully they can't even begin to grasp the Fifty thousand post per second. They'll just need to watch others five hour video diatribe and the playlist and that playlist's playlist and if they can't even comprehend his genius let alone my own 50k genius they ought to just make do with second best.
Oh? The argument makes no sense? Well just watch it again idiot.
Still is this so called big retard energy? Well checkmate reverse uno it you who has the big retard energy. I'm 50 thousand posts ahead of you.
Ah ha trying to argue that one of my posts makes no sense? I have twenty more checkmate but with checkers.
Go ahead I'm very busy with my heady 50k posts per second per second so little peon tell me what those silly /mlpopol/'s think about this. Can't? Because you arn't an admin or mod.
C H E C K M A T E.
Silly little egotripping narcissists it is I who has the biggest 50 thousands per thousands per second posts who make up this website. It I the 50k posts Anon who make up the life blood and user count.
Without me the 50 thousand gorrillion posts a day anon you'd be left with your twenty posts every half week. How absolutely dreadful would that be.
For you see I the 50 grand anon will enlighten you all by replying to myself and others as if I'm different other 50 grand anons.
Yes bask in my glory. How do you even know all those other 50 thosand posts resemble each other. How could anyone possibly figure out patterns of behavior, for my color ID is different!
Foolish peons did you not witness the terrifying shock of losing the 50 thousand posts per picosecond in which I so graciously left for you all to stew in your lacking of 50 thousand posts per plank-second.
What's that? Talking with the rabble ugh disgusting, I must leave to go puke. Puke hard, I do these 50 thousand pukes for you.
Finally one of the little people outright made a post saying that one of my 50 thosand posts per second³ is decent and they looked at it. Those other ungrateful mental midgets they wouldn't even begin to survive if I began to debate them in any capacity.
This whole site something is wrong about it, ah of course, it's not centered around I the 50 thousand posts anon. They ought to rejoice it is I who brings threads and this site to life.
How could anyone possibly live without my 50k posts.
Quality? Hahaha quantity is good enough for them that's the most important quality.
Incorrect post? Hahaha surely you've at least read my 50k other posts supporting what I've already assured is true.
My 50k posts are tingling I must go and absorb an image from Farcebook and post it on this backwater site.
Then I go eat a caviar cake, when these troglodytes forget I'll be there with my 50 thosands of posts.
>>8162
>>blah blah blah blah blah
>>8165
>blah blah blah blah blah
>Missed the point puts that wordy post in a folder.
>Surely none of any of these posts couldn't actually impact me.
Here's the foreshadow. The things about to occur. It will. It's so quotable. You wanted responses but not any discussion. Consider it a heads up a change course pretty please. A small taste of what is to come.
>>8202
>blah blah blah blah blah
>>8197
>blah blah blah blah blah
>>8175
>blah blah blah blah blah
Advice? Pfft just save it and dump it.
>>8170
>blah blah blah blah blah
>>8168
>blah blah blah blah blah
>>8158
>blah blah blah blah blah
>>8154
>blah blah blah blah blah
[Read more] >>blah blah blah blah blah
>>8165
>blah blah blah blah blah
>Missed the point puts that wordy post in a folder.
>Surely none of any of these posts couldn't actually impact me.
Here's the foreshadow. The things about to occur. It will. It's so quotable. You wanted responses but not any discussion. Consider it a heads up a change course pretty please. A small taste of what is to come.
>>8202
>blah blah blah blah blah
>>8197
>blah blah blah blah blah
>>8175
>blah blah blah blah blah
Advice? Pfft just save it and dump it.
>>8170
>blah blah blah blah blah
>>8168
>blah blah blah blah blah
>>8158
>blah blah blah blah blah
>>8154
>blah blah blah blah blah
[Reply] [Last 50 Posts] [Last 100 Posts] [Last 200 Posts]
You are viewing older replies. Click [View All] or [Last n Posts] to vew latest posts.
Clicking update will load all posts posted after last post on this page.
Post pagination: [Prev] [1-100] [101-200] [201-300] [301-400] [401-461] [Next] [Live (last 100 replies)]
461 replies | 149 files | 92 UUIDs | Page 1
[Add to Thread Watcher]