Staff and Jannies and Administrators have had their hands tied in a measure of good faith, and so when the users see what is wrong in their hearts they speak out.
By the rules the community crafted to ensure our everything didn't become a shithole, they cover most of the known issues.
But not all, and that is where tension occurs.
As many considered age old shitposting tactics, which usually do work with correcting hostile behavior to the whole of /mlpol/.
Until it doesn't.
We don't yet have rules which directly address that kind of bullshit so the staff and go staff and know the community is behind them in support.
I'm proposing a new rule the Faggot Clause. Maybe Lurk moar fagget.
Proportional banning/tempban/kick/shitposty-retaliation/unusual-punishment for faggotry.
We all know what it is, because we've experienced this with long time users that degrade the whole experience for everyone. It boils down to they don't lurk as in there is no assimilation to our imageboard culture.
If they've successfully lurked and listened to suggestions they wouldn't be faggots.
It's gatekeeping to prevent the values of the imageboard from being taken over.
Rabid individualism without teamwork doesn't work. And lecherous collectivism with no individual also can't work.
/mlpol/ is a slice of something magical, politics and ponies and anons shitposting, talking and having a grand time without bots, shills, crazy SJW types, dindus, spam, /ptg or hyper cancer nu-fags.
Suggestions and community support is required if you too want something like this.
/qa/ - Questions and Answers
Keeping the community together by giving you a voice
1712609469_1.jpg (99.5 KB, 654x386, 0026D593CAAC8986470B5205F15879BE-101842.jpg)
1712609469_3.png (13.2 KB, 819x460, 9935F1FA87D67FA634DACF825BF30A99-13522.png)
1712609469_4.gif (438.8 KB, 283x400, 004AE36014A8766CAA3207F33392F0F6-449312.gif)
127 replies and 62 files omitted.
sage
>>8807
>>8810
what you do not seem to understand, is that rules are secondary to the staff - if the staff is not willing to do something, the rules will not make them, and conversely, if the staff is willing to do something, the rules will not stop them
all this change does is enshrine the 'we'll hem and haw and argue and avoid banning nigel at all costs'
for what it is worth i am in favor of this change - so that people know straight from the doorstep that jannies here will do no jannying, and you are safe from bans as long as you appear to be 'an active user' even if 905 of your activity is walls of schizophasic graphomania
>>8807
>>8810
what you do not seem to understand, is that rules are secondary to the staff - if the staff is not willing to do something, the rules will not make them, and conversely, if the staff is willing to do something, the rules will not stop them
all this change does is enshrine the 'we'll hem and haw and argue and avoid banning nigel at all costs'
for what it is worth i am in favor of this change - so that people know straight from the doorstep that jannies here will do no jannying, and you are safe from bans as long as you appear to be 'an active user' even if 905 of your activity is walls of schizophasic graphomania
>>8905
>all this change does is enshrine the 'we'll hem and haw and argue and avoid banning nigel at all costs'
As opposed to the status quo where shitposters go unpunished because "they technically didn't break any rules"?
>all this change does is enshrine the 'we'll hem and haw and argue and avoid banning nigel at all costs'
As opposed to the status quo where shitposters go unpunished because "they technically didn't break any rules"?
>>8902
>you faggots are killing /mlpol/
You are such a massive hypocrite. I know no less than four posters who have stopped posting because of you, and yet you accuse everyone else of "killing" /mlpol/ for daring to talk about it on the designated board.
>you faggots are killing /mlpol/
You are such a massive hypocrite. I know no less than four posters who have stopped posting because of you, and yet you accuse everyone else of "killing" /mlpol/ for daring to talk about it on the designated board.
>>8898
>What about if you mind your business and leave the rest alone?
This is our business. It's the site we've been using for 7 years. This is the place to talk about it.
There was a time in the early years of the site when we had a new /qa/ thread every week to talk about things like this, but you weren't here for that, were you?
>What about if you mind your business and leave the rest alone?
This is our business. It's the site we've been using for 7 years. This is the place to talk about it.
There was a time in the early years of the site when we had a new /qa/ thread every week to talk about things like this, but you weren't here for that, were you?
>>8904
>I think you're saying "If you know it's problem, just fucking do it," correct?
What he's saying is that you shouldn't let natural pushback get in the way of appropriate action.
>I think you're saying "If you know it's problem, just fucking do it," correct?
What he's saying is that you shouldn't let natural pushback get in the way of appropriate action.
>>8904
>I think you're saying "If you know it's problem, just fucking do it," correct?
What I'm saying is you might be looking at the wrong thing, but I can't know.
So I'm talking about it and hoping.
So there's understanding where various people of all sides get that it's harmful even if they've never felt it.
I don't want to shove it off on a single or Hand-full of staff members, that'll fucking break the everything.
Instead I'm attempting sympathy to convey why this rule isn't ban everyone I don't like.
Even though I don't like them after being burned many times afterwards.
It wasn't like that towards the beginning, I stood by their side.
Putting more time and energy into interacting and seeing others attempt to interact something was wrong.
If there was an attempt to communicate back its akin to someone shitting in the cereal on the table just as you're pouring the milk.
So people who don't like shit in their breakfast tried and failed to tell them not to shit in the cereal.
Then different attempts were made so the cereal won't be shat in.
It doesn't work, talking could have worked but for some reason it never does. Maybe because we suck at it. Who knows.
What I do know is every bridge gets burned and people who tried to keep the bridge open to the cereal shitter gets burned for doing so.
The Proposed Rule is to try to communicate something to the cereal shitter, because all normal and special means of communication that users have totally failed.
So we (the users) need staff to attempt communication using whatever you feel like using to get our point across, stop shitting in the cereal.
The rule is so that members of staff can be confident they're speaking with us supporting what they say. Whether it's making a meme, putting special words at the bottom of the post, changing a name, posting to say knock it off, whatever insanity required to communicate or even a ban.
Because non-staff methods of communication have broken down.
>>8905
>rules are secondary to staff
I know.
That's why I'm hoping through this and explaining this position thoughtfully and I need help.
That way for future reference nobody has to be the only one dealing with the burning shit.
[Read more] >I think you're saying "If you know it's problem, just fucking do it," correct?
What I'm saying is you might be looking at the wrong thing, but I can't know.
So I'm talking about it and hoping.
So there's understanding where various people of all sides get that it's harmful even if they've never felt it.
I don't want to shove it off on a single or Hand-full of staff members, that'll fucking break the everything.
Instead I'm attempting sympathy to convey why this rule isn't ban everyone I don't like.
Even though I don't like them after being burned many times afterwards.
It wasn't like that towards the beginning, I stood by their side.
Putting more time and energy into interacting and seeing others attempt to interact something was wrong.
If there was an attempt to communicate back its akin to someone shitting in the cereal on the table just as you're pouring the milk.
So people who don't like shit in their breakfast tried and failed to tell them not to shit in the cereal.
Then different attempts were made so the cereal won't be shat in.
It doesn't work, talking could have worked but for some reason it never does. Maybe because we suck at it. Who knows.
What I do know is every bridge gets burned and people who tried to keep the bridge open to the cereal shitter gets burned for doing so.
The Proposed Rule is to try to communicate something to the cereal shitter, because all normal and special means of communication that users have totally failed.
So we (the users) need staff to attempt communication using whatever you feel like using to get our point across, stop shitting in the cereal.
The rule is so that members of staff can be confident they're speaking with us supporting what they say. Whether it's making a meme, putting special words at the bottom of the post, changing a name, posting to say knock it off, whatever insanity required to communicate or even a ban.
Because non-staff methods of communication have broken down.
>>8905
>rules are secondary to staff
I know.
That's why I'm hoping through this and explaining this position thoughtfully and I need help.
That way for future reference nobody has to be the only one dealing with the burning shit.
1712680500.jpg (55.7 KB, 464x404, 0B808BC2C6B1068176367A801412BC4B-57060.jpg)
>>8898
>mind your business and leave the rest alone
I did.
You're one of the hardest people to communicate with I've personally spoken with that by all technicalities we should all be friends.
But nobody could successfully talk with you or to you.
>banish that anon because he will not fold to our wishes
Do you know what I wished for?
>mind your business and leave the rest alone
I did.
You're one of the hardest people to communicate with I've personally spoken with that by all technicalities we should all be friends.
But nobody could successfully talk with you or to you.
>banish that anon because he will not fold to our wishes
Do you know what I wished for?
Derailing threads with tangents should be a banable offense if done persistently and repeatedly.
>>8913
Tangents as in arguments not directly relevant to the OP, that should instead be made into separate threads.
Tangents as in arguments not directly relevant to the OP, that should instead be made into separate threads.
>>8912
>Derailing with tangents constantly that aren't appreciated
It's another marker of needing to lurk moar. It does occur.
Counterpoint, the green of the hoarse fucker.
>Derailing with tangents constantly that aren't appreciated
It's another marker of needing to lurk moar. It does occur.
Counterpoint, the green of the hoarse fucker.
>tangents
>>8917
>Counterpoint, the green of the hoarse fucker.
I remember that, lol
This is an appropriate counterpoint, however, it is already addressed by rules #3 and number #10. Ponies are allowed, no exceptions; and posting pony content in a thread should always be considered appropriate.
>Counterpoint, the green of the hoarse fucker.
I remember that, lol
This is an appropriate counterpoint, however, it is already addressed by rules #3 and number #10. Ponies are allowed, no exceptions; and posting pony content in a thread should always be considered appropriate.
1712771951_1.png (560.8 KB, 656x1813, 0D6D70F44BAD75376EA238A2ED07FDF2-574212.png)
1712771951_2.png (452.9 KB, 1280x1280, FBA8C6DDEF167B95BFBA2EC3B848D3C1-463750.png)
>>8921
Thanks for contextualizing.
Personally I'd extend extreme leniency for all humor, mockery, parodies ect.
Thanks for contextualizing.
Personally I'd extend extreme leniency for all humor, mockery, parodies ect.
>>8906
They will still go unpunished because the problem isn't the rules, the problem is staff. If the staff wanted to punish those shitposters, they'd add a rule for that long ago by themselves - "TECHNICALLY :nerd: they didn't break any rules" is an excuse, a shoddy one, for being lazy/spineless, and more rules won't cause punishment for shitposters - they'll cause staff to make up more excuses.
>>8910
tl;dr
They will still go unpunished because the problem isn't the rules, the problem is staff. If the staff wanted to punish those shitposters, they'd add a rule for that long ago by themselves - "TECHNICALLY :nerd: they didn't break any rules" is an excuse, a shoddy one, for being lazy/spineless, and more rules won't cause punishment for shitposters - they'll cause staff to make up more excuses.
>>8910
tl;dr
>>8923
>If the staff wanted to punish those shitposters, they'd add a rule for that long ago by themselves
>"TECHNICALLY :nerd: they didn't break any rules" is an excuse, a shoddy one
This is a fair point, tbh...
>If the staff wanted to punish those shitposters, they'd add a rule for that long ago by themselves
>"TECHNICALLY :nerd: they didn't break any rules" is an excuse, a shoddy one
This is a fair point, tbh...
>>8923
>>8924
>more bitching about staff
>more non-ponerpics sourced images
I'm not going to lie. When one or more users cry out for another regular user to be banned, I often ask myself "whose behavior is pissing me off more right now? The person these people are asking us to ban? Or the people asking us to ban him?" And if the answer is "the people asking us to ban" the scales tend to be tipped in favor of innaction. This was actually my big problem with Glimmergate back in the day - the people bitching were as disruptive and thread derailing as Nigel
>>8924
>more bitching about staff
>more non-ponerpics sourced images
I'm not going to lie. When one or more users cry out for another regular user to be banned, I often ask myself "whose behavior is pissing me off more right now? The person these people are asking us to ban? Or the people asking us to ban him?" And if the answer is "the people asking us to ban" the scales tend to be tipped in favor of innaction. This was actually my big problem with Glimmergate back in the day - the people bitching were as disruptive and thread derailing as Nigel
>>8925
You know what? I'm not sorry at all. This really is the reason we do so very few discretionary bans.
Every time there's a call "oh my god ban this guy," without fail, the people calling to ban him are the people who are stupid enough to derail the thread by arguing with someone they know better than to argue with in a thread they know it's off topic to argue about that given thing. Stop taking the bait every damn time. Back in Glimmergate we decided to end it by setting a redline for thread derailment and banning anyone who crossed it. And you know what happened? Nigel saw that redline, said "thank you" and stopped, while Vril anon intentionally crossed the redline. And he was the only ban, besides one guy who was trying to dox. And this happens every time there is some drama that the person who is the subject of the drama isn't the source of the very worst behavior - there's always some detractor who does something worse.
And then there's the people who sit and bitch like >>8923. Go fuck yourself. On 4chan you'd just be banned alongside the person you're bitching about, but we can't have a "don't piss off staff" rule, so the best thing for me to do is to very deliberately not give you what you want and instead leave the person you hate free to post. Because you're like a bug to light, incapable of resisting the urge to go right back to trying to move an immovable object. So I can just sit back and watch both of you seethe endlessly. The dog returns to its vomit, and the sow returns to wallow in her mire. Get fucked.
[Read more] You know what? I'm not sorry at all. This really is the reason we do so very few discretionary bans.
Every time there's a call "oh my god ban this guy," without fail, the people calling to ban him are the people who are stupid enough to derail the thread by arguing with someone they know better than to argue with in a thread they know it's off topic to argue about that given thing. Stop taking the bait every damn time. Back in Glimmergate we decided to end it by setting a redline for thread derailment and banning anyone who crossed it. And you know what happened? Nigel saw that redline, said "thank you" and stopped, while Vril anon intentionally crossed the redline. And he was the only ban, besides one guy who was trying to dox. And this happens every time there is some drama that the person who is the subject of the drama isn't the source of the very worst behavior - there's always some detractor who does something worse.
And then there's the people who sit and bitch like >>8923. Go fuck yourself. On 4chan you'd just be banned alongside the person you're bitching about, but we can't have a "don't piss off staff" rule, so the best thing for me to do is to very deliberately not give you what you want and instead leave the person you hate free to post. Because you're like a bug to light, incapable of resisting the urge to go right back to trying to move an immovable object. So I can just sit back and watch both of you seethe endlessly. The dog returns to its vomit, and the sow returns to wallow in her mire. Get fucked.
>>8925
>disruptive and thread derailing
Good news, that should stop with this new rule.
<Why?
Because evidently users can't do anything about such by shitposting and bantering on 'em.
So in thread disruptions should go away to a tolerable warning minimum.
<Downside
You are going to have to deal with more reports and rehabilitation or whatever is chosen is in staff's hands. Even in differing opinions (at the staff level), it is like the Nigel fiasco, but instead of users shitting up the thread it's reports.
I'd recommend something to signify something's been done so repeated spam doesn't occur.
It's alot of stress being placed on you all.
If the follow-up user posts weren't there who'd piss you off the most?
>>8923
I understand your frustration and pain. I have a different take.
They don't do the grand sweeping shitpost gestures of yester-year for two reasons.
Accumulating users.
Community pushback (and friction).
On paper keeping every single user maximizes how many are on the site. Yay numbers.
In practice there's edges and more nuanced takes that lead to users leaving because of another user. Or users joining because of another user.
Those effects are not obvious at first or second glance. The time span for it can be short or a very long time.
The site is made with love and care, and every action rocks the boat always. Even waiting. All actions. We all want the boat to stay afloat.
If somebody starts filling the boat with water something has to be done and most people don't know who to turn to, to properly remediate the situation. When something is done and people don't like it for any reason is made known even if it was or wasn't the right call at the time.
>>8927
It's good to get it off your chest.
<don't respond, make sure to report
Sure thing.
[Read more] >disruptive and thread derailing
Good news, that should stop with this new rule.
<Why?
Because evidently users can't do anything about such by shitposting and bantering on 'em.
So in thread disruptions should go away to a tolerable warning minimum.
<Downside
You are going to have to deal with more reports and rehabilitation or whatever is chosen is in staff's hands. Even in differing opinions (at the staff level), it is like the Nigel fiasco, but instead of users shitting up the thread it's reports.
I'd recommend something to signify something's been done so repeated spam doesn't occur.
It's alot of stress being placed on you all.
If the follow-up user posts weren't there who'd piss you off the most?
>>8923
I understand your frustration and pain. I have a different take.
They don't do the grand sweeping shitpost gestures of yester-year for two reasons.
Accumulating users.
Community pushback (and friction).
On paper keeping every single user maximizes how many are on the site. Yay numbers.
In practice there's edges and more nuanced takes that lead to users leaving because of another user. Or users joining because of another user.
Those effects are not obvious at first or second glance. The time span for it can be short or a very long time.
The site is made with love and care, and every action rocks the boat always. Even waiting. All actions. We all want the boat to stay afloat.
If somebody starts filling the boat with water something has to be done and most people don't know who to turn to, to properly remediate the situation. When something is done and people don't like it for any reason is made known even if it was or wasn't the right call at the time.
>>8927
It's good to get it off your chest.
<don't respond, make sure to report
Sure thing.
1712799200.png (625.6 KB, 945x945, dapxkky-2255c3cb-9ac1-4def-b6eb-4063f0b0f14f.png)
>own the haters by deliberately refusing requests and concerns that other users made
Not the healthiest attitude towards moderation, tbh.
Have a Trixie.
Not the healthiest attitude towards moderation, tbh.
Have a Trixie.
>>8928
>We all want the boat to stay afloat.
I'm one of them.
Please stop bitching and shitpost moar. Thank you.
>We all want the boat to stay afloat.
I'm one of them.
Please stop bitching and shitpost moar. Thank you.
>>8929
>not giving me the (You) I so rightly deserve
>thinking you can just order the unpaid moderators to do what you want while maintaining a shitty attitude throughout, the same way you bully minimum wage retail employees
Kiss my ass.
>>8928
>>8930
Thank you
Yes, I think that reports would definitely be better than derailing the thread with pointless arguments that the users in question know are pointless
>not giving me the (You) I so rightly deserve
>thinking you can just order the unpaid moderators to do what you want while maintaining a shitty attitude throughout, the same way you bully minimum wage retail employees
Kiss my ass.
>>8928
>>8930
Thank you
Yes, I think that reports would definitely be better than derailing the thread with pointless arguments that the users in question know are pointless
I suggest that we TRIPLE Janny's salary.
>>8935
>Oh good, since you also support this now, that's a load off my shoulders.
To keep /mlpol/ afloat YES. To witch-hunt posters NOT.
>Oh good, since you also support this now, that's a load off my shoulders.
To keep /mlpol/ afloat YES. To witch-hunt posters NOT.
>>8935
Glad that's all wrapped up... >>8936
I'm pretty sure you weigh more than a goose, so you can't be a witch.
I weigh more than than a goose.
Pretty sure most image board users weigh more than a goose.
On the other hand that'd be a great new age way to pawn off a weight loss plan. It'd light a fire under their ass.
It's a two-fold problem, shitting in response to shit just makes everything shitty.
So have to hand it to jannies to see what is going on.
You get less derailing and more constructive posts and possibly helpful lessons to maximize user retention and high quality and quantity posts.
And more time is spent making stuff instead of inane unwanted corrections.
It sounds like a win-win-win-win for everyone.
[Read more] Glad that's all wrapped up... >>8936
I'm pretty sure you weigh more than a goose, so you can't be a witch.
I weigh more than than a goose.
Pretty sure most image board users weigh more than a goose.
On the other hand that'd be a great new age way to pawn off a weight loss plan. It'd light a fire under their ass.
It's a two-fold problem, shitting in response to shit just makes everything shitty.
So have to hand it to jannies to see what is going on.
You get less derailing and more constructive posts and possibly helpful lessons to maximize user retention and high quality and quantity posts.
And more time is spent making stuff instead of inane unwanted corrections.
It sounds like a win-win-win-win for everyone.
>>8937
>It sounds like a win-win-win-win for everyone.
Sure, I like that. However some anons won't meet that needed sanity threshold and will come back with new ways to create drama. You see, those anons are more comfortable bitching non-stop and antagonizing than to take the smart road and ignore their perceived offenders.
>It sounds like a win-win-win-win for everyone.
Sure, I like that. However some anons won't meet that needed sanity threshold and will come back with new ways to create drama. You see, those anons are more comfortable bitching non-stop and antagonizing than to take the smart road and ignore their perceived offenders.
>>8812
You have CLEARLY stated that you don't lurk enough. The mods and jannies have openly refused to remove Niggel out of some retarded sense of duty. At least 50 anons know how much of a whiny furfag soygoy commie he is.
>>8824
>>8825
>>8925
Then do a job right for once in your life: ban Niggel for the unfuckingtold number of actual schizophrenic fursecution posts he has made, and will inevitably make again.
Continuing to fail at this has shown that you are incapable of being legitimately unbiased and highly dishonest about keeping /mlpol/ strong. But oh fucking well, one shred of decency seems impossible since (You) can't pull that enormous head out of (Your) own asshole.
You have CLEARLY stated that you don't lurk enough. The mods and jannies have openly refused to remove Niggel out of some retarded sense of duty. At least 50 anons know how much of a whiny furfag soygoy commie he is.
>>8824
>>8825
>>8925
Then do a job right for once in your life: ban Niggel for the unfuckingtold number of actual schizophrenic fursecution posts he has made, and will inevitably make again.
Continuing to fail at this has shown that you are incapable of being legitimately unbiased and highly dishonest about keeping /mlpol/ strong. But oh fucking well, one shred of decency seems impossible since (You) can't pull that enormous head out of (Your) own asshole.
>>8938
>You see, those anons are more comfortable bitching non-stop and antagonizing than to take the smart road and ignore their perceived offenders.
Ignoring stuff is very hard for those that aren't normal fags and get what's going on.
What is easier instead is to make it someone elses problem, still a tough call is manageable because of activity on the other people picking it up.
>However some anons won't meet that needed sanity threshold and will come back with new ways to create drama.
Life is pretty dramatic. Best anyone can do is make the best of things.
To be honest I'll probably run afoul of any part of this myself at times, the new proposed rule, the adding a double check to what I post, but I also know the staff are very long suffering.
It's the only way to keep your head amidst chuckle fuck assholes like myself, besides copious amounts of SNOWPITY and Mare Essence.
See? >>8939
>>8939
Have some mare. You need it.
[Read more] >You see, those anons are more comfortable bitching non-stop and antagonizing than to take the smart road and ignore their perceived offenders.
Ignoring stuff is very hard for those that aren't normal fags and get what's going on.
What is easier instead is to make it someone elses problem, still a tough call is manageable because of activity on the other people picking it up.
>However some anons won't meet that needed sanity threshold and will come back with new ways to create drama.
Life is pretty dramatic. Best anyone can do is make the best of things.
To be honest I'll probably run afoul of any part of this myself at times, the new proposed rule, the adding a double check to what I post, but I also know the staff are very long suffering.
It's the only way to keep your head amidst chuckle fuck assholes like myself, besides copious amounts of SNOWPITY and Mare Essence.
See? >>8939
>>8939
Have some mare. You need it.
>>8939
Nigel's been gone for at least a month now, and even that couple posts were the first in several months
This is another problem I have with the "ban this guy and everything will be great!" push. You literally haven't even noticed Nigel's absence.
The same thing happened when Boomer was banned for a month (more than once). Nothing improved. We didn't have more quality posting. None of those alleged lost posters came back. It was just less posting.
Nigel's been gone for at least a month now, and even that couple posts were the first in several months
This is another problem I have with the "ban this guy and everything will be great!" push. You literally haven't even noticed Nigel's absence.
The same thing happened when Boomer was banned for a month (more than once). Nothing improved. We didn't have more quality posting. None of those alleged lost posters came back. It was just less posting.
>>8940
>Ignoring stuff is very hard for those that aren't normal fags and get what's going on.
It is super easy and a way of not ruining other posters' mood with noisy drama.
>Ignoring stuff is very hard for those that aren't normal fags and get what's going on.
It is super easy and a way of not ruining other posters' mood with noisy drama.
>>8942
>None of those alleged lost posters came back.
I mean would you?
Unless they know things have changed alot and someone gets into contact with them somehow it's near impossible, unless one day they show back up.
If it's the same old same old, the reason why they left still exactly as it was they'll say they weren't wanted.
Didn't have to be true, but that's how it looks.
>>8939
He was banned, it's since expired.
He's still gone or gone near silent.
So please understand exactly why I'm posting about adding this rule.
>>8944
Yes the streamlined process of blocking posts and or users has been made efficient.
Out of sight is not out of mind and many care very deeply about this place.
Drama tends to follow caring an incredibly large amount and trying to act on it.
[Read more] >None of those alleged lost posters came back.
I mean would you?
Unless they know things have changed alot and someone gets into contact with them somehow it's near impossible, unless one day they show back up.
If it's the same old same old, the reason why they left still exactly as it was they'll say they weren't wanted.
Didn't have to be true, but that's how it looks.
>>8939
He was banned, it's since expired.
He's still gone or gone near silent.
So please understand exactly why I'm posting about adding this rule.
>>8944
Yes the streamlined process of blocking posts and or users has been made efficient.
Out of sight is not out of mind and many care very deeply about this place.
Drama tends to follow caring an incredibly large amount and trying to act on it.
>8925
>8927
>because people are bitching, I will refuse to remove the cause of their bitching, without which there'd be no bitching
Clown wig. Now.
>8933
>unpaid moderators
You could be getting paid a dollar per janny action but you'd still be getting paid a nice round zero.
>8942
>None of those alleged lost posters came back.
Why would they? They left. They don't know anything about what you have or haven't done.
>It was just less posting.
And "more posting" is An Unquestionable Good.
sage
[Read more] >8927
>because people are bitching, I will refuse to remove the cause of their bitching, without which there'd be no bitching
Clown wig. Now.
>8933
>unpaid moderators
You could be getting paid a dollar per janny action but you'd still be getting paid a nice round zero.
>8942
>None of those alleged lost posters came back.
Why would they? They left. They don't know anything about what you have or haven't done.
>It was just less posting.
And "more posting" is An Unquestionable Good.
sage
>>8946
>And "more posting" is An Unquestionable Good
(You) made it clear before in other threads. (You) are perfectly happy with a dead site only useful for your exclusive use on writefag breads. Kinda you only accept posts from you and friends while cockblocking the rest because reasons. And BTW, when this site was almost dead with the traffic to the bottom, and you and friends didn't post much besides the Occupied Equestria games.
I doubt you care about /mlpol/ much.
>And "more posting" is An Unquestionable Good
(You) made it clear before in other threads. (You) are perfectly happy with a dead site only useful for your exclusive use on writefag breads. Kinda you only accept posts from you and friends while cockblocking the rest because reasons. And BTW, when this site was almost dead with the traffic to the bottom, and you and friends didn't post much besides the Occupied Equestria games.
I doubt you care about /mlpol/ much.
>>8947
What's the problem with the writefag thread? I have no idea why you even started attacking it like 2 or so years ago. Is it because of Elway?
>>8925
>>8927
>>8933
>>8942
See, you're letting your emotions dictate what you do with the site again. Can't even put your pride aside a few secs for the sake of this place.
Woops, I said I was staying out of this. Sorry.
What's the problem with the writefag thread? I have no idea why you even started attacking it like 2 or so years ago. Is it because of Elway?
>>8925
>>8927
>>8933
>>8942
See, you're letting your emotions dictate what you do with the site again. Can't even put your pride aside a few secs for the sake of this place.
Woops, I said I was staying out of this. Sorry.
>>8948
Hence why codifying a rule that is less tolerant and would tend towards more action, as OP is trying to do, is a good idea
Hence why codifying a rule that is less tolerant and would tend towards more action, as OP is trying to do, is a good idea
>>8946
>Detractor was Banned for this Post
Ironically, this demonstrates an example of a poster who was banned because the mods determined that their posting was distracting and bad for the thread, even though they didn't overtly break any of the rules.
Can't this same logic be applied elsewhere?
>Detractor was Banned for this Post
Ironically, this demonstrates an example of a poster who was banned because the mods determined that their posting was distracting and bad for the thread, even though they didn't overtly break any of the rules.
Can't this same logic be applied elsewhere?
>>8949
It's near impossible to cram the spirit and culture into legalistic words that won't be twisted.
Admittedly what happens for violating the rule is up for staff pick, I even recommend combing multiple sometimes returning to a lighter sentence. The point is communication.
I can't promise anything about even more quanity of posts or high quality posts, because life happens. I've been made to eat my own words many times.
What it is, is giving a name to the driver's wheel for how the site will be.
It's also a pat on the back and showing the difference between anywhere else and here for newcomers, old frens, everyone.
The community is chatting about where to go and staff is the drivers.
>less tolerant
More confident and assured we're behind you.
Like the doctors having no news is good news. If users think you really overstepped we'll bitch and moan and if you haven't and others still do that I'll try being a voice saying it's the right course of action.
And really this is something of a last/medium resort for users, because we'll talk with each other usually.
Heck you all can ask if you overstepped and I'm sure we'll respond.
Let's bake that into the rule too.
<For future fags
I'm really hoping I'm getting across what has gone unsaid but implicitly for many years, even if we forget in the midst of bantering or shit talking.
This is a fun and silly place of ponies and politics and anything else we get our hands on.
I do hear you future fags.
"But OP isn't that the whole point of lurking so you understand and emulate the unsaid values? Hah gottem!"
Yeah yeah it is. The internet isn't how it used to be, nor how general perception shifted. The 4chins can't deal with so many people never bothering to assimilate, the amount of old fags to everyone else is vastly out numbered. So word of mouth and spending as much time trying to find those cashes of wisdom, shitposting or humor amidst everything else.
Here is an alcove not the so called sewer of the internet.
The internet is an amazing, suprising and potentially dangerous place. Like curing salts if improperly used you won't like what happens next.
[Read more] It's near impossible to cram the spirit and culture into legalistic words that won't be twisted.
Admittedly what happens for violating the rule is up for staff pick, I even recommend combing multiple sometimes returning to a lighter sentence. The point is communication.
I can't promise anything about even more quanity of posts or high quality posts, because life happens. I've been made to eat my own words many times.
What it is, is giving a name to the driver's wheel for how the site will be.
It's also a pat on the back and showing the difference between anywhere else and here for newcomers, old frens, everyone.
The community is chatting about where to go and staff is the drivers.
>less tolerant
More confident and assured we're behind you.
Like the doctors having no news is good news. If users think you really overstepped we'll bitch and moan and if you haven't and others still do that I'll try being a voice saying it's the right course of action.
And really this is something of a last/medium resort for users, because we'll talk with each other usually.
Heck you all can ask if you overstepped and I'm sure we'll respond.
Let's bake that into the rule too.
<For future fags
I'm really hoping I'm getting across what has gone unsaid but implicitly for many years, even if we forget in the midst of bantering or shit talking.
This is a fun and silly place of ponies and politics and anything else we get our hands on.
I do hear you future fags.
"But OP isn't that the whole point of lurking so you understand and emulate the unsaid values? Hah gottem!"
Yeah yeah it is. The internet isn't how it used to be, nor how general perception shifted. The 4chins can't deal with so many people never bothering to assimilate, the amount of old fags to everyone else is vastly out numbered. So word of mouth and spending as much time trying to find those cashes of wisdom, shitposting or humor amidst everything else.
Here is an alcove not the so called sewer of the internet.
The internet is an amazing, suprising and potentially dangerous place. Like curing salts if improperly used you won't like what happens next.
>>8948
>What's the problem with the writefag thread? I have no idea why you even started attacking it like 2 or so years ago.
It was stated that writefags resent shitposting because it is popping up in the overboard. That bothers them a lot.
>Is it because of Elway?
I have no idea how, or if, he is involved in this.
>What's the problem with the writefag thread? I have no idea why you even started attacking it like 2 or so years ago.
It was stated that writefags resent shitposting because it is popping up in the overboard. That bothers them a lot.
>Is it because of Elway?
I have no idea how, or if, he is involved in this.
1712857601.jpg (1.3 MB, 1200x1768, Clara.(Honkai.Star.Rail).full.3740516.jpg)
I was about to write an essay over this, but I guess it's no longer my business anymore.
>>8951
Shitting on [redacted] is the only consistent way to get you banned here. Is it right or is it wrong? I dunno, but it is an undeniable fact nonetheless.
>>8952
Notice that staff is already taking action, and it didn't need to be written down in the rules for it to happen. I dunno if you trust their judgement or not, but that's what it seemed like from your posts. Well, you've seen what their judgement is now. Proceed accordingly and good luck.
>>8951
Shitting on [redacted] is the only consistent way to get you banned here. Is it right or is it wrong? I dunno, but it is an undeniable fact nonetheless.
>>8952
Notice that staff is already taking action, and it didn't need to be written down in the rules for it to happen. I dunno if you trust their judgement or not, but that's what it seemed like from your posts. Well, you've seen what their judgement is now. Proceed accordingly and good luck.
1712864615_2.png (5.3 MB, 2850x4050, 56365D2B33CECA501B74C0546CE04A7B-5533469.png)
1712864615_3.jpg (164.8 KB, 1080x1080, 96B32750CABB2E4538DE7DD7A557CC24-168787.jpg)
>>8954
Needling any member of the staff for long periods of time at every opportunity is retarded.
There's a line that's crossed and further poking just demanding retaliation.
>luck
Well if everything goes to shit you can blame me.
<Nothing ever happens
Then watch as nothing fucking happens. I think things will happen and things will get better.
I have a shred of faith if not in people then in a higher power and then horse pussy.
The rule is over emphasizing what is already here in the rules and what all of what /mlpol/ is.
It's plainly doing something out pic 3 shit fucks.
<Rules don't do anything Anon
That's correct, people do. It's about how people interact and agree or disagree on how to interact with each other.
[Read more] Needling any member of the staff for long periods of time at every opportunity is retarded.
There's a line that's crossed and further poking just demanding retaliation.
>luck
Well if everything goes to shit you can blame me.
<Nothing ever happens
Then watch as nothing fucking happens. I think things will happen and things will get better.
I have a shred of faith if not in people then in a higher power and then horse pussy.
The rule is over emphasizing what is already here in the rules and what all of what /mlpol/ is.
It's plainly doing something out pic 3 shit fucks.
<Rules don't do anything Anon
That's correct, people do. It's about how people interact and agree or disagree on how to interact with each other.
>>8955
>Well if everything goes to shit you can blame me.
I disagree, there's only so much you can do. Still, it's better to try something than sit in your ass and do nothing.
>Well if everything goes to shit you can blame me.
I disagree, there's only so much you can do. Still, it's better to try something than sit in your ass and do nothing.
>>8953
>It was stated that writefags resent shitposting because it is popping up in the overboard. That bothers them a lot.
Stated by whom? And since when do writefags resent shitposting? Writefags are the most prolific shitposters on the board. I'm curious what autismo chain of reasoning led you to reach such a bizarre conclusion.
>It was stated that writefags resent shitposting because it is popping up in the overboard. That bothers them a lot.
Stated by whom? And since when do writefags resent shitposting? Writefags are the most prolific shitposters on the board. I'm curious what autismo chain of reasoning led you to reach such a bizarre conclusion.
>>8957
Go look into the treads listed at >>8859 , everything is there.
> I'm curious what autismo chain of reasoning led you to reach such a bizarre conclusion.
It is literally posted on those threads, when pushed for clarifications, that the bumping of threads, disrupts their threads being at the top of the overboard.
Go look into the treads listed at >>8859 , everything is there.
> I'm curious what autismo chain of reasoning led you to reach such a bizarre conclusion.
It is literally posted on those threads, when pushed for clarifications, that the bumping of threads, disrupts their threads being at the top of the overboard.
[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] [1-50] [51-100] [101-150] [151-177] [Next] [Live (last 50 replies)]
177 replies | 97 files | 18 UUIDs | Page 3
[Add to Thread Watcher]