/qa/ - Questions and Answers

>>7985
You have to admit that was funny.

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

>>7985
Literally just go.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

> Is the responsible already banned?
No.

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

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

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

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

>>8280
I see.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

It isn't a settled question.

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

>>8296
KYS faget.

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

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

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

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

>>8308
There is no such rule, iirc.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I'm not relitigating ancient shit.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

>>8321
Come and get me, fag

>>8324
Some day you'll pay.

>>8325
~Ooh, that sounds spooky

>>8326
We'll see.

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

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

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

>>8330
You are being deceitful.

>>8331
Elaborate

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

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

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

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

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

>>8335
got you* real pissed

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

>>8340
What about posting threads ends the ride?

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

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

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

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

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

>>8342
Flip flopping as per the course lol.

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

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

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

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

>>8347
oh come off it, we all know why the Hi Anon threads piss you off so much.

>>8351
>two spam posters
Slander is not welcome. My posting is not spam.

>>8355
You both are literally identifying each other as spam. It isn't coincidence my friend. You are different forms of the same problem. You both need to post what you want and damn anyone that says to compromise the style. You are literally the same.

>>8356
>general dumps where virtually no conversation
And why is that. So you would blame the poster instead of the readers?

>>8359
>blaming the readers
You are free to reply to each of those HI ANON threads if you wish

>>8360
>comparing news to identical 0 effort threads
Really?

>>8361
>""""news"""
>implying
There is a reason why hardly anyone ever replies to the links in those generals.

>>8359
>>8360
In both of your cases, both of your posting styles are suitable in moderation, which is the main contention. Why this is a problem for you both, I have no idea.

News threads are nice when you don't desire to make generals on the site where the only discussion goes into three or four threads where one poster dominates, actively squashing debate because OP knows best.

Hi Anon is cute, but for fuck sake, you can't have a million of them and get replies on any significant portion of them. Tone it down.

>>8363
>Tone it down
Okay.

>>8358
>>8359
The problem is that your excessive autism prevents you from evaluating reader interest. You post content that nobody is engaging with because they're not interested, and instead of tailoring your content to make it better, you double down and insist that everyone else is somehow at fault for not being interested.

If you ever run out of Facebook memes, you could always get a UK proxy and start ranting about Naruto.

>>8362
>""""news"""
Yup, they were and are literal news.

>>8365
>If you ever run out of Facebook memes
More slander. My memes are /pol/ tier faggot.

>>8366
The reason why nobody replies to those posts is because the conversation is not worth having.
A bunch of one-off posts in a single thread whom nobody replies to is by volume the same as a bunch of individual threads with no replies.
At least the HI ANON threads have ponies in them.