[ Rules ] [ ot / g / m ] [ pt / snow / w ] [ meta ] [ Discord ]

/meta/ - site discussion

Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Youtube
Password (For post deletion)

Townhall May 5th 8PM GMT. More info here

File: 1549754396510.jpg (101.31 KB, 850x476, znBZH50.jpg)

No. 8771

Please post all general issues and complaints here. If you want mods to do something, or have some issue with or suggestion for site content, you should use this thread.

>>>/meta/6821 should only be used for technical issues and suggestions (can't load site, site slow, bugs, site feature requests). This thread is for non-technical issues.

No. 8774

I am in favor of /m/. It is a distinct category and we have enough threads for it. Perhaps we could have a poll?

Will minimodding continue to be a rule only in /pt/ and /snow/ or will it become global?

No. 8775

>>8774
I'm against it but agree with the poll idea

No. 8776

I'm interested to know the answer to this question someone asked in the last thread. I want to understand!

>Is there a reason for not redtexting when you ban?

>Seems like all it does is make people think the post has been ignored by mods.

Inb4 hurrdurr have you ever used an imageboard b4???? It's a simple question.

No. 8777

File: 1549819901754.png (233.04 KB, 1321x331, screenshot.png)

I was kinda following this in the Azealia thread and the last Complaints thread, but this is just really confusing as a user, can you offer some clarity here?

nta but Why was this person banned (pic related)? I thought "hi cow" was against the rules too but I checked because of what this anon said and everything (regarding rules) was correct? So…you're banning the users that actually know your rules now instead of the user who is trying to enforce rules that don't technically exist or deciding what people get to talk about in that thread? If there's a reason other than that an explanation would be helpful because this makes mods look terrible tbh.

So, saw that in the AB thread, and then saw (what I assume was the same anon sperging about "hi cow" doesn't get redtexted or something in the last complaints thread) and mod said:
>We do not redtext everything, we do ban them though.
So then how is it a bannable offense if it's still not in the rules? Even after the rules were updated as recently as "January 22, 2019" according to the page? If you're banning people for it I guess I just don't understand why you still haven't added it to the rules or why it's not stated anywhere?

So then I guess my other question is are we not allowed to discuss the possibility that a cow is a farmer at all? Even if no one is "hi cow"-ing? Cause half of that thread (and past Celebricow threads) is talking about how Azealia is probably a farmer, and there's plenty of examples to allow for speculation. Is that still considered "hi cow" if we're not specifically accusing any user of being her? Just discussing the probability based on her actions?

Honestly not trying to argue or anything I'm just really trying to follow the logic here and understand the rules. Also cause Azealia is one of my favorite cows and but because of this I'm not sure what we're allowed to talk about anymore. Cause like I said just as someone seeing the situation from the outside it looks like:
>user a mini-mods thread, says they're breaking rules that don't actually exist (without reading any of the thread it seems like?)
>user b tells them the rules, says to read the thread (in a bitchy way, tbf)
>user a goes and whines in the complaints thread about "hi cow"
>user b permabanned…because….? person a threw a tantrum?
>?????

Anyways, any clarity would be helpful, thanks mod-senpai!!

No. 8778

>>8777
obviously not a farmhand, but i think a lot of them are tired of seeing infighting and general autism relating to what is being perceived as "mini-modding"
i saw the post you're referencing and thought it was warranted simply because of the unnecessary sperg-out

No. 8779

Can something be done about Shay's thread? The last ten replies have been nothing but damn arguing.

No. 8780

Can an admin clean up the anons in shays thread who are wildly tinfoiling about dogfucker-Chan (dawn) and the idea that she’s trying to sell her puppies to other gross dog fuckers? It’s shitting up the thread. Thanks.

No. 8781

>>8780
Thirding this–we finally have someone giving us fresh Shaytard milk and anons are speculating dumb shit about her. Please take care of it, mods, at least for the infighting.

No. 8782

>>8775
Why are you against it?

No. 8783

>>8777
This is one of the most autistic posts I have ever read on this site and I was here during Kikis sperg. Wow.

Just…wow. got any official diagnosis, buddy? If not I recommend getting it officially diagnosed, I bet you qualify for a tugboat.

No. 8784

>>8779
>>8780
>>8781

all this. At this point I have no idea what is going on, I can't tell what posts I should report for infighting because it got really out of hand.

No. 8785

File: 1549844089047.gif (1.59 MB, 332x332, F11vuyrf0_540.gif)

>>8778
I guess so, but then why not ban all parties in that case? They were both being obnoxious and shitty, so if both were banned that would make sense to me. I guess I just don't understand anons that go into a thread to be mad at people for discussing the subject of the thread. If that's not mini-modding or derailing then what is? Like, if one anon goes into a thread and picks a fight by basically saying anyone who believes x thing is "fucking retarded"….how is that "infighting"? Isn't that just 1 person starting shit with the rest of the thread?

I've seen a lot of confusing bans that don't seem to follow any rules (or logic), I just picked that one cause it seems like a good example. (Also because it was so clear that that one anon was the one sperging in the last thread about "hi cow").

>>8783
….asking for clarification on users being banned over rules that don't exist is "one of the most autistic posts you have ever read"? You must not read much friend.

No. 8786

>>8785
>if one anon goes into a thread and picks a fight by basically saying anyone who believes x thing is "fucking retarded"….how is that "infighting"? Isn't that just 1 person starting shit with the rest of the thread?

It's instigating infighting by virtue of seeking so start a fight on the site lol

No. 8787

>>8785
>"We do not redtext everything, we do ban them though." - Admin >>8764

No. 8788

>>8786
>It's instigating infighting by virtue of seeking so start a fight on the site lol
Are you having a stroke anon? What's happening here?

>>8787
you're literally quoting the exact post I said didn't make any sense in the first place >>8777

No. 8789

Thanks for vetting the Shay thread and I hope a staff member can stay vigilant in there. The Dawn obsession is still going. I personally hate the way any player gets venerated when they are opposed to Shay but anons really need to shut the fuck up about it all.

And please don't give that mess a tripcode.

No. 8790

File: 1549849640843.jpg (29.23 KB, 293x339, 1532766331086.jpg)

>>8788
>how is that "infighting"? Isn't that just 1 person starting shit with the rest of the thread?
You asked how the situation you described is infighting so I tried to explain why picking a fight in a thread is violating the no infighting rule even if nobody has responded to it yet.

No. 8791

>>8777

The only change made to the rules was updating Admin's email address.

No. 8792

>>8777
Just take your ban and be done with it. PS, AB is not a cow.

No. 8793

File: 1549855681979.png (323.66 KB, 1394x625, screenshot.png)

>>8790
Right…but the anon who started shit isn't the one that got banned, the anon that apparently followed the rules was, that's why I'm asking for more clarity here because it doesn't make any sense. Honest to god, can you not read? Why are you so personally offended by me asking a question here?

>>8792
Mods already approved the thread, so take it up with them if you're that upset. Already said I'm not that anon but judging by the established pattern, I'll end up getting banned too for asking a question in the complaints/issues thread, and the anons inciting the infighting and starting shit will not get banned. Because that seems to be the logic here.

Can we just stop with this already? Honestly this is why people think Azealia is a farmer, if you say anything about her anywhere spergs come out of the woodwork to scream about how she's not a cow or derail everything. I just came to this thread to ask for some clarification on rules in general, and you turned into an Azealia thing. Christ.

Mods, can you please just answer my question so I can leave? That's all I came here for, just some clarification.

No. 8794

>>8788
So if you're aware that not all bans get redtexted, what makes you think the anon who started it didn't also get banned? This sounds like you're butthurt you got redtexted and the other anon didn't.

No. 8795

File: 1549857889304.jpg (35.59 KB, 865x332, 9ZYMwsC.jpg)

>>8778
>>8791
>>8784
We're still working with the old rules so I'm unsure about where the confusion is. Here is a sneak peak of the new condensed global rules.
>>8793

>Right…but the anon who started shit isn't the one that got banned, the anon that apparently followed the rules was

You have no way of knowing that. Sometimes the more mass reported post get red texted so users know it was dealt with.

No. 8796

>>8795
>Sometimes the more mass reported post get red texted so users know it was dealt with.
Right, but what was being dealt with here exactly? That's what I'm asking for clarification on, just in general. What rule was broken here, so we can know not to do it in the future. Again, it's not just that thread, that just seemed like the most glaring example of it.

>You have no way of knowing that.

Right, I don't know that because there's no way for me to know that with the way the information is presented…which is why I'm here in this thread, asking for more clarification. But instead of answering any of my actual question you just picked out one random sentence that had very little to do with it. I still have any way of knowing that, because you haven't answered anything?

I appreciate you getting back to me Mod-sama and I'm really not trying to be combative or anything….but do you see how this is confusing for other users? Publicly displaying a ban on a comment that's literally quoting the correct use of your own rules, contrasted with no acknowledgement of the user who actually broke/is writing their own definition of the rules?

Can you just offer some more clarity on the rules here, since it seems like you the anon who directly quoted the rules was incorrect? Like on mini-modding or "hi cow" etc.

No. 8797

>>8796
I was the anon who asked why redtext isn't for every ban in the previous thread.

The answer seems to be that there is no fucking reason for who gets redtext. It's arbitrary.

No. 8798

>>8795
Happy to see new, succinct rules! I wonder if the phrase 'posters with a phallus' is going to trigger anyone.

No. 8802

Q: What is considered infighting?

>>8761
Can we define when exactly an argument turns into an infight thus making it bannable?
Because I get real sick of seeing a discussion where things start out reasonable/civil and then someone starts slinging personal attacks, and then things snowball from there.
I do feel like there's always one or more people more in the wrong than people who didn't really start it. Although I realize arguing is unproductive on either side and I'm guilty, I just hope this sort of rule is weighted.

No. 8803

>>8802
Ban length could probably vary but both parties should be punished to some degree bc you can always choose to drop it. People continue to argue to "win" which isn't really helping the thread getting shit up.

No. 8804

>>8795
Is there going to be an expanded version? There's a lot of "this isn't <thing>" and confusion over terms like cowtipping lately.

>>8796
The post you're (still) going on about was pretty obviously infighting and sperging. It shouldn't need any clarification, let alone this ongoing discussion.


Anyway, can someone please clean up the Miranda thread? It's been a swamp of Shut up, Miranda, ranting and useless commentary / shitposting for at least two threads now.

No. 8805

>>8803
Idk, I argue because I'm firm on my points. "Winning" to me would mean anons turn over to my point, which obv rarely happens. I feel like other anons take "winning" as demeaning the other side as much as possible until they quit.

No. 8806

File: 1549866427011.gif (1.98 MB, 480x270, vine.gif)

>>8796
>>8797
>>8800
>>8802
Glad to see I'm not the only one who's confused by this all the time and could use some more explanation. I feel like 85% of bans I see make zero sense and just look like mods are banning whoever they feel like for no discernible reason (because we can't see who's samefagging or whatever), but knowing that not all bans are redtexted just makes it even more confusing. The rules are all numbered, would it really be that difficult to just put the number of the rule broken instead of just a catch-all "(USER HAS BEEN PUT OUT TO PASTURE)"?

>>8796
>>8777
this makes less than zero sense, if that's possible. I always considered mini-modding to be anyone who says what can or can't be discussed in a thread, is that not correct? I see users all the time act like their opinion is the law on what constitutes nitpicking or what's worth talking about, and there's never any consequence to it at all (that we can see) even though it's super disruptive and derails conversation and leads to infighting.

Basically "fighting" in threads should only ever be people's opinions on the subject. The rules should be so clear that there should be no room for users to constantly fight about their own interpretation of them in threads. If a thread is already in motion with active participants or mods have specifically approved a subject, comments like >>8792 or anything similar should be bannable. If you don't like a thread or don't think a cow deserves one, then don't look at it. Just move on from that shit, this shouldn't still be happening.

No. 8807

>>8806
>I feel like 85% of bans I see make zero sense
Then you need to integrate more. It's simple really.

No. 8808

>>8796
>I still have any way of knowing that, because you haven't answered anything?
No, you actually still have no way of knowing. For the record you were being an extreme minimod to the point where you were derailing the thread. It wasn't even one person responding to you, it was multiple anons. If you're here to ask me if I spanked the other anons instead of reflecting on your own ban then you've come to the wrong place.
>>8802
I would think slinging personal attacks randomly is infighting. However I think the person instigating should face the hardest ban, not the anons responding unless it's gotten way out of hand.
>>8806
The put of of pasture message should be used when the ban reason is obvious, like male posting or an obvious samefag or spergchan.
>>8797
Pretty much but it really depends on how many anons have reported the post and whether or not the post can serve as an example of frowned upon behavior.

No. 8809

>>8805
Right, but remember the context is infighting which is different from a debate on a real topic. Intellectual discourse within the thread's framework is kosher as far as I've seen.

If you're debating something OT or flaming back and forth you are part of the problem too so how "firm" you are doesn't really matter since LC isn't debate club. You should be dropping it instead of trying to win.

No. 8810

>>8808
>For the record you were being an extreme minimod to the point where you were derailing the thread. It wasn't even one person responding to you, it was multiple anons.
Wait, what now? Your replying to my post, I'm >>8777 who was trying to understand the ban logic here, but I'm not the OP of the post I was asking about…which I think is who you're trying to address here? I have no idea what any of this means or who you're talking about. Who was being a mini-mod? Who was derailing the thread? There's only 5 posts in that entire "infighting" interaction, who was being responded to by multiple anons? What are you talking about?

>If you're here to ask me if I spanked the other anons instead of reflecting on your own ban then you've come to the wrong place.

Again, not that anon and I literally never asked that, I just asked for clarification on what rule was broken there to earn a ban, because it's unclear

>The put of of pasture message should be used when the ban reason is obvious, like male posting or an obvious samefag or spergchan.

Except nobody can see any of that info except mods? How is it "obvious" to the rest of the site's users? Again, there's only 5 posts in what appears to be a multiple-person interaction, so what exactly counts as being a spergchan and who's the "obvious samefag" in that situation?

>No, you actually still have no way of knowing.

What does this even mean?

Seriously? Is this the new farmhand tactic? Ban people for no clear reason, start fights with users who ask for clarity and accuse them of being samefag (despite being able to see IP info, etc) because info that no one but farmhands can see is "obvious"? Literally all I was looking for was "they were banned because of rule #x" but you just made it 100x worse and more unclear. I've been on this site for years and that was some of the worst sperging I've ever seen.

No. 8811

>>8796
>>8808
This is amazing.
>Get banned for being an autistic spaz
>Go on /meta/ pretending it's not your post
>wHy DiD tHiS aNoN gEt BaNnEd? ToTaLlY wAsNt Me
>Why was this anon banned omg no reason for it
>Multiple people explain why
>Buut whyyy?
>Continue on insisting you were dindu
>BUT DID THE OTHER SIDE GET BAAANNEED TOOO

You clearly didn't get banned for long enough.

Btw, I think diagnostic response is a month so I reckon a two month ban would get you enough time for therapy AND a diagnosis?? Just throwing that out there.

No. 8814

The majority of bans look like a mod picked a word from the rules and slapped it into a post they didnt like.

>>8807
Dont be disingenuous please, the majority of bans dont make sense and its pretty obvious.
Also, very rich of you to tell the other anon to integrate when the mods stick out as very new to imageboards.

No. 8815

>>8811
That anon's post was so autistic it was the only one that deserved redtext. Don't understand how she can't see that.

No. 8817

File: 1549889973322.png (139.25 KB, 686x416, pnp.png)

Why was this anon banned in the PNP thread?
>>>/snow/753018

The post is saged and doesn't seem to break any rules? It's a screenshot of that t-shirt design she stole from Lolcow (and pretended it was her idea), so IMO it's relevant.

No. 8818

>>8809
Well sis that's why I'm asking for clarification of what constitutes infighting, because there's never been a set definition. I'm saying lots of arguing starts as debate but some anons turn into an infight so where's the line. It made sense back before we had general boards because nobody wanted to browse dedicated lolcow or snowflake threads and have to scroll through a million replies of ot arguing.
However, there's always been a free for all attitude when it comes to arguing on ot though, and the rules for what is permissed have always flexed depending on the moderation team. So that's why I'm bringing it up to maybe add something into the rules since 'infighting' was specifically mentioned. That way there's no more arbitrary interpretations.

No. 8819

>>8807
am i in the minority agreeing here?
i rarely see bans that don't make sense besides the little issues we were having with the new farmhands a couple weeks back.
hell, i've caught a few bans in the last week or so i can't really argue with.
sometimes you just have to take your L and wait out the ban.
everyone has a right to appeal too.

No. 8820

>>8817
you really think a picture of her holding a t shirt with zero context is relevant in any way?

No. 8821

>>8817
i'm guessing because there was basically no context for the reason of posting the shirt (which is old news that it even exists)

No. 8823

>>8814
I'm not being disingenuous in the slightest. Like >>8819 I generally have no trouble understanding the context of a redtext I see in a thread. I've only been banned unfairly once on this board and it was not under this new team nor under the first admin. If the staff and other experienced users can see the context, then the problem is you.

No. 8824

>>8820
In the context of the thread, yes, because most frequent readers know what's this about and she's bringing the t-shirt up again now for some reason. I don't think every screenshot needs an elaborate explanation, or does it suddenly need one?

No. 8825

>>8824
a picture of her wearing a t shirt everyone's already discussed is not milk and not worthy of being posted
the pnp thread is under strict moderation because it was highly contested that it even be brought back
so post better content or deal with the bans and possibly see the threads closed down again

No. 8826

>>8825
NTA but redtext not giving a reason is the reason you guys are having this argument now right? Admin claims it happens when the ban reason is "clear" but it's evidently not because there are anons who don't think so.

I called out weeb insecurity when /w/ was made, now gonna call out unnecessary infighting bait on the redtext being temperamental. Declare a number of reports for redtext to appear, and always give an actual reason for the ban in the redtext. End of the stupid vague arguments I am so sick of reading in these threads.

No. 8827

>>8807
Nta but nah. I've been coming here for years and some shit is just mysterious because mods, etc. don't explain bans as they occur. It seems flippant sometimes, even. I'm so sick of the LuRk MoRe attitude. It reeks of falsely inflated ego. Stop.

>>8826
>Declare a number of reports for redtext to appear, and always give an actual reason for the ban in the redtext. End of the stupid vague arguments I am so sick of reading in these threads.
It's really very simple. Idk why the mods are making this so convoluted and retarded.

No. 8828

I've gotta agree that numbered reporting seems like it would cause less issues and it does seem easier than typing "USER HAS BEEN PUT OUT TO PASTURE" although I still like seeing that for scrotes, kek.

No. 8829

>>8826
i'm not one of the anons arguing about it, i'm one that doesn't give a fuck about micromanaging the mods and admin as far as bans are concerned
most of the (put out to pasture) redtexts i see are pretty obvious to me idk

No. 8830

>>8828
Yeah, I'm all for it being the phrase for scrotes cause it amuses me too. Aside from that, make shit clear and functional. Seems like Admin already takes every step with this goal in mind so I see no reason not to implement this # based redtext qualifier with ban-reason disclosed.

No. 8831

I'd love to see anons draw board-tan more and I don't think the "offcial art thread" should be in /meta/. Wouldn't it be better if it was in /ot/ so more farmers could see it?

No. 8833

File: 1549916192918.png (111.11 KB, 720x720, IMG_20190211_121549.png)

I see you farmhand!!
Tysm for considering the will of us plebs!!

No. 8834

>>8833
It's sad that you guys are so retarded they had to idiot proof redtext bans. You literally need to have even the most obvious rule breaking spelled out to you in giant red letters to pick up on it.
>b-but stop calling us unintegrated newfags!

No. 8837

>>8834
Obvious rule breaking can just have the [USER HAS BEEN PUT OUT TO PASTURE] redtext as far as I'm concerned. But seeing as this is an anonymous board, it's not always apparent when someone is excessively posting in succession (just one example). I don't understand why calling out users publicly and elaborating on bans is such a big deal to you. It will actually help integration. Don't we all want better posts?
Admin and mods don't have to do anything they don't agree with. I'm just gonna leave this at that.

No. 8838

>>8837
She's posturing for no reason. Chalk it up to autism that rejects any change at all.

No. 8839

File: 1549946570877.png (84.21 KB, 800x460, Screenshot_2019-02-11-20-40-20…)

This type of shit needs to stop, ie. derailing to infight after the offending anon has been redtexted.

>>>/pt/128373

No. 8840

>>8839
this. this is some primitive fucking idiot shit right here.

No. 8841

>>8818

Also, infighting is not explicitly included in the rules. It is considered derailing and thus a bannable offense.

No. 8844

File: 1549948483979.png (29.21 KB, 901x577, fuckingstupid.png)

this was pretty fucking stupid and i don't even care if i get banned for evading.

/ot/ is supposed to be a lax board.

No. 8847

>>8844

Admin, your email address in ban notices needs to be updated!

>>8839

Also, this thread should perhaps be locked since she is imprisoned. Even KF locked their thread on her.

No. 8848

>>8844
Imagine giving a 2 day ban for someone's hurt feels. FFS infighting is arguing and how the hell can you ban someone's opinion as trolling if they've only written one post. Her post after that before she got banned was fine. I was happy in the townhall, but I hope these aren't the changes we'll be seeing.

No. 8849

>>8844
What thread is this from?

No. 8851

>>8849
Female Gaze. The thread has been going strong without derailment and with a high number of thoughtful input so her post quality stood out compared to the other posts by far.

No. 8852

>>8851
How do you know if she hadn't posted other things? There are multiple posts in the thread with that typing style.

No. 8853

The fakeboi thread is a fucking mess. I can't tell what it's supposed to be about. I feel like a lot of people use it to post incidental drama about people who happen to be fakebois.

No. 8854

>>8851
Yep, no contribution. Like how is she even in this thread complaining.
Seems like she thinks /ot/ has less rules or something.

No. 8855

>>8854
>Seems like she thinks /ot/ has less rules or something.

/ot/ does have less rules, asshat. Admin even stated that /ot/ and /g/ are getting a new set of rules. They have never really had the same rules anyway.

No. 8856

Is this thread just a place to appeal bans now?

No. 8859

>>8855
Is this stated somewhere? Sorry for retardation.

No. 8860

>>8859
Nta but have you ever even read the rules?

No. 8861

>>8856
no it's a place to bitch about a 30 minute ban that already expired or red text. that said, I disagree with >>8844 's ban.

No. 8862

>>8859
Yes, see >>8761.

No. 8865

>>8860
Yeah, that was the first thing I did before asking. The rules page only has specific rules for /pt/ and /snow/.

>>8862
Thanks for the heads up! Appreciate it.

No. 8866

Is the site loading slowly for anyone else in the past few hours?

No. 8868

>>8859
>>8865

The first section are rules for all forums. The second section are additional rules for /pt/ and /snow/. Therefore /ot/ has fewer rules than /pt/ and /snow/.

No. 8869

>>8841
>Also, infighting is not explicitly included in the rules.

Infighting was specifically mentioned in the new set of rules from last thread that admin wanted to propose, which I quoted in my OP.

No. 8870

>>8868
Touché, thanks for spoon feeding my ignorant self lol

No. 8873

>>>/snow/777551

Was the redtext for this image?

http://archive.fo/LkNI1

There is no personal information on her LinkedIn page, and the information that is there she posted herself.

A screencap of her LinkedIn page was posted on GG via Imgur. It was removed almost immediately from Imgur, presumably because she lodged a complaint. Then the lolcow.farm link was posted. The GG mods have not redacted it, and their policy regarding doxing is far more strict than ours.

No. 8874

>>>/snow/333727

Anons keep bumping the thread with milkless posts and not posting evidence.

No. 8875

i didn't sage my post in the unpopular opinions thread, but it didn't bump to the top of the catalog. is the thread on autosage? or am i on autosage? kek

No. 8876

>>8875
it hit the bump limit. someone needs to make a new thread.

No. 8877

>>8873
Hi, first of all the post was necro. A LinkedIn profile of a snowflake isn't milk and due to the persons post history, it seems more like an attempt to dox/vendetta. The picture got removed/considered dox because of the circumstances.

No. 8878

>>8844
if you look at the new rules for /ot, they're not lax w/r/t infighting or starting shit. that post is trying to start shit, no?

No. 8879

Is this post not doxxing? I reported it a few days ago but it's still up.
>>>/snow/777365

No. 8880

>>8877

It looks like the user on GG posted it here for lack of anywhere else to post it (it's too large to be posted directly on GG). They are discussing her CV there, not attempting to dox her. I checked her thread there after seeing her thread here necro'ed. She accuses everyone on every forum discussing her of cyber bullying and harassment. Surely I wish her and her cats dead by virtue of thinking about her right now!

No. 8881

>>8879
how the hell is it doxxing? it's a cap of a public facebook comment(this)

No. 8882

>>8881
Okay, fair enough. I just figured since it's in the personal lolcows thread it was kinda fucked up/doxxing to put her full name out there.(is an)

No. 8883

File: 1550105348926.jpeg (161.1 KB, 944x638, 647DFE6E-CD36-4F59-8530-9AE774…)

I kept trying to post on snow, multiple times, and every time I couldn’t because of someone else’s ban notice. It’s not my post. I don’t even post in jill’s thread and I’m not an anachan. I assume it’s from ip cycling, since it’s happened before to many anons. So I was like whatevs, since it said it would expire as soon as it I saw it. But now anytime I try to post in snow this ban shows up (which I appealed) and won’t let any of my posts go through. It’s kinda annoying.

>pic related is before and after appealing ban
(infighting)

No. 8884

>>8883
are you using a vpn?(example)

No. 8885

>>8878
Exactly.(assume this was a warning ban)

No. 8887

>>8884
Nope, no proxy and no vpn. I just assumed it was ip cycling. I’ve gotten 4 bans previous before that weren’t mine, including one ment for Sarah from the onision threads. But this one wouldn’t let me post on snow for 5 hours after I had viewed it. I can post now though, so it’s fixed thankfully!

No. 8888

>>8887
Yikes. Does that mean there are farmers close to you that are constantly shitposting or something? You live in an unlucky area lol.

>>8834
I don't really get the issue with mods redtexting. It makes the moderation visible to everyone and is usually humorous. It helps out everyone who sees it, not just the farmer who got banned.(so this is why most boards don't do this)

No. 8889

I am unaware of how many bans are actually given out on a thread to thread basis, so if it would truly look like that, it would be quite the eyesore.
I guess it makes sense to only redtext the worst offenders and leave the rest unmarked.
My bad, I didn't even really think of the back to back infighting bans which are probably the most common after namefagging bans.

No. 8890

I appreciate the robot, 32 inch waist-chan, and gold star icons!

No. 8891

Why not mark the initial post with a message and just (b) for the other posts? Rather see a little b than nothing

No. 8892

>this is an infighting example

But >>8883 and >>8884 are not part of that thread.

No. 8893

>>8892
I think the mod was just trying to show what infighting bans WOULD look like (ie back to back redtexts) not that those posts were actually infighting. But I could be completely wrong.
>>8890
Yeah they always make me chuckle when I see them.

No. 8894

File: 1550210693947.png (42.79 KB, 653x179, dont type.PNG)

just curious, i've seen this type of thing getting banned before, but when people are posting like this referencing the meme, should they really be banned?

No. 8895

>>8894
5. Integration
Express yourself in a way that doesn't make you stand out from other anonymous users. This means avoiding:
emojis or emoticons
ALL CAPS
a lot of punctuation??????!!!!!
other obnoxiusoius typign sTYLES
Emojis are banned too even when people use them to reference memes.
The anon wasn't banned for long but this is a textbook example of an obnoxious typing style.

No. 8897

In recent months novice anons have been posting shit OP's immediately after the thread reaches 1100 comments, sniping the OP's from the anons who have been regularly posting excellent OP's. This just happened in the Taylor Nicole Dean thread. Anons even suggested requesting the OP be deleted because it is so bad.

Many of the regular OP anons begin preparing their OP's in advance, even taking notes during the course of the thread. Could anons please respect the work that they put into providing the site with quality OP's?

No. 8898

File: 1550226089321.jpg (51.34 KB, 530x548, 34d.jpg)

>>8895
But admin it's a meme.

No. 8900

>>8839

Who keeps doing this?

>>>/snow/778432

No. 8901

>>8894
I feel like the new farmhands are noobs and we're going to have to deal with retarded bans from here on out. Admin seems to stand behind them, so gotta accept it and move on I suppose.

Also I'll never understand how they Shay thread is allowed, especially in the face of the PNP thread ban/perma-sage. I've accepted that rule enforcement here isn't objective anymore. It blows, but whatever I guess.

No. 8902

File: 1550251582614.png (10.03 KB, 264x40, Screen Shot 39.png)

>>8833
Been starting more clear and descriptive red-texts pop up in /snow/, just wanted to say it's not going unnoticed and it's nice to see our requests for more clarity be acknowledged. Even this >>8895 is so much more helpful for following the admins' thought process. It just makes it so much more cut and dry, and takes the "emotion" out of it. For what it's worth if this pattern continues, I just posting the rule number is clear enough. I don't think you should ever have to repost the whole rule for someone (that's just more work for yall), even just a point in the right direction is a 100x more helpful.

>>8888
>It helps out everyone who sees it, not just the farmer who got banned.
Just seconding this notion in general. This kind of >>8834 elitist bullshit attitude is just stupid and the cause of so much infighting all over the site. There's literally no possible way clarity could make the site worse unless you're triggered by the color red. Can you imagine how much less derailing/infighting there would be if you just subtracted the amount of anons throwing tantrums and stomping their feet calling everyone retarded or autist because they had to read one extra line of text? Obviously sometimes idiots/newfags do pop up in threads and then its very clearly warranted, but the amount of fighting over rule interpretation/acceptable site behavior has gotten excessive. It's an anonymous gossip website, not an elite club you can only be in if you know some secret set of rules and behaviors that don't align with any rules or board culture info posted.

Anyways, just wanted to say we appreciate it!

No. 8903

>>8894
Tbf it's a stupid meme and makes anyone using it look underage. It's not even funny, just obnoxious.

No. 8904

>>8897
As a regular creator I second this. It actually takes time and effort to put together a good OP, half-assed jobs stick out like a sore thumb and detract from the fun.

No. 8905

>>8883
I agree. I have also been banned for a post I didn’t make. I didn’t appeal it or anything though because the ban had already expired.

No. 8906

>>8895
>>8898
>>8894
I came here to ask about this too. Does admin not get that it’s a meme that has been around for a year? I get we have new farmhands but some of you are acting like newfags.

No. 8907

the mods in the momo thread have gotten WAY too strict. if one sentence of a post could be considered a nitpick, you get banned. commenting on her appearance whatsoever, including clothing, is apparently bannable. she's a costhot popular for looking ridiculous, we're not allowed to comment on it now?

No. 8908

File: 1550276861399.jpg (27.07 KB, 500x330, yndnxyf597c21.jpg)

how much longer til we get news on that leech kelly jean's threads? it's been months and nobody has said anything.

No. 8909

>>8907
>>8906
these, i've been noticing this shit happening way more often the last 2-4 weeks or so. it's kind of annoying in my opinion.

No. 8910

>>8904

I write OP's for several threads. I have the OP's I manage in my text files and update them as the thread progresses. Someone sniped one after 1101 posts. I replied that they didn't update the OP and got bitched at for complaining.

No. 8911

>>8902

And redtexting would reduce mods' workload. The same comments won't be reported over and over.

No. 8913

Admin, can you look into the bug that prevents deleting posts within 30 minutes? This was brought up in the last thread, too.

I am using Chrome on Android. I just posted a few images to the Raven thread. After posting three I wanted to delete the second one to add a comment and I was unable to.

No. 8914

>>8913
Weird, I use Chrome on Android and haven't run into this issue. & I delete posts all the time (within 30 min).

No. 8915

>>8911
It actually doesn't make a difference. Farmers still report the same posts even when we do redtext for that exact reason. (and there's usually never report reasons either)
>>8913
This isn't a bug, the only time window to delete posts is the first 30 minutes.
>>8898
>>8906
I know it's a meme but this isn't twitter. Second of all, I placed the ban myself because obnoxious typing styles violate imageboard culture and show a lack of integration.
>>8907
I think you guys just got used to being able to nitpick moo's facial cleanser choices and obesity without repercussions. If you disagree with a ban, appeal it. Crazy nitpicks are being moderated and it should be noticeable. Actually upholding the rule against nitpicking isn't a newfag thing to do.

No. 8916

>>8904
I agree too, but the infighting in Shay’s thread about this is getting insane

No. 8918

>>8917
Maybe it's related to the dynamic IP on your mobile device not allowing you to delete (hence the automatic password generation). If this happens on desktop I'll have to look into it further but thanks for bringing that up.

No. 8923

>>8915

You misread/misunderstand. I am sometimes unable to delete within 30 minutes. This has happened with both image posts without text, image posts with text, and text only comments.

Also, there have been a couple of instances where I posted a series of images, needed to delete three images, but was able to only delete two.

I first posted about it in >>>/meta/6610. Other anons replied saying it happens to them on desktop.

At the time I asked if it was a browser issue because I had just updated Chrome. After that update my browser window reloads every time leave the tab and return to it.

Since then I have come to believe it is more than an issue related to the update. The error is intermittent and inconsistent. And I can close the tab completely and reopen the site and still delete my comment as I did with >>8817.

I posted about it again in the last thread, and Admin did not reply.

No. 8924

>>8923
ntadmin but could it be a problem with the password? jsyk if your ip changes, you clear your cookies, etc. it changes.

No. 8925

>>8924

Does anything I described involve changing IP or clearing cookies?

No. 8926

when will the “moderators” stop being mongoloids? no, when will this website finally get a clue about decent board culture? “autism” is not a ban reason, its pure cringe. i hate to say it but its becoming unbearable to browse or generally be an active contributor because of the fucked up moderation. i don’t get why over the course of the past several months someone decided to run this place like a dictatorship. you can’t post your opinion on anything because it warrants OT ban, you can’t communicate with other users within the thread because it warrants an OT ban, you can’t DISCUSS anything without getting banned unless its mindless shit talking, even if its schizo level tinfoil or just retarded, but that seems to get a pass on most threads for some reason.
there was a time when you could have back and forths with other users and deviate the discussions you have, and most importantly ENJOY posting here instead of feeling like you need to be wary of some horrendous rules which really shouldn’t exist on a chan style imageboard or, god forbid, tiptoe around bitch moderators.

No. 8928

Mods, please delete robot bullshit instead of banning+closing and letting it fester.
Incels get off on thrashing female spaces and their vile hate being read.
No need to mark/red text, just delete and move on.

No. 8929

Someone needs to delete the robot thread in /ot/ so they don’t keep shitposting

No. 8930

>>8928
>>8929
this this this. what's the point of basically archiving this kind of stuff anyways? it just gets them excited to have their shit kept on here, and i'm technologically retarded, but isn't it a waste of mod and admin's money clogging up space with their stupid crap?

No. 8932

I really like how the site is running so far. My only real complaint are new fags who don't post images and link to twitter /IG accounts instead. It's actually really annoying because it keeps happening. They dont screenshot at all.

No. 8933

Holy shit can someone please ban every single one of the retards fighting in the vent thread please

No. 8935

>>8932
in typing 'new fag' you ironically reveal yourself a newfag. peace out, fam.

No. 8936

>>8932
TY and agree.

No. 8937

An increasing trend in minimodding is attempting to shut down speculation with, "Don't give the cow ideas! She's going to read what you said and do it!"

No. 8938

>>8937
oh god I hate that. policing what you can and can't say and using [redacted].

No. 8939

>>8908

Based on the responses of the last Admin, apparently the host provider doesn't understand section 230 and that the US does not have personality protection laws (Kelly claims that publishing her image, regardless of its source, violates the law).

No. 8940


No. 8941

>>8926
don't act like an autist and you won't get a ban for being autistic. It's really not that hard.

No. 8942

can someone please do something about the like 30 posts in shayna's thread about a fucking chipped tooth???

No. 8943

>>8938
The [redacted] thing is so fucking autistic it causes me physical pain.

No. 8944

>>8915
"obnoxious typing styles violate imageboard culture and show a lack of integration."

lmao what the actual fuck … violates imageboard culture should be a meme unto itself, jfc.

>>8939
I am so surprised this hasn't been abused a whole lot more. Is it still the same host?

No. 8945

can something be done about the newphew crush sperg? It continuously derails threads

No. 8946

>>8945
They were banned a day ago.

No. 8947

>>8915
are you a fucking retard, admin? i was with you for a lot of stuff but the meme isn't a typing style that people use to type, it's like being sarcastic. ffs.

No. 8948

>>8947
Are people really still going on days later over what was probably a 30 minute ban? Whew.

No. 8949

May be a good idea to auto-sage the RealStreamNews thread in /snow/. There is never any actual milk and the thread is constantly self bumped by RSN himself with no contribution or his his newfag orbiter losers with their petty interpersonal infighting.

No. 8950

>>8948
lol maybe if admin didn't constantly out herself as a fat normie we wouldn't have this issue.

No. 8951

The new farmhands are obnoxious as fuck. There's nothing more annoying than seeing a thread full of nitpicky redtext. And for the claim that the new admin has been here since the beginning, it sure doesn't seem like it. Gut the whole team, tbh.

No. 8952

>>8951
all the redtext is because of the people itt insisting that every single minute ban needs a redtext
see:
>>8911
>>8902
>>8888
>>8837
>>8827
>>8826
>>8814
etc etc etc

No. 8953

>>8952
Its a tricky one-not all new farmhands are red texting however certain posts will get reported numerous times because anons do not know they have been delt with because of no red text. Damn if you do damned if you dont.

No. 8954

>>8950
>people who don't like my boring fat teenager normie twitter memes are fat normies
Nice logic. Who cares this much about a 2017 spongebob meme thats gonna last for like 3 more months

No. 8956

can a farmhand please take a look at the shay thread? every time someone says something remotely interesting or attempts to get discussion going past 'nasty pussy' they get reamed while at the same time people post not-milky pictures of her walls or her stuffed animals to sperg about the filth. help, farmhands.

No. 8957

>>8956
people are just posting social media updates and others are posting paragraphs of tinfoil that's already been discussed and is tired. none of it is really banworthy imo.

No. 8958

>>8915
>I think you guys just got used to being able to nitpick moo's facial cleanser choices and obesity without repercussions.

I know you're currently getting shit on for putting the kibosh to the Moo nitpicking, but kudos to you because you're absolutely correct. People in that thread were getting so obsessed they sounded like mentally ill cows themselves. I hope one day /pt/ will be readable for me again.

No. 8959

Please ban this person.

>>>/snow/779295
>>>/w/36435

No. 8961

>>8958
This. The bans and strict moderation in the momo thread is justified, the boob vein a-logs there got so used to Dakota stan level nitpicking it just ruined the threads for everyone and made all the posters look like autistic nutjobs. The fanficcing about her got so out of hand that I'd rather have people be banned for constant "speculation" (ridiculous tinfoiling) than let everything pass. The people currently screeching about jnig taking a hand selfie with her sound like all those obsessed jealous thots on twitter constantly "burning" momo with regurgitated milk for social media clout. Momo does enough awful shit on her own, you don't have to make up stuff.

No. 8962

Terrible admin/mod team on this site, it's pretty much dead because people get banned for having discussion. There's no back and forth between users because of the absurd "derailment" bans, only certain opinions are allowed and encouraged and everything else seems to be shot down by both the mods and the mini mods, and banning nitpick on a website full of women bitching about other women is retarded and a guaranteed way to bury the site. Dead site, dead threads.

No. 8963

File: 1550590583209.jpg (145.68 KB, 971x817, Into the trash it goes.jpg)

>>8962
Maybe if you posted according to the rules, you would not get banned.

Let me guess you're one of the retards on RSN thread spamming or the nephew pedo fucker who wouldnt shut up about it?
>banning nitpick on a website full of women
Oh wait nevermind, spotted the femcel.

No. 8964

>>8908
>>8939
seconding this. Maybe at this point we should just make one without any patreon pics? I think that what the main problem was, judging by her sperging in the old threads

No. 8965

File: 1550604231833.jpeg (340.92 KB, 1242x2208, 631F24B2-B40F-499B-9EC5-B0B53E…)

We have an alt-righter / male on the mod team.
Why would I be banned for saying this 3 DAYS ago unless there's a male/ female tradthot salty I said this about one of them?!

No. 8966

>>8965
uhhh… no you just needed to sage

No. 8967

File: 1550604469083.png (311.02 KB, 1242x2208, 42CF3AC0-197F-4B04-8260-F5183E…)

>>8965
Also I tried reporting this post for racebait in the Stell Bell thread but I couldn't becuase the dialog box came back as

"true"

Agreeing with them I see.

No. 8968

>>8966
But to ban me for something I did a few days ago?

No. 8969

>>8968
it said you posted it yesterday and the ban was filed yesterday

No. 8970

>>8967
you can't report until your ban is expired, you hadn't tried to post yet so the ban hadn't cleared.
can you please learn how this site works before you come in bitching about nothing?

No. 8971

>>8970
Read my pic retard, it was lifted yesterday

No. 8972

>>8971
banned 02/18/2019
it is now 02/19/2019
do better

No. 8973

>>8971
…reread my post.
since you received the notification that you were banned and it is now lifted, you should be able to report.
if you tried to report before you tried to post and received your ban notif, that's probably why it didn't let you.
is it still not letting you report? doubtful.

No. 8974

>>8972
Well I was able to report it now so mods were watching

Cope

No. 8976

>>8974
or your ban expired.
it's okay to be wrong, you know?

No. 8977

>>8976
lmao. no, anon, farmhands are watching their every move.

No. 8978

>>8967
>"true"
>Agreeing with them I see.
Lmao, I'm not even that tech savvy but I'd greater assume that's a script message or error.
Anon, you're a little too mad about this. Just a tad.

No. 8979

>>8974
You actually shouldn't be able to post right now because you have another active ban for infighting in /ot/, per usual. However it seems you haven't seen the ban so it isn't technically your fault, just don't pretend that you don't know why you got the ban 11 hours ago. If you don't want to keep getting bans like this then learn to post like an adult and stop acting like a schizophrenic toddler.

No. 8980

>>8964

In October I discovered that Admin had moved her thread to https://lolcow.farm/practest/ by searching for "site:lolcow.farm kelly jean". When I asked about it here Admin did not reply and quickly removed the directory.

Now when I search the only pic I can find by key words is >>>/pt/82417
https://lolcow.farm/pt/src/1429121380832.png

There may be more images in the old CGL threads.

DMCA complaints are required to list each individual file. Did she or her attorneys actually comb through the entire site for all of the images?

IIRC, Admin stated that her complaint regarded any unauthorized use of her image. This right is only granted with personality protection laws. Neither the US nor the UK (her country of residence) has such laws.

If her complaint is valid internationally then she will be able to have this archive removed http://archive.is/7F3Yn

No. 8981

OT but these assblasted anons are a hoot, this thread is more entertaining than half the shit in snow currently.

No. 8983

File: 1550611285122.gif (366.02 KB, 267x200, giphy.gif)

>>8981
IKR? They are bitching over literally nothing.

No. 8984

the taylor nicole dean thread is a dead horse beaten to a pulp. she hasn’t posted anything in a while and as a result, the ENTIRETY of the thread is baseless speculation, reposting milkless and irrelevant screenshots of jen’s twitter and jonny’s instagram, and a ton of tinfoiling. i wish sage still existed in /pt, not that anyone would fuckin use it.

No. 8986

>>8984
she should just be moved back to /snow/ at this point

No. 8987

>>8986
Not really anon. She's /pt/ worthy, just taking a break to wallow in her heroin addiction. New anons in the thread can't handle it, they think she will deliver 24/7 and it will be a 24/7 comment parade. I'm more active reporting cat pee posts in that thread than actually posting in it rn.

No. 8988

There is a very suspicious, dedicated whiteknight in Taylor R's thread. It's the same person and they literally spammed the thread with unreasonable whiteknighting and accusing everyone of being Kiki.

No. 8989

Can their be a list of requirements to make a thread? I really feel like this website is becoming more like Pretty Ugly Little Liars and Lipstick Alley rather than being an image board for cows. Everyone and their mother who someone happens to dislike shouldn’t have a thread imo. Being a weeb alone isn’t indicative of needing a thread(see: the new net idol thread in /w/). Yeah a shit ton of cam girls / e whores are cringe worthy like dolly Mattel but being a slut alone isn’t worth a thread. I would actually prefer a clean up of the site with less threads but much higher quality. Or at least 4chan’s system of deleting the shit ones after a while.

No. 8990

>>8989
shay is certainly extremely cringe but even her thread is a fucking mess, it’s full of 32 inch waist chans wrt: everything BUT her waist kek. a lot of threads in snow have become basically unreadable because they’re just 600+ posts of “lol she’s so ugly her nose is huge!1!!1!”

No. 8991

>>8990
it's on par with everything else in /snow/ and /pt/ tho
when the milk is sparse the low blows come out

No. 8992

This is old and shit and I missed townhall and the last complaint thread about radical feminism and GC getting split.
Gender critical feminism and radical feminism are basically the same thing with some slight differences. It's a little confusing.
I think that it might me worth renaming GC to peak trans or trans critical or something like that if the threads have to be split. But if they ever get merged again I think it would be worth making it clear that broader radfem topics like makeup/sex work/surrogacy would be allowed but that the discussions need to stay civilized and way less antagonistic. Plenty of radfems are willing to have a dialog with women who like makeup w/o calling them handmaidens if they dont call us man-hating legbeards, and I'm sure plenty of women who wear makeup have it in them to not get upset when someone criticizes makeup from a political standpoint. I'm fine with man hate getting its own thread because that's a real hot topic and it makes any radfem discussion anywhere turn to shit.

Got a warning ban for posting about makeup in GC and I'm totally fine with moving it to the radfem thread but I'm still really confused as to why they needed to be split in the first place.

No. 8993

Can y'all consider moving the radfem thread and the pink pill thread to /g/? Gender Critical can stay in /ot/ but those two would fit better in /g/.

No. 8994

>>8989
Yeah the new rules will be uploaded soon and I agree that we need better guidelines for threads. Too many subtle vendettas out there and being a camgirl or fat doesn't automatically make someone a cow.
>>8991
Nitpicking is a huge issue because of this. Anons don't know how to take a break and insist on posting nitpicks for the next 2 threads.
>>8992
That's where you're wrong anon. GC is for tranny sperging and the radfem thread is for radfems to fight about who's the most radfem of them all.
>>8993
Discussion stays in /ot/.

No. 8995

>>8992

General discussion of feminism was never included in the GC thread. This is why the RF thread was made.

>It was originally created by Admin as an amalgamation of the TERF and Transgender threads.

No. 8996

i like new mods/admin ty 4 your service

No. 8997

>>8994
Reading this made me so frigging happy. Thanks Admin, a lot of us appreciate what you're doing.

No. 8998

>>8996
Ty anon!

No. 8999

>>8994
thank you admin

No. 9000

okay i appreciate the work farmhands and admin are doing and i take my bans and move on, they're usually warranted.
what i'm annoyed with is the veiled threats in minor bans like "you've been warned" or "if you keep this up your bans will get longer" etc. etc.
like, the ban in itself is the warning. you guys try to make it sound like you're going to come and kick my ass or something and it makes me not want to post or contribute at all.
just calm down the power tripping.

No. 9001

>>8994
Admin can we please get some kind of answer for
>>8980 >>8908

New thread or nah? Doesn't need to be in-depth. Thanks

No. 9002

File: 1550788249109.jpg (155.05 KB, 636x1170, wew lad.jpg)

people were right about the bans. is ur team autistic? i didn't know blowjob would be taken so literally and it's obvious from my post history on that ip that i'm a woman.

the least your team could do is check their shit before getting all ban happy.

No. 9003

>>9002
also even if i was a guy, since the ban already expired and was filed today, that means yall are keeping nasty ass dudes on this site instead of getting rid of them entirely.

No. 9004

>>9002
>>9003
sorry but are you retarded? your post history doesn't factor in making anyonymous male-posting any less annoying or anymore okay and why would farmhands need to check your history or how would they even have the time?
you're mad for getting a slap on the hand and then you're mad for not getting banned longer because hypothetically a dude?
and how would you know what bans other male-posters get and how they're dealt with?
Maybe try being funnier if you want it to be perceived as a joke.

No. 9005

>>9004
are you new and have trouble reading? Farmhands talk about checking user's post history all the time. don't tell me the mod team don't have time when they're running a site, otherwise they wouldn't be running it.

and how was my post a joke lmao glad you thought it was funny enough to be one though.

No. 9006

>>9004
Your English and reading comprehension are horrendous. You do realise that blowjob can be used for pussy as well, right? Wouldn't doubt you're the same retard who banned her given you said you don't find male posting okay but are upset that she called out the ban time for it. I also think you're the same one who keeps responding to people itt without your janitor tag. You sound more upset about the whole ordeal than anyone too.

No. 9007

>>9005
staff do not check user post histories all the time. it's for special cases - it takes time, and users here expect anonymity so they only take that away from someone when the rule breaks are bad.

the narcissim to think they're all over your post history checking it out over one minor ban, lmao. a ban which had expired by the time you saw it, no less.

No. 9008

>>9007
it actually happens with minor bans too now, you might be surprised

No. 9009

>>9008
noticing a person's recent history in a thread, especially when they've been getting bans by the same farmhand or attracting consistent reports, is not the same as doing an extended search on someone's identity.

No. 9010

>>9009
it doesn't take extended research to see me still talking about my pussy in VERY recent post history and it's not like I posted often. it isn't narcissism to expect to have decent mods who know what they're doing either. it's okay to admit you're shit at what your job is supposed to be.

No. 9011

>>9000

If you're still being banned after being told several times that you need to stop being retarded than you're not heeding the bans as a warning then, are you

No. 9012

>>9000
Someone's definitely on a power trip. Pretty pathetic and annoying

No. 9013

>>9006
please tinfoil harder lol. I'm going back to bed, excuse my horrendous Engrish, gonna give myself a girl bj while I'm at it

No. 9014

>>9002
It was a one hour ban and since you weren't permabanned it means the mod was unsure or saw your history. Would you have preferred to have been permanently banned?
>>9000
>what i'm annoyed with is the veiled threats in minor bans like "you've been warned" or "if you keep this up your bans will get longer" etc. etc.
How is that a threat or power tripping? Obviously an anon who keeps making the same rule violations will get longer bans for repeating them.
>>9001
The previous admin must have moved it. I discussed the issue in depth at the townhall . I don't think it's a good idea to make a new thread right now. The server memory has been upgraded but we haven't switched hosts yet. When we do switch I'll make sure to make an announcement beforehand so it's not unexpected downtime.
>>9006
>>9012
Are you done pretending to be a different person than the salty anime blowjob anon?

No. 9015

File: 1550827254617.jpeg (28.41 KB, 540x546, DsY0MkUV4AAWFO8.jpeg)

>>9014
THEIR IS SM CONTENT IN THIS THREAD ALONE. THANK U ADMIN

No. 9016

>>8994
Let me tell you I'm happy with the positive changes with the site, admin. Personally I think the fine line between nitpicking and discussing news about a cow's behavior isn't very well defined in most threads, both /pt/ and /snow/ are very guilty of this (I avoid /snow/ for that particular reason, along with it being filled with a lot of basic instathots as if being an internet whore = cow) and it should be specified. I wish /pt/ could have sage though and as far as I remember, during Townhall most were in favor of it.

No. 9017

>>9016
it was voted to be brought back, yes
>>8684

No. 9018

Why the hell should I sage that you dumb mod I want people to see my post. It's not even a dead thread or anything.

No. 9019

Also why don't you state which rules I'm breaking instead of "lol I'm banning you because someone reported you"? The fuck?

No. 9020

>you were already warned to stop derailing and infighting. if you have a problem with a post report and move on, stop infighting.
THAT POST WAS ALREADY MADE BEFORE THE FIRST BAN YOU IMBECILE. Learn to do your job properly holy shit.

No. 9021

can the habit of mods writing their own unfunny ban reasons die please? i'm tired of seeing """quirky""" bs redtext floating around.

No. 9022

>>9020
>>9018
>>9019

Sage isn't there for you to decide if you want your post seen, dumbass, it's there for unimportant posts that don't contribute to the thread. Also, calm your fucking sperge–we don't need three separate posts of you bitching because admin/mods hurt your feefees.

No. 9023

>>9022
This, also remember this sperging is all over 10 minute bans which most likely expire before they even see them.

No. 9024

>>9018
>>9019
>>9020

Who are you even replying to?

No. 9025

>>9022
if this is an advertisement for their posting quality then mods pls permaban.

No. 9026

/meta/ is a cow board too apparently. This thread's been wild.

Anyway when are we getting sage in /pt/? The rules being updated can take ages, I get why. Sage should be a quick fix though.

No. 9027

Admin,

Is admin@lolcow.farm still valid?

>>9026

The Global Rules have been updated, but the rules for /pt/ and /snow/ have been omitted.

No. 9028

>>9026
The previous admin hard-coded the no sage feature onto /pt/ so I need to reverse it. It's not as easy as switching a button on or off but it's a work in progress.
>>9027
Yes, that's the new email. The rules page is currently under construction.

No. 9029

>>9028

I could have sworn I typed admin@lolcow.farm. I asked because that address is still appearing in ban notices >>9002.

Do we really need more words added to the redtext filter? Trigger, triggering, triggered and now valid and victim.

No. 9033

>>9029

Ahhh, I see you have a filter that changes lolcow.farm @ gmail.com to the new address.

Way to fuck up my attempt to communicate with you.

No. 9034

File: 1551009874939.gif (1.79 MB, 282x150, a04038648ee0310af731fc2a75f593…)

>>9033
>>9020
>>9019
>>9018
>>9000
Why is this thread milkier than almost anything else on lolcow right now?? Who could have known farmers generate so much milk by just being so fucking autistic?

>blowjobs for females are totally valid

>REE mods telling me to stop shitposting so much or theyll permaban me REEEEE
>admin is fucking with muh brain injury by correcting posts automatically

Thank you farmers for the laughs!

No. 9035

>>9033

that's what happens when you don't read admin posts, retard

No. 9036

>>9029
I find that red text pretty annoying when people are talking about things like crime and skincare in ot and g ("the serial killer with the highest victim count" "triggers my acne")

No. 9037

File: 1551010303694.png (9.69 KB, 871x122, caughtuanon.png)

>>9029
>>9034
DONT THINK I DIDNT CATCH YOUR BRAIN INJURY POST ANON! DELETING IT WONT HELP

No. 9038

>>9036

stop being a pizza face with weird interests, anon

No. 9039

>>9035

Did Admin say there is a filter changing the email address?

No. 9040

>>9038
I legit laughed irl. It looks weird in serious discussions, that's what I'm saying.

No. 9042

>>9034
>>9037

Real funny, anon. I hope you never have to repair and rebuild your cognitive function after someone attempts to kill you.

No. 9043

>>9041

don't dirty delete like that girl.

No. 9044

File: 1551011770840.png (Spoiler Image, 60.86 KB, 238x128, 107154e4c26bb01308ed5376c4cf5f…)

>>9042
Like, I doubt you acquired the TBI from admin trying to kill you by using word filters to correct an email address, which means it is pretty obvious she is not trying to mess with your memory.

Yet here you are, blaming admin.

No. 9046

>>9035

Or are you saying that Admin already replied to whether the gmail address is still valid?

No. 9047

holy fuck my sides, reading this anon not getting the e-mail filter thing

I'm dying

this needs to be a banner itself lmao

sweet fucking

wew

history today

anyway

I actually just came here to say thanks admin. I was one of the anons who dug their heels in and bitched a bunch when you came on board, but things have been looking up and a lot of the moderation issues have been smoothing out

so

yeah

sorry for being a cunt and thanks for not sucking

No. 9048

>>9047
What's so funny about asking if the gmail address is still valid and being irritated that the filter fucked up the question?

No. 9049

>>9048
I.. I can't

I just can't. I'm wheezing. Anon, you're answering your own confusion as you go, but you don't even realize

that's some legitimate mental fog, if I weren't laughing so hard I'd be concerned for you

No. 9050

There’s a retard spamming a year old onision thread with blog posting on the front page of /pt/ and other anons are feeding into it

No. 9051

>>9049

If the gmail address is still valid or forwards to the lolcow.farm address, then why did Admin change it in the rules on January 22nd?

No. 9052

TBIchan please come back. You're comedy gold.

No. 9053

>>9047
>>9049
something is wrong with you.

No. 9054

Shitting on anon's TBI post that she herself deleted ages ago bc she prob figured it was unreasonable to project emotional shit on admin is… something. Get a life.

I want to bring something up that I'm not sure how people will react to. Let me preface this by saying I largely agree with radfem ideas and am not a handmaiden. I want better research on troons (how to treat them and acknowledgement that it's a mental illness rather than an identity) and I am against them speaking for us when it comes to womens' issues. Etc etc etc.

However, the constant radfem derails outside of the radfem thread is approaching racebait levels. I'm tired of reading posts upon posts sperging about how one farmer opted to use the pronouns the cow wants to go by. It's not adding anything to the conversation 99% of the time and it's purely there to derail the conversation. Radfem evangelizing is as annoying as /pol/tard redpills.

Can we maybe make it a bannable offense to derail with radfem sperg? I'm not calling for a strict containment of radfem but rather something like warnings when people decide to sperg about some dumb pro-trans language used by a farmer making an entirely unrelated point. It would be a case-by-case situation I reckon but it would help improve post quality.

No. 9055

>>9054
Tbh if the cows in question show obvious signs of being trans with proof, then going by their preferred pronouns shouldn't be a big issue. The problem is when a cow makes their gender identity their entire personality, can't keep their story straight, and just literally is a fakeboi transtrender. Using their pronouns just comes off as stanning hence why some people react badly.

No. 9056

>>9055
i don't think that's the issue anon had. she's saying that since the site is radfem people will barge into threads getting angry and derailing when people use tranny's preferred pronouns.

No. 9057

>>9054
Infighting and derailing are already bannable. Dropping into a thread to sperg about men or handmaidens should make any difference to that. I agree they could do with some extra attention, we need to keep those particular spergs in check.

No. 9058

>>9057
*shouldn't

No. 9059

>had townhall with admin
>voted against the shitty media board
>admin makes it anyway

welcome to crystal.cafe 2.0!

No. 9060

>>9059
the posts in /w/ aren't any better in quality, if anything they move slower since the move. we don't need boards for every topic, this site doesn't move fast enough to warrant it

No. 9061

Just curious, has the moderation team or admin noticed a sizable increase in traffic/participation on LC, or has it been mostly the same for the past 1-2 yrs? Just wondering.

No. 9062

>>9060
i agree. plus it's a really dumb way to sort things. some of the cows aren't even weeb, they just fit because of the topic? i don't want a million boards.

No. 9063

Has anyone noticed all the necro of threads on snow? I thought it was just a few threads over the past few days but it seems like one person posting on each since the posts are in quick succession.

No. 9064

>>9063
Yeah, I think it's some retarded male or something, because they're mostly ancient threads about thots.

No. 9065

>>9059
>>9060
>>9062
The vote was nearly tied and when asked again users showed an interest. Two new boards isn't a million boards.
>>9061
Lolcow is continuously growing.

Aside from the /m/ board, the new rules page has been updated although it's still a work in progress. The rules for /pt/, /snow/ and /w/ will be the same for the most part. We are now ready to effectively prepare for a hellweek sometime in the next week or two.

No. 9066

>>9065
still, it's really stupid to just move threads without saying anything to anyone. boards are already slow don't need segmenting.

No. 9067

>>9059
Right? Most users didn’t even get to vote because townhall was 10 minute long and American time. Regardless, efficiency is changing what proved to not work. /w/ can be kept for otaku subculture shit, there are those threads littered all over /g/ and /ot/. Just move the cows back to /snow/ ffs

No. 9068

At this point it honestly sounds like you all are whining just to whine.
I don't get having such a big issue with this when it literally just makes cows easier to find. Organization shouldn't cause this many tantrums good Lord.

No. 9071

>>9067
>10mins
The townhall was 2h 30min long. I know because I attended it. Don't blatantly lie to make your case.

No. 9073

>>9068
too many slow boards cause thinned out threads which make it harder or more of a chore to browse and reduces user traffic, especially from lurkers. i was in the townhall and at this point it feels like admin didn't give a shit about the votes.

No. 9075

Why is the front page of snow full of threads that haven’t been posted in 1-3 years? They’re not even necro’d or bumped. There’s like 5 threads with last posts being years ago all on the front page?

No. 9076

>>9075
They were bumped by adbots, they got banned and the ads removed very quick.

No. 9077

This isn't a complaint, more of a mood but I miss the days when the posters at lc were funny. At least, I think we used to be funnier and not so pissed off all the time, maybe I'm wrong? Being comfy with a helping of bitchy snark seems to have disappeared from most places, I blame the shitheads at twitter and tumblr for dragging their outrage everywhere. Of course, people would express their anger and disagree, but they did it with humor and an elegant turn of phrase.

I know this is gay but I had to say it.
Admin is doing terrific, love the changes.

No. 9078

>>9077
Started browsing a few years ago and I get what you mean. Seems like more and more anons have an extra helping of sand in their vaginas over the most inane shit.

I might also be retarded, but I can't seem to locate the new m board.

No. 9079

>>9078
By locate the new board, I mean it isn't linked with the other ones yet and I'm a lazy fuck who doesn't want to type it in. Would delete the former post but it won't let me.

No. 9081

>>9075
Is there a way to "un-bump" a thread on the mod team's end?
It's frustrating that they still stay up after a mod addresses the necromancer. Could be a good feature to add to the list of things you're considering.

Also thank you for the /media/ board. I'm excited to talk about stuff there!

No. 9083

When will /m/ get a proper link? Also, I don't see anything about use of smileys in the new rules.

No. 9084

>>9083
>>9081
A proper link will be added later today.
Emoji use falls under rule #4
Adhere to board culture and the culture of this board.
The new rules have been condensed, most rule violations fall under derailment or a lack of integration after all. The use of sage falls under board culture too.

No. 9085

What is the rationale behind including threads like "Interesting makeup looks" and "Pale skin dark hair" in /m/?

No. 9086

Just want to discuss the Onion thread briefly.

I understand quality has taken a nosedive idk if it's because there's been an influx of new posters since lc is getting name dropped pretty frequently on twitter surrounding it or what, but - can content of what cows provide be allowed to be discussed.

This is an anon board and a place to discuss things that conventionally you can't go into about people. I understand posts that are just essentially "Eww so ugly" is frivilious and people get triggered about the screen caps of them with funny faces because of their delicate sensibilities insecurities. It's all just a laugh. We use to create so many funny photos from inspo posted in the form of a hilarious screen grab.

A lot of the onion fun is getting overly moderated and not just by lc staff. The people that take it so serious like we're documenting evidence for a court case should be discouraged. When 'milk' such as court docs or leaked convos with girls they're flirting with isn't posted anons get wound up someone wants to discuss a non serious topic relating to a video/twitter post/insta post they've made.

Also with the thread being on page 2 since it's been autosaged the quality has went down again with people gatekeeping it and not bumping with actual new content being posted by the cows themselves.

It's moving slow with actual milk that we've had day long sperges about 2 other youtubers in regards to EG. Onion hasn't even acknowledged this Dan guy and there's been derails discussing what he might say, people repeating the same point over and over because they don't seem to understand the context of thread. Posts don't get deleted. We don't need 2 or 3 posts supporting a statement by rehashing it in other words. We get it.

It's discouraging discussion. I'd rather skip over a dozen smaller posts critiquing their aesthetics rather than paragraphs about JG and EG and how sad her plight is. It's not the EG thread. It's a thread about Greg and Lainey and the thread shouldn't be policed because the cows aren't providing high brow intellectual discussion. There are dozens of threads on this site discussing cows appearance, why should onion and Lainey get a pass.

No. 9087

>>9086
Adding to this I think the biggest issue is reptititon.
Maybe anons could collate photo sets rather than post one at a time if they're able? And like if for eg, Lainey's appearance looked drastic or something of note, it could be discussed but repetitive points discouraged.

I understand its hard to moderate quality, but rather than discourage posting it seems the biggest issue is reptititon.

Sorry if this is repetitive lol

No. 9088

this has nothing to do with any of the discussed topics, but does anyone else feel like the miranda thread is just the same small handful of people? shit is fucking weird in there. anytime i scroll past it it’s a dumpster fire. also tons of infighting and some autistic anon wants to brigade and report her videos. it’s honestly 100% unreadable so i still have no clue what even warrants her having a thread in pt because it seems like for the most part she’s just another schizoid with a youtube channel

No. 9089

>>9086
>It's all just a laugh. We use to create so many funny photos from inspo posted in the form of a hilarious screen grab.
Nearly every thread does that but for the onision thread there's more screencap nitpicking than actual milk, and it's not even really that funny most the time. The thread reads like a bunch of childish insults for a reason.
>A lot of the onion fun is getting overly moderated and not just by lc staff.
I personally think it's been under moderated for awhile, momokun anons got more backlash last year for things the onision anons have gotten free passes to.
>When 'milk' such as court docs or leaked convos with girls they're flirting with isn't posted anons get wound up someone wants to discuss a non serious topic relating to a video/twitter post/insta post they've made.
That's not a moderation issue that's just newfags not caring about milk and preferring to nitpick.
>Posts don't get deleted. We don't need 2 or 3 posts supporting a statement by rehashing it in other words. We get it.
I'm not going to allow my staff to delete posts people don't like unless it's spam or illegal content. Yes repetitive posts can get banned but I won't allow censorship on an imageboard, that's a bit silly.
>It's discouraging discussion. I'd rather skip over a dozen smaller posts critiquing their aesthetics rather than paragraphs about JG and EG and how sad her plight is
You realize you're apart of the problem right? I hope I don't need to go into detail why that is but you are apart of that exact problem.
>There are dozens of threads on this site discussing cows appearance, why should onion and Lainey get a pass.
There is a crackdown on nitpicking and the onision thread is no exception, so actually they don't get a pass at all. The thread quality at this point is an embarrassment for a /pt/ thread.
>>9085
They're both image topic threads but not personal enough to be in /g/ like the wedding dress inspo thread.
>>9088
We'll try to be more on top of the thread but mira has plenty of reasons for being in /pt/.

No. 9090

>>9085
yeah I don't get it either. Threads like room inspo and pale girls with dark hair are just strange to have in /media/.

No. 9091

>>9089
I never meant to imply to delete posts I meant that anons were acting as if previous posts disappear and they have to reiterate things.

No. 9092

>>9089
Also admin chill out, I called a mod a dick face for coming on to an onion thread several hours after anons were discussing something. It came across wild patronising of mod.

I also got a ban for derailing for pointing out if onion hadn't discussed the dirty dan video the topic is dull or redundant as in it had fuck all to do with onion drama.

Looking over the new rules too and let me just be the first to say chill out. I bet no one liked you if you were around in tempcow.

No. 9093

>>9092
So you bumped the thread to call a farmhand a dickface for telling users to stop nitpicking unless they want to stay on autosage? A well deserved ban.
>I also got a ban for derailing for pointing out if onion hadn't discussed the dirty dan video the topic is dull or redundant
No, you got banned for derailing about Jaclyn Glenn then decided to come here to complain about anons derailing about JG's plight. Again, you are apart of the problem.
>>9090
Both threads are more image oriented but I an move them back to /g/ if that's too weird. There will be stickies posted on /ot/ and /g/ later today and the link to /m/ has been added to the index.

No. 9094

>>9093
so do you want a fucking image dump board or one discussing media? like i said. this. isn't. crystal fucking cafe.

No. 9095

>>9093
The post was to discuss any ideas on how to allow the onion thread to flow somewhat normally since a new thread is due.

No. 9096

>>9092
>I bet no one liked you if you were around in tempcow

Oh god were you a tempfag? Tempcow is when lolcow became 100% shittier.

No. 9097

>>9094
You're way too hostile sis.

I don't think the image spam threads should go on /m/ either, though I also think they're stupid threads to begin with so maybe I'm too biased. I was picturing /m/ as a place of media discussion rather than a place to share wallpapers personally. I'd say a thread like kpop critical even is more /m/ material than idol spam for instance. One is discussing a music genre and the other is… idk fap material? Not sure why people hoard images of random people.

No. 9098

>>9092
I thought the dickface comment was hell funny because you'd have to know you'd be banned for that and I thought you just didn't give a fuck… but now here you are giving a fuck. I am disappoint.

>>9084
Onion thread regularly has posts by people so ridiculous, I wonder if JoySparkles is there. However, sometimes there's no explicit rule to report them under. If we report hoping that it falls under rule 4 will mods hate that?

No. 9099

>>9089
Would really like a new onion thread. the lack of one is stopping from new mirrors of his videos being made. i would really like to not give him views on youtube

No. 9100

I appreciate the current moderation and think it could even be more prudently enforced in the Onision/Laineybot threads.

Onision threads have been completely unreadable in the last 6 weeks due to lack of milk. Farmers making entire separate posts to snivel about being buttspanked by mods or to correct a typo instead of deleting and reposting is pitiful and embarrassing.

No. 9101

>>9089
I know for a fact that many of my posts add to the headache, but I want to say that you're doing an amazing job, admin. Some of us get really sloppy and forget the rules due to not having to abide by them for so long, so it's nice to see someone sticking to their guns.

No. 9102

>>9100
honestly i wonder if it shouldn’t be moved back to /snow/ for a while like momokun was. then at least we could enforce saging for all the garbage while we try to up the quality of it to /pt/ appropriate again.

No. 9105

>>9088
Mira's thread is a slow-burning dumpster fire that never goes out. We laugh at her, and she sockpuppets. It's sort of unique in that way.

No. 9107

>>9096
Exactly, tempfags ruined Onision threads and should go

No. 9109

>>9098
Aww cmon guys I took my two day ban for the dick face comment and said nothing, just with the thread being maxed out thought it should be discussed. Admin was the one being salty insinutsting my other bans were relevant. Is admin more a cgl fag because onion thread has a different culture to the rest of the weeb shit which last admin seemed to at least grasp.

No. 9110

I just had a look at the rules and I'm sooo happy that there's an actual, formal prohibition on pornography for /g/ and /m/, but pretty please, can we have that rule apply to /ot/, too? Sorry for the annoying request, I just love that this place is clean of that kind of stuff, otherwise it'd turn into CC or every other chan, and even more unsavory people will be sniffing all over the place.

No. 9111

>>9056
>>9056
If a cow was calling himself a vampire or some stupid chuuni shit like that, would you agree with anons who "respected his identity" and called him a vampire instead of a human? Or some weeb trying to be Japanese? It's all the same. We don't play into crazy delusions here anon, we're here to laugh at them. Someone groaning at people calling the worst tranny AGP a she isn't "radfem derailing", it's not just radfems who don't buy into troon astroturfing.

No. 9112

>>9111
Yes and isn't that troon thinking in itself, that anyone who doesn't respect special pronouns is a TERF (radfem)!

No. 9113

someones making whack threads that link to human trafficking porn… yuck

No. 9115

File: 1551451123072.png (1.21 MB, 1960x1310, rep.png)

How come the Repzilla thread on /snow/ was deleted? Milk was being posted.

No. 9116

>>9115
because you keep fucking replying to yourself and don’t know how to sage. also your thread looks like it was written by a child.

No. 9117

>>9116
Are you retarded? It's not even my thread, but I was looking through it.
This is for mods to reply to, not your salty ass.

No. 9118

>>9117
lmao my bad anon, your lack of sage made it seem like you were the same person insisting on replying to themselves ad nauseam with no sage. it’s pretty obvious it’s the same person pretending to be different people, milk or no milk.

No. 9119

The Repzilla sperg is back >>>/snow/782105
They're threatening to go to Kiwifarms, which I think is an excellent idea. They love untreated mental illness over there.

No. 9120

>>9109
>onion thread has a different culture to the rest
exactly what moofags tried t claim, and the munchies claimed it too

No. 9121

>>9089
Just wondering if we are getting a new onion thread, and if so where is it going to be?

No. 9122

>>9116
>>9118
Another issue that the site is having is this. So many anons are quick to accuse each other of shit. It usually leads to infighting and derailing until we see a bunch of red text.

No. 9123

>>9119
anon providing all the shit is unhinged and tinfoily, but now I'm interested in the drama. Seems like he has the makings of a good cow.

No. 9124

>>9109
You guys aren’t some special snowflakes who get separate rules from the rest of the site. Culture is board-wide.

>>9120
At least the munchies left, it seems tempfags don’t realize they are shit and were not liked for the most part. Remember when most of them didn’t even know what lolcow was because they only posted on temp?

No. 9125

>>9122
The constant accusations are out of control on all boards, though it looks like things are maybe calming down? It does derail almost every thread it pops up in. It's all a variant of infighting, I think. Either anons are pressed non-stop, or it's a few good trolls shit stirring. Sometimes it's hard to tell.

No. 9126

Why is there no new Onision thread????
Hes one of the only actual cows on this site, i dont wanna read about how some chicks vagina is yucky or how someone has a tiny mark on their butt. When will it be back/will it be back?

No. 9127

>>9110
I agree. But I also would like to know where the line is drawn between OK nsfw spoiler images and pornographic content.

No. 9128

>>9127
>>9110
The rule wasn't applied to OT because some NSFL imagery is posted in gender critical and the art thread (drawn porn) but it's usually posted to mock it. Because OT is a random discussion board the idea was that porn threads wouldn't even be allowed to be posted. I can add the rule explicitly though.
>>9115
There was no milk aside from randoms DMs from two vendetta chans.
Subjects must meet 3 out of the 5 following criteria:

◦ An unhealthy desire for attention
◦ Failure to accept criticism
◦ A lack of self awareness
◦ Delusions related to their skill or self importance
◦ No willingness to improve upon their behavior
>>9121
As far as I know, nobody has made a new thread.

No. 9129

>>9128
Going based on what was posted, he seems to meet 1, 2, and 4. Not sure if he's aware that he's acting like a turd or not.

Will the next Onion thread go on autosage too?

No. 9130

>>9129
When I was awake during the posting and reposting of the first 3 threads nothing but personal DMs were posted. There was nothing to support that he met any of that criteria. It's only two people posting the same caps, a clear vendetta.
Not to mention the fact the OP keeps ban evading.
The next onion thread will be on autosage until the post quality improves.

No. 9132

Why are the kpop threads still in /ot/ and not /m/?

No. 9133

>>9111
You still sperging about pronouns is showing how hard you people miss the fucking point. It's not an important discussion in most threads, especially bc the anons that choose to use whatever the fuck pronoun are almost always making some unrelated point and their comment gets responses solely on the pronoun front. It's only happening bc you can't shut the fuck up about your gender politics and respect someone else's tangential view.

No. 9134

hey mods, may I ask if I upload a picture in here, would it strip off the metadata? If it doesn't, can you add a feature where the site automatically strips the metadata off the picture? Thanks.

No. 9135

Mods, I think you should forgot to put the >>>/ot/361130 (Dress Up Games) thread in the m/ board, it's in ot/ and it may seem nitpicky but, it would be nice if it's put in the right board.

No. 9136

>>9133
Not that Anon but this is literally untrue lol. Threads have gone on into full derail because someone called a cow she instead of he.
Does what you suggest happen a good portion of the time?? Of course. But that still doesn't change the fact that most of the pink pill posters will take any chance to derail a thread about gender shit when no one cares.

No. 9137

>>9130
repzilla autist is back >>>/snow/782360. thanks for your efforts at cleaning up the rubbish threads, admin, I for one appreciate it.

No. 9138

>>9137
ngl, this is mildly entertaining to watch. but i second this, bless up for keeping it at bay, admin

No. 9139

>>9124
Tempfags were allowed to have their party at the admin's expense, and they remain barely integrated as posts in this thread about 'muh special thread culture' and 'wheres my new thread' prove. They're a scourge.

No. 9140

>>9137
aaaand they're back >>>/snow/782388

No. 9142

>>9139
in retrospect is there anything that admin did that didn't bend over and assfuck board culture?

I say this in the least offense way possible towards that admin, as I understand being in that position isn't simple and they did what they felt was best

I appreciate that current admin does seem more cgl-centric, it's what we needed

No. 9143

>>9130
No offense admin but by those criteria, all the threads are shit. The Luna thread is shit, the Moo thread is shit, the Shay thread is shit, venuses mum thread is shit. Literally all of those is “omg fat” “omg ew ugly pussy” rinse and repeat, why are those allowed up?

No. 9144

>>9143
I can't speak for the others but Margo has a significant history as a cow both with Venus and since she ran away. Margo's only dormant, she hasn't reformed in the slightest in her cowishness.

This compared to a thread that comprised someone getting mad about several Discord interactions. Those Discord interactions don't prove repzilla's a cow, anon needs to do better or forget it.

No. 9145

Why is the moderation so shitty and inconsistent?

Also implement this >>>/ot/382217 instead of banning people who unknowingly replied to a thread that got bumped to page 1 due to spam. And before you ask no that wasn't me.

No. 9146

>>9144
I said by admins criteria. The sme can be said about Onion bois threads, hes an evil pedo psycho, but his thread is forboden, but 20+ thread about “ew fat” “bad cosplay” is fine. Margos threads are “shes soooo crazy” and thats it. Now i think all of those threads are fine, i find them boring but their fine, but for some reason in admins mind those are soper milky and allowed, but not Onisions? Makes no sense.

No. 9147

>>9146
Greg's thread isn't forbidden you turnip. It got put on autosage is all. Seems like some of you get lost without it always sitting on your front page. Someone finally made a new one since the old one locked through reaching it's maximum several days ago so you're in luck.

No. 9148

File: 1551529338809.gif (1.31 MB, 413x200, 200.gif)

>>9146
…Are you retarded or just pretending to be retarded? The thread is allowed but no one has made a new one yet. You do realise a regular farmers make new threads and not staff??

>Someone didnt make a new thread REEE

>FUCKING MEANIE ADMIN WHERE IS MY THREAD

cancer.

No. 9150

>>9148
It's been embarrassing watching them ask

No. 9151

>>9148
if that's an example of their super speshul board culture then it's not really a surprise it ended up on autosage

No. 9152

>>9128
>Because OT is a random discussion board the idea was that porn threads wouldn't even be allowed to be posted. I can add the rule explicitly though.
Yes, I think that'd be a good idea. TY in advance if you do decide to add the rule!

No. 9153

>>9151
it got made already and they're still asking for one in thread requests

No. 9154

>>9133
>It's only happening bc you can't shut the fuck up about your gender politics and respect someone else's tangential view.
I think you're better off at Crystal Cafe with the rest of your kind. Imagine being this assblasted over someone making a ">they" reply.

No. 9155

>>9154
Are you the same fuckwit that constantly brings up CC in this thread? You sound obsessed.

No. 9156

>>9148
>>9151
I only said that because all the outrage led me to think that Onion thread were going on forever autosage. Which would be bs because there are many more way nitpicky, milkless threads that were given a pass.

No. 9157

>>9156
Tons of threads have been put on auto sage and brought back. It's just a matter of the participants cleaning up their acts. It's really not a hard concept…

No. 9158

>>9156
Those threads got put off autosage because they didn't have the posters rush in and claim they're totally speshul and different from the other boards.
If you want to help the Onision board and prove it - stop posting. Deadass just you in specific, stop posting. You didn't help your case, in fact you pretty much just clarified that maybe the onision thread SHOULD be on autosage forever. You represent the worst qualities of that thread, especially since now you keep making autistic post after post. Do yourself and your thread a favor and lurk for the next month instead of posting.

No. 9159

>>9158
Not everyone is the same anon retard. I dont think im special because i read the onion thread, i read loads of threads and contribute to many, i mistook the no thread sperging as if it were some kind permanent situation, drink some milk to calm your ass and while your at it crawl out of it too.

No. 9160

>>9159
nta but you should know nothing's permanently on autosage unless the post quality never improves

No. 9164

>>9159
LOL you read tons of threads but don't even know that autosage usually isn't permanent or how to not be this stupid?
Your reading comprehension is abysmal holy shit. I didn't say you were speshul for reading it. Anons from that thread have come into THIS thread to claim the board is special and has different culture fuckin KEK.
Also what milk, from the Onision thread where everyone is repeating
the same point at each other like a bunch of seagulls?? Lmao you're better off as a lurker because nothing you posted here makes you look smart or like you even know how to browse LC

No. 9165

>>9159
Then you should know what autosage is for, that it doesn't mean a thread is 'forbidden' and that threads come back from autosage quite often once posters clean up their shit.

No. 9166

>>9164
Read what i wrote again and try to use your brain.
>i mistook the no thread sperging as if it were some kind permanent situation

So since autosage is not usually permanant, and people are freaking out about something that isnt permanant didnt make sense to me so i THOUGHT it ws because why sperg if not something like that?
You are too invested in this shit, if you want to suck Gregs dick just DM him.(derailing by white knighting yourself)

No. 9167

>>9166
>f you want to suck Gregs dick just DM him
typical tempfag paranoid thinking. not everyone's greg, related to greg or a greg fangirl. some of us just think you should integrate better.

No. 9168

>>9133
Thank you for saying this, I agree. The pronoun sperging is just annoying and tends to derail discussions.

No. 9169

>>9168
maybe i'm missing something but i rarely see any "pronoun sperging"
like who gives a fuck either way lol the people that are so insecure with their gender identity that they are getting upset when their selected pronoun isn't used is as retarded as a straight guy getting pissed when someone calls them gay
everyone in the situation needs to get over themselves and move on

No. 9171

>>9169
Last time I'm reiterating this bc some responses straight up sound like the anons have poor reading comprehension skills.

In this case people doing the sperging are against using someone's chosen pronouns and are yelling at other anons for using pronouns the cow might want. Nobody should be policing other anons' choices in what the fuck pronoun they want to use when talking about a cow or whatever else. Consider it like minimodding, it derails discussion because how dare some anons not go out of their way to see someone as a different gender than they present as.

TL;DR radfems are yelling at anons that don't use biological pronouns for troons

They're trying to evangelize radfem shit in threads that don't need it. Good for you if you haven't seen it but it happens and it's a problem.

No. 9172

>>9171
I get it but if it's really derailing just report it and move on??

No. 9173

>>9171
Anon, someone replying >she to a post calling whatever creepy hon of the week a woman isn't an epidemic lmfao. It's not even ban worthy. Not only is this not a radfem exclusive thing but it's easily the least annoying thing radfems on this site do.

No. 9174

>>9173
tbh wouldn't be suprised if that anon did have a vendetta.

Ever since the gender crit and radfem threads have came back people have been trying to get them taken down by complaining about trivial shit.

No. 9175

>>9174
Only the manhate thread was shut down. I don’t see how it is vendetta to say that they shouldn’t come into threads to make useless derailing posts.
Not the same anon and I also post in the GC thread before you call me a troon. GC should stay in GC. Lolcow is supposed to be apolitical.

No. 9176

>>9173
this, if anyone is derailing it's the spergs with hurt feelings throwing a wall of text at someone making a
>she
reply, just move on and don't reply if it bothers you that much

>>9175
Anon if anything is taking a political stand it's when someone is willing to call the rattiest man a woman just to cater to their self-identification meme lmao

No. 9177

>>9175
>>9171

Being a gender speshul is a delusion of many cows. We don't cater to their other delusions, so why should we cede to their delusional gender identities?

>>9174

The GC thread was never shut down; read the OP. The RF is new; I posted it after a group of us in the Town Hall discussed starting it.

No. 9178

Will threads that dried up years ago be locked so that they cannot be exploited by spammers?

No. 9179

jfc you guys are retarded.

No. 9180

can the kpop general thread in /ot/ be moved to /m/ please?

No. 9181

>>9171
>TL;DR radfems are yelling at anons that don't use biological pronouns for troons
I would be willing to wager that the majority of people calling out people who cater to troons aren't radfems. The same happens in most male places that pride themselves on not being politically correct. Doesn't make them radfems. I don't see this happening that often, and I think lolcow should remain a place that is 'hostile' to troon catering, personally, or else tumblr kids are going to flood us. We already have them stopping by all of the time and I, personally, prefer that they not get too cozy. They only seem to dip when they find out the sentiment on LC isn't approving trannies and shit.

No. 9182

can someone wrangle the "hi cow" autists in the mickey thread accusing everyone not licking the ass of the dude posting in there claiming he fucked her two years ago of being either a WK or mickey herself? i'm baffled that it even needs to be said…

No. 9183

Will "Hi, Cow" be added to the rules?

Also

>Last Updated: January 22, 2019

No. 9184

>>9181
Agree-I see that in the comment section of youtube all the time. Sort of thought it was like a meme, not seen as much of it here recently.

No. 9185

>>9183
It falls under no contribution, rule 7.
>7.2 Repetitive comments
>>9180
Sure thing.
>>9173
>>9171

Anons are free to believe whatever they want as long as they're not derailing threads and infighting over pronouns, period. That goes for both sides.

No. 9186

>>9185
The pronoun thing makes me want to ask Admin a question - are we taking a course towards the culture where you can just go to meta to complain about someone having an opinion you disagree with and get them banned? It just seems like for the past year a lot of things have become a "bannable offense" because some oversensitive anon lost an argument and cried infighting afterwards. Racebaiting is understandable because it completely shits up the discussion and brings in robot tier demographics but it seems as if some anons have realized that they can report anyone who they don't agree with under some vague reasoning. Like the tranny issue, people yell radfem baiting and femcels when most people who hate genderspecials are just normal posters with no strong feelings towards radical feminism or any other ideology.

The "widespread pronoun sperging" is usually something like this (demonstrated in a hyperbolic sense to make a point):
>Chris-chan just released her newest Sonichu issue!
>">her" reactionimage.jpg
>REEEEEE SHUT UP LOLCOW IS APOLITICAL IF SHE CHOOSES TO IDENTIFY AS A WOMAN THEN THAT'S HER OWN BUSINESS WOW STOP BEING SO TRANSPHOBIC THIS AIN'T A TERF BOARD I AM GOING TO REPORT THIS FOR DERAILING ADMIN THE RADFEMS ARE AT IT AGAIN PLEASE BAN THEIR ASSES AND DELETE THE CONTAINMENT THREAD

And it's not just the pronoun question. I get that it's derailing and infighting when anons keep going on for 70 replies arguing about dieting in Momokun's thread but it seems that a lot of anons have gotten used to being able to silence people by just whining about it on /meta/ a couple of times. Anons need to grow a thicker fucking skin, someone disagreeing with you and challenging your opinion in /ot/ isn't supposed to be seen as infighting.

No. 9187

This page needs a lot of updating >>>/pt/396455

>Threads that are missing any of the above information will be removed and the user will be sanctioned with a 30 day ban.


Has this ever been the case?

No. 9188

>>9183
>>9185
The old Admin said that hi cow-ing fell under infighting. (just reminding)

No. 9189

>>9187

Case in point, shouldn't this be deleted? >>>/snow/783460

No. 9190

>>9189

And this >>>/pt/635716 got moved to >>>/snow/774420 then locked. Can threads like this be deleted to declutter the catalog? The catalogs are so lengthy they cause some mobile browsers to crash.

Double posting because I get a password error trying to delete.

No. 9192

does anyone else feel like celebricows threads should be in /m/? The content is pretty similar to the kpop critical thread, but focused on westerners.

No. 9193

>>9186
>are we taking a course towards the culture where you can just go to meta to complain about someone having an opinion you disagree with and get them banned?
Absolutely not, on the contrary, it's amusing to see anons come here to tattle-tell on each other. The radfem/ pronoun debate is an infighting issue most seen in the Blaire White or fakeboi thread.
>Anons need to grow a thicker fucking skin, someone disagreeing with you and challenging your opinion in /ot/ isn't supposed to be seen as infighting.
This is true, discussion is supposed to happen organically and it's only natural that anons are going to have different opinions. The infighting and derailing i'm referring to is pointless banter and circular arguments.
>>9187
That's a thread the previous admin made, all rules and posting FAQ is all in the new rules page. No subject is officially banned for now.
>>9188
It's however you want to interpret it but we can all agree "hi cow" is no contribution 101.
>>9190
I'll see about decluttering catalogs. Some threads in /pt/ and /snow/ need to stay archived. The good news is that I'm working on something that automatically archives old threads + watch thread permanently integrated.
>>9192
Any celeb can be discussed there so it's general discussion. Even on /mu/ all kpop threads devolve into oogling or shitting on idols so it's only fitting k-critical and k-general stay in /m/.

No. 9194

>>9193

>>>/pt/396455 is still linked to the posting form on /pt/ and /snow/.

>Read this post before starting a thread.

No. 9195

>>9193
nta but not wanting pointless banter is fine, but when do you decide that's what it is? we have so many threads on /ot/ that i think we should just not fucking have because anons think all of their opinions are gods gift to the world.

No. 9196

>>9195
what threads shouldnt we have?

No. 9197

Feel free to tell me I'm wrong/why but I think threads like the YT Art salt thread should be moved to /snow/ instead of being in /ot/??
It probably has a reason for being there, but I feel like most people want it there since OT has a lot less rules to follow.

No. 9199

>>9197
I'd say it fits fine in /ot/. It serves as a nice containment for shitty artists that want to bitch about other shitty artists.

No. 9200

seriously wtf is with the sudden influx of newfags who seem like they don't understand english very well…usually newfags don't bother me that much but esl-chans are a different breed. where are they coming from

No. 9201

Random ask: Does moderation keep "profiles" on the scrotes who post here? I've always been curious if it's the same characters and what things they decide to post about. They're almost like cows themselves with their obsessed tier dedication, although I realize it's probably hard to keep up with them what with the various ways they can hide their true IPs.

No. 9202

>>9200
i said this too before. they're fucking annoying. i've seen a lot of infighting from them because they didn't understand something but they get butthurt when called out. if you're ESL, whatever, but don't be a snotty bitch cause you don't understand english very well.

No. 9203

Can we get the typo fixed in the title of Phoebe Tickner’s thread in /snow/? It’s fatvegfemme not fetvegfemme

No. 9204

recent modding decisions on the pixielocks thread in /w/ are way too harsh imo, farmers do tend to nitpick in there a lot but (there's only so many times someone needs to say "lol jillian is fat kek") but there are a few relevant, saged posts in there that have recently been banned in the purge

No. 9205

>>9204
can you point one out. I was just reading in there and it's a dumpster fire of nitpicking, I didn't see any redtexted comments that looked important?

No. 9206

>>9205
comments don't need to be important, especially on /snow/. ffs, this site isn't ED or knowyourmeme. these threads aren't just to archive milk, they're for us to talk about the cows. whoever banned all those comments is autistic.

No. 9207

>>9206
If the posts are saged I don't understand why the posters should be banned. Exactly, we can't even have (SAGED) conversations with other users without admin sperging out about it

No. 9208

>>9207
>>9206
The infopage states explicitly that even if you sage you have to follow the rules.

>Note: Sageing a post doesn't make wildly off-topic comments okay. You still have to follow posting rules.

>7. The following contribute nothing, even globally.
>7.1 Nitpicking
>7.2 Repetitive comments
>7.3 Milkless social media statuses and images
>7.4 Spamming low effort edits and candid images
>7.5 Tinfoiling with no basis to a claim

Sageing has never been a way to circumvent the rules, last admin did not enforce it regularly. The ones before last admin did though. Jill has not had milk since her hospitalization, but somehow you guys have still filled up a whole thread with nitpicking about her weight. The last 40 posts are about what filter someone used in a photo she was tagged in and whether she has lost or gained weight. If you guys want to have PULL type conversations, you can go on PULL you know?

No. 9209

>>9208
i'm not even a regular poster on that thread so sorry to burst your bubble. i just think that not letting anons talk about anything is pure autism, like what you're displaying. none of the redtexted posts were breaking any of the rules you mentioned.

No. 9210

>>9196
NTA but the unpopular opinion and stupid shit threads need to both go. Constant bitching about literally nothing and obviously intentional infighting. There's enough shit slung around those threads we could get rich selling manure.

No. 9211

j music thread in /ot/ needs to be moved.

No. 9212

>>9210
no.
just stop getting mad people think differently. lolcow isnt and echo chamber and i like that admin isnt enforcing something like that. are you a tumbler or twitterfag? just go back to that if you cant handle such tame premises

No. 9214

>>9212
I'm talking about people who simply go to threads to infight. When you start insulting people and attacking everyone's opinions then that's a sign…And both those threads are filled with like 90% infighting.

No. 9215

>>9214
They're good threads imo. A little disagreement isn't so bad. I dont think it's full on infighting. They're fun threads.

No. 9216

>>9214
They really aren't bad lately and I say that as an anon who was extremely fed up with shitposty anons around this time last year.

No. 9217

I think this website is over regulated. You can't banter and shitpost like on other imageboards. It doesn't feel like you can have free conversation in most threads and is run more like a subreddit.

No. 9218

>>9217
i agree, it's not even close to similar to the site i browsed only a few years ago. the segregation and over moderation is going to kill it. but that's alright, the new admin is no good anyway.

No. 9219

Can you please stop moving the j-music thread around??
Admin made /w/, therefore I made that thread in /w/ (which would have been fitting, because japanese music - weeb, no?). Somebody complained, you move it back to /ot/. Then again back and forth. And now again some idiot complained and this time you moved it to /m/?
Please make a decision and stick to it! People lose sight of where which thread is.

No. 9220

>>9209
not the same anon but here's an actual comment sample of what you're defending:
>the teeth whitening was a good move. as derpy as her face looks in this
>For one she doesn't look fat but overall looks different and like a different person
>you know she has a double chin when she laughs, and lighting makes her look like she has no neck
>pixie looks infinitely better with eyeliner
>some uncanny valley shit. it's creeping me out big time
>went to Japan and got magical huge kawaii eyes out of nowhere!
these were redtexted. according to >>9204 they are "relevant" and according to you they don't break a rule. except they're nitpicking and repetitive, so… >>9208

No. 9221

>>9218
Yeah agreed. Lol to have both the onion thread on autosage and lock the anisa thread (a thread that was featured in banners btw) seriously I miss the male admin, he knew what he was doing

No. 9222

>>9217
Definitely have to agree, it's super bizarre.

No. 9223

>>9208
>not had any milk

I’m sorry did you miss the japan trip and the shit she’s continuing on patreon conning kids. Her threads were moved to snow for being just a slow moving thread anyway, the to /w/ in the big move. I’m confused at these modding decisions when it was fine before. I agree that “hurdur double chin/she fet hurhur” “she’s so childish watching kids anime” is overdone at this point but banning people over pointing out something/her shoop is accepted on other threads? Why not Jill’s?

No. 9224

>>9221
>seriously I miss the male admin, he knew what he was doing
okay you lost me there

No. 9225

>>9221
Banners mean nothing, we still have age-old long-irrelevant cows featured on them, and afaik she's only in one banner that features many other cows as well. calm your tits and accept that the Anisa thread went to shit and refused to clean up its act.

No. 9226

>>9224
I mean I agree with them, the site is supposed to run more like 4chan. The site as it is now makes it fully obvious that admin has no idea why chan sites are a thing.

No. 9227

>>9224
I agree with that anon as well, he (the old admin) was pretty cool and had the site running 100% those were during the golden days of this site, mods weren't so ban happy and all around the site was showing a promising start. Everyone was having a good time.

No. 9228

I know this isnt the thread for this but seeing so many anons complaining about farmhands being too strict, I'd actually like to weigh in and say I love the new mod team. I don't agree with every decision but stricter rules and better inforcement of the rules is actually making lc better.
You guys should go read threads from 3 years ago, it was a shit show.

I've been here for quite some time, I'm fairly active and never been banned so all of you sperging about unfair bans just seems like you consider this place to dump every one of your irrelevant thoughts. There are other places for that.

Thanks admin and thanks mods. You're doing a great job.

No. 9229

>>9227
i just don't think we need a man to wrangle us lol

No. 9230

>>9228
Lol we are talking about threads from 3 years ago. If you want LC to be how it is now, just go to fucking reddit.

No. 9231

On mobile but LC has grown so much in the past 4 years, the site used to have a smaller user base. From what I know, OG admin and the original staff didn't actually moderate much at all.

I know the jill thread shouldn't have been filled with redtext and a warning would have been more effective but I think it serves as a good example of why we don't label everything.

No. 9233

>go on lolcow
>PULL thread: So glad lopcow isn't like PULL! People aren't allowed to complain about the same thing over and over again and bitch over nothing!
>Go to KF Thread: KF is terrible it's full of men and they do is make useless posts and sperg
>Go to this thread
>"Admin sucks because she's enforcing rules that make it to where we aren't allowed to comment 'fat' 50 times in a row!!!!1!!!!

No. 9234

pure salt over here but how is criticizing pixielocks' bad makeup and styling choices off topic and banned when there's a whole reply chain on that thread right now about sourcing the cardigan she's wearing in some shot

No. 9235

>>9233
She's not actually doing that but okay.

No. 9236

>>9234
The bans weren't labeled.

No. 9237

>>9236
you're a dense fucking cunt aren't you.

No. 9238

Probably just the browser on my phone but is anyone else having an issue with not all the replies loading when they try to view a thread on their mobile?

No. 9239

Did I really just get a tiny ban for telling a blogposter that nobody cares about their blogposting? C'mon lmfao it's not infighting. Choose your posters carefully.

>>9227
I'll second this. Miss the old days

No. 9240

>>9229
Imagine being so autistic you want a man to run a site that's 'for women' and literally bans men on sight lmao

No. 9241

>>9239
>I’m actually kind of amazed that people are still talking about vkei, I though it was a dead genre at this point.
This isn't a blog post when it was posted in the J-music thread. It was a warning against infighting because it was such a random no1curr comment, 10 minutes is nothing
>>9235
>>9237
If there is something you want me to improve you might as well express it instead of hurling insults. See >>9231
The site changed because the userbase changed, newfags need to be wrangled.
>>9238
For me, the replies take a bit to load on mobile. Maybe other anons are experiencing the same issue.

No. 9242

>>9227
I miss the guy too but he had a thing with Anisa and let her be a farmhand here and jumped ship of his own accord because of it. Remember he also did dumb shit like lock the Aly thread at the peak of her popularity.

We are now three more admins down and finally have one who is engaged, let's just let them do their thing before we judge too hard. I personally like that it's become stricter but I think the last admin really let things go so bad here it's going to take time.

No. 9243

>>9217
Definitely true on /pt/. Onion, one of the milkiest cows is still on autosage? And all these mostly inactive threads like Sheena and Kiki on the first page. The board just feels dead rn.

No. 9244

>>9242
>had a thing with anisa
Yeah you gonna need some proof for that because that's completely false the guy doesn't even know her I know shoe use to be a farm hand but that's about it lol if that wre true wouldn't you think anisa would have blabbed about it. In the other hand I think this admin is probably friends with anisa (I'm kidding!) but yeah proove what you're saying mate

No. 9245

>>9244
Admin said he was romantically involved with a staff member here and it was affecting his ability to impartially run the board so he was bailing. That's all I knew of for a long time. I don't have any proof of it being Anisa he was involved with tbh, that came from anons here. I don't give two fucks about her.

No. 9246

>>9245
You're mistaken anon, it was shoe not anisa. Also it was an actual staff member, not shoe >>>/pt/286891

No. 9247


No. 9248

>>9220
>posts 5 unrelated comments
>these are repetative!!!

no.

No. 9249

>>9242
NTA but i disagree with you, admin has already done stupid as fuck shit like have a useless townhall but then proceed to do what she wanted, we didn't even talk about /w/ in the townhall but she added that without even announcing it. even if you like those boards, her lack of transparency and lack of discussion, or better yet, going against a vote that she organized is stupid.

i'm judging her even more harshly now because of how poorly she's starting out.

No. 9250

>>9218
>>9227
>>9230

>"golden days"


>see: berry tsukasa thread, ember thread, princess doll thread

>also: shay-gnar and micky thread, formerly banned cows whom became unbanned and still haven't improved in quality
>fucking ana-chan threads and tempcow

Were you all really here years ago?

No. 9251

>>9249
I like admin but
>going against a vote that she organized is stupid
Agree with this. Reminder of the votes:
>Return of manhate poll: Yes by a large margin
>/ot/ and /g/ merging poll: No by a large margin
>/media/ board poll: No
>Return of PnP poll: No by a large margin
>sage in /pt/ poll: Yes

No. 9252

>>9248
they are repetitive in relation to the rest of the thread content, they don't have to repeat each other. don't be obtuse.

No. 9253

>>9252
NTA but you're misinterpreting the rule.

No. 9254

>>9252
The rule is for when one anon posts repetitive comments, not when the thread has repetitive comments in it…

No. 9255

>>9227
Are you aware that the male admin was Shoeonhead's friend who made this website only to track whoever shittalked June, and she was a mod?

No. 9256

Why was the gendercritical thread autosaged? I'm pretty surprised by this decision, since anons there knew when to sage, the discussion was always in topic and there's no infighting or trolling.

No. 9257

>>9256
Again, it was done without anyone saying a word.

No. 9259

File: 1552323388895.png (88.14 KB, 185x192, Angry_Dairy_Farmer.png)

>>9256

What the fuck, Admin?!

Could the lack of enthusiasm across the boards have anything to do with the emergent draconian moderation? Even the OP anons for the most popular threads have abandoned the site.

No. 9260

>>9256
>>9257
>>9259
At work but if this is true, this was done without my knowledge. I'll check up on it later.
>>9251
Just wanted to reply to this real quick, votes were done so I can see the general consensus. Final decisions are up to me. I like to listen to how people feel. >>9249
If you want to call it a lack of transparency then you're ignoring the fact I asked and mentioned it twice after the townhall.
I allowed PNP back because she is a cow, I don't feel right banning threads just because people don't like them. If they are a cow then who am I to ban discussion of a cow?
/m/ vote was nearly tied and when asked again users expressed an interest.
The others votes were won by large margins and I am working on the sage issue in /pt/. Thank the previous admin for the spaghetti code I have to fix.
EDIT: looked at moderation logs and it turns out a staff member autosaged the thread 2 days ago, I was never told but it may have been an accident. I don't know yet. I put it off autosage.

No. 9261

>>9260
I honestly gotta say I REALLY doubt it was on "accident" due to it being a controversial subject and the only thread being affected, and one of the few threads that keeps on topic and doesn't have a ton of infighting. Look into your staff please.

No. 9262

>>9260

Perhaps the power to autosage should not be in the hands of mods.

No. 9263

>>9260
you're a fucking retarded.

No. 9264

>>9261
don't even bother with new admin. anyone who thinks that randomly making boards without even announcing it is transparent then there's no use trying to speak English with them.

No. 9265

>>9260
the staff member responsible is only going to tell you it was an accident.

No. 9266

>>9259
I completely agree. I don't mean this in an insulting way, but it doesn't seem like the new admin understands what makes imageboards appealing. At all.
Not every post needs to be some enormous revelation or leak. Banter is normal, that's what makes the conversations fun. As long as it's saged and not autistic powerleveling, there shouldn't be problem.
Excessive moderation is ruining the appeal of this site. I shouldn't visit a thread and have my eyes assaulted with a wall of red text.
I strongly suggest admin and the mod team go visit other chan sites to learn 1. what makes them appealing, and 2. what a proper level of moderation is.

No. 9267

>>9266
i don't really have a horse in this race and i don't mind admin's moderation, but i have to say that it is different. literally few people even sage on most chans

No. 9268

>>9247
I'll move any threads that are active, if they have been dead for awhile then I don't think it's necessary.
>>9262
We currently have about 3 active mods, everyone else is a janitor with all different timezones. Janitors can't autosage or move threads, only experienced mods can.
>>9261
>>9265
The mod who autosaged the thread didn't realize they autosaged it, they frequently moderate manhate and gendercrit and as an active contributor to the threads I doubt it was intentional. Based off of their moderation history I don't see a reason foul play was involved.
>>9266
The red text flood was done by one mod, and it was dealt with. A few weeks ago anons were here saying they wanted all bans redtexted.
Banter and discussion is normal and encouraged but I emphasize again that sage isn't an excuse to break rules to the point where a thread only devolves into nitpicking.
>>9267
That's why sage isn't in the rules anymore, it's part of board culture but sage shouldn't be a big deal as long as the post isn't spam or some random necro.
>>9263
>>9264
I hate to break it to you but /m/ was discussed a few times here after the townhall. /w/ wasn't but /m/ was.

No. 9271

Just wondering why in the MH thread all the posts responding the the scrot apart from mine got deleted and why I got a 6 day ban for laughing about an incel sperging about how unfair breast enlargement is since men can't enhance their cocks?

I understand not replying to bait but that was pure irony, it was hilarious. 6 day ban seems excessive and my post the only one left and red texted. Sorry about my shallow set vagina but /ot allows for blog posting

No. 9272

>>9271
god, you're embarrassing

No. 9273

>>9250
anon probs meant the pixi teri days, man those were fun, that was the main reason I loved hanging on this site, pixi made everything better maybe thats why lolcow is such a mess because our queen is gone

No. 9274

>>9272
>>9272
Good thing it's an anon board hunty. Stay pressed I know my spot always izzzz. Imagine being 1 of the 3 dedicated farmhands and baiting the user base constantly. Uwu power

No. 9275

>>9241
Are you fucking retarded? It was definitely blogposty in a thread about discussion and drama and not only that, but it was a very obvious "wahh why are people still talking about things I don't like" post. Get a grip and learn how to be an administrator.

No. 9276

>>9241
>dun be mean guise!!!

fuck off newshit admin.

No. 9277

>>9268
>/m/ was but /w/ wasn't
>hate to break it to you
>still doesn't see a problem

dude, just fuck off already, if you can't take criticism for your shitty decisions this early in the game you'll never cut it.

No. 9279

>>9237
>>9263
>>9264
>>9276
>>9277
If you're going to keep IP hopping to pretend to be 4 different anons, at least do it right.
Still mad about the spongebob meme? God I must be such a fat normie.
>>9271
Responding to scrots is against the rules, it's also in the OP. I removed the ban for you but just report and ignore robots and incels.

No. 9281

>>9279
>doesn't know what a dynamic VPN is.

No. 9282

File: 1552367274807.jpg (39.1 KB, 750x422, UnL0e7A.jpg)

Reading this thread like
Milkier than snow because of the pearfags and tempfags

No. 9283

>>9282
kek wtf you talking about? nobody is even mentioning anisa anymore just like two or three people at the most she is an irrelevant cow that didnt had any milk not even britt could save that thread. Tbh all I want is good farm hands that dont go ban happy and ban you for the most stupid reasons, also would be nice if you tell people why they got banned. The year aint over yet so I am hoping the admin can turn this around, also what happened to the other "new admin" the one before this one.

No. 9284

>>9283
are we talking about the previous admin because we thought she was dead for months before she just gave up the site

No. 9285

>>9246
sorry anon that was my bad. thanks for clearing it up.

No. 9286

>>9284
So she just abandoned ship? Wished the new admin told us what actually happened to that admin because I thought it was weird that they right away changed admin. Yeah I agree wtih the other anons I still believe in this site also I think it would be helpful if there was a summery of every townhall so people that didn't assist to it stay informed as well so there's no misunderstandings

No. 9287

>>9286
where have you been, anon?

just scroll through meta every admin change has been announced/explained

No. 9288

>>9286
Here are some relevant posts, you can see the atmosphere in /meta/ was pretty fiery at the time >>7090 and her formal announcement >>7078

No. 9289

>>9286

There's a thread about the last town hall >>>/meta/8345

No. 9290

>>9247
>>9268

>I'll move any threads that are active, if they have been dead for awhile then I don't think it's necessary.


Well, I tried to warn you before I posted.

Also >>>/ot/284289 has been resurrected.

No. 9291

>>9281
How many fucking times does the admin need to say that they use more than just IP to identify samefags?
You are so fucking embarrassing and if I were the admin, I'd consider rangebanning your entire fucking country. This site and it's userbase clearly doesn't want you here so fuck off.

No. 9292

>>9291
did you miss the point of my post? i'm not trying to hide who i am, admin is just a retard who seems to think that i'm trying to hide from her

No. 9293

>>9292
>Not trying to hide
>IP hopping and using VPNs

If you have such a fucking problem with this site GO AWAY. How many more fucking times are you going to call the admin a retard? Just fucking email her your complaints instead of shitting up this thread with your asinine word vomit.

Jesus Christ, I can only imagine what it looks like from an administrator/farmhand side of things. Constantly dealing with these absolute dregs and actually having to spend the time detailing what they did wrong and explaining the same fucking rules to them over and over. I feel blessed I get to use this site for free, without having to seriously interact with the absolute worst retards on here.

No. 9294

>>9293
maybe admin should stop being retarded :^)

No. 9295

>>9293
Nta but calm down. I'm sure admin doesn't want such an autist wking them either. You literally have no idea who that anon is so there's no reason to be so aggressive. I feel like both of you are the types of users we don't want.

No. 9296

Wait is this sperg mad about the sPonGbOb mEmE or is it something else
samefagging is autistic unless you didn't edit and you can just delete and edit

No. 9297

>>9296
It doesn't look like anyone is samefagging just admin trying to call someone out for using a VPN. Tbh I think admin is being equally immature in her responses to many anons ITT so I'm taking what she says with a grain of salt.

No. 9299

>>9292
>>9294
>>9295
>>9297
>Nta but calm down
This level of samefagging is tragic.

No. 9301

>>9299
is something wrong with you?

i'm the 1st two posts, but posting more than once in a thread isn't samefagging. you guys are more childish than i am lmfao.

No. 9302

File: 1552438638871.jpg (115.17 KB, 1000x600, 2wePLmp.jpg)

>>9301
iM NoT sAmEfAgGiNg
Can the amount of K threads in m be limited because anons made a k girl spam thread when there's already like four threads.

No. 9303

>>9302
be careful not to get banned for weird typing bb.

idk why admin and farmhands don't just ban me instead of this weird high schooler chest puffing if they have such an issue. poor babby admin can't take insults so her big sissy farmhand has to come in!

i wouldn't be surprised if you and admins are fucking samefagging and ganging up on me, but it's okay. anyone who wants to fucking mod this website has to be fucking nuts anyways.

No. 9304

File: 1552439027112.jpg (13.03 KB, 301x349, Question_calf.jpg)

>>8771

I got a ban notice thanking me for my help. Was that a genuine communique or sarcasm?

No. 9305

>>9303
The only insulting thing in this thread is that you actually think your samefagging isn't obvious. Here's some advice anon, stop using the same IP ranges on both your mobile device and PC. Have a nice day.
>>9304
It wasn't sarcasm, your reports have been helpful!
>>9302
The two threads are pretty active right now but we can merge future kspam threads.

No. 9306

>>9305
do you seriously think that multiple people can't be in the same area? i know atleast 3 people who live in the same town as me that browse lolcow lmfao.

No. 9307

File: 1552450607234.gif (4.4 MB, 480x268, literally you.gif)

>>9306
>do you seriously think that multiple people can't be in the same area?
All you have to do anymore is not reply and it's over, there's no need to go on this next level charade. This is too much cringe.

No. 9308

>>9307
shouldn't the admin ban me??? she keeps calling out all these broken rules but isn't doing anything. oh right, because no one is breaking any rules and she's just making shit up.

No. 9309

>>9308
There is always infighting in this thread and nobody gets banned really
>>9307
This thread should go to snow at this point

No. 9310

>>9308
I've rarely ever seen anyone banned for breaking rules in meta lmao
At this point I wouldnt ban you either because having an autistic girl constantly dig herself deeper in the whole while thinking that she's better than anyone on the same forum she uses, and let's be honest, daily is ABSOLUTELY hilarious.
I can't tell you how sad it was to see you genuinely thought this was "ganging up" on you.

No. 9311

>>9302
I second this.
It's obnoxious and the more threads there are, the more it attracts kpop fags from twitter/PULL/etc who refuse to integrate, and are only here to shit anonymously on their disliked group while spamming/stanning their favorites. Shit shouldn't be encouraged with multiple threads.

No. 9312

>>9311
Thirding. At the very least the idol boy and idol girl spam could be merged.

No. 9313

>>9310
lol what? no one ever said that, it's just really fucking cringy that admin is triyng to "call me out" when she should be doing her fucking job. you sound more autistic than me, i'm just a chronic alcoholic shitposter :3c

No. 9314

tinfoil

what if the autosage of gender critical thread was a way to distract us from jill's red text thread

what if jill is on the mod team and she is red texting everything because she's a retard who doesn't understand imageboards

No. 9315

>>9314
don't be silly anon, she'd be rainbowtexting everything.

cheers to the best thread on the board right now.

No. 9316

>>9313
>everyone is more autistic than me
>I'm just an alcoholic
Christ
>>9311
I noticed this too it's really just a fanwar

No. 9317

>>9313

shay go home.

No. 9318

Can we finally get IP etc checks on the Logan/Dorian/Isa posts since it's happening again?

No. 9319

>>9318

The thread is filling up with "Hi, Cow".

No. 9320

>>9302
I don't get why there's even a need for these spam thread. Plenty of kpop idols are already getting posted in the cute girls/boys threads, the girls/guys I'd like to fuck threads and so on. Why should they be deserving of a thread specifically dedicated to only them? Could I just make an american models thread, because I only want to look at american models, despite there already being multiple other threads in which they regularly get posted?

No. 9321

>>9320
Because other farmers get triggered by idol spam in non kpop threads and the thinly veiled thirstposting was cluttering up kpg, bitch.

No. 9322

>>9321
nta but no need to be so rude, it's a genuine/reasonable question.

No. 9323

>>9321
Then how about you stop spamming and only post 1 or maybe 2 pictures like any other normal person as well, bitch.

No. 9324

>>9323
No thanks, I neither want to nor need to. This is an image board after all.

No. 9325

>>9313
>Say something stupid
>everyone tells you it's stupid
>Get called out by admin
>Say they're ganging up on you
>Everyone still agrees you're stupid
>"Ur actually more autistic than me1!!1!2!2!2!"
Also lol calling Amin cringy when you keep posting because your feelings got hurt

No. 9327

Thanks for deciding to merge the idol spam in the future. Those threads stand out like sore thumbs.

No. 9329

>>9318
This reminds me, is the Raven investigation still going on, admin?

No. 9330

there's a scrot in the pink pill thread posting scat porn.

No. 9331

This thread is crazy. So many insults and shit. While I think the new, more stringent moderation is unlike most chans (and I doubt admin likes me, personally) I really appreciate the transparency and how communicative she is considering LC is not the only thing on her plate. It really is running smoothly considering how heavily moderated we are in comparison to most chans.

No. 9332

>>9327
We'll be sure to make sure the thread is merged once either one gets locked.
>>9329
>>9318
The investigation is complete, we're getting ready to label posts. It's best to keep this here for maximum impact.
>>9331
I don't mean to make moderation stricter, if anything the condensed rules are meant to make things more lax and enjoyable for everyone. If you have any recommendations for improving moderation I'm all ears.
To make it a bit more clear, derailing a bit or being catty shouldn't be a reason enough to get a hard ban hammer in my opinion. I think bans should get issued when the user(s) have been going at something for hours or have a history of repeating offenses.

No. 9333

>>9332
Can I ask kindly what was wrong with the Idol thread?

No. 9334

>>9333
There's nothing wrong with the idol threads themselves, having 4 active k threads is just excessive. Merging kboy spam and kgirl spam just means 1 less thread.
That is k-critical, k-general, and the future k-idol spam for both genders.

No. 9335

>>9334
Hmmm, makes sense. Thank you for responding!

No. 9336

>>9332
My body is ready for the labelling! Thanks admin for picking up the pieces of the mess this place was in.

No. 9337

>>9332
I'm super keen to see if Raven dropped the initial info about them. I did want to see a thread on them, tho.

No. 9338

Also, admin, is a hellweek scheduled?

No. 9339

Why is necroing the "Would you date/be friends with someone with ed?"-thread allowed? It's been dead for 3(!) years already.
In general, threads about EDs aren't really a good idea, you known that it'll cause infighting.

No. 9340

>>9332
I had a few complaints about the new farmhands. I mean a lot of bans are well earned but some are wtfs. Overall, I don't care that much, but this makes it all better, Admin-kun. We've all been really suspicious and while it's been kind of milky, not enough to become Raven's personal army.

Thanks for the investigation!

No. 9341

>>9339
Isn't necromancy allowed outside of /pt/, /w/, and /snow/ now? Last time someone got banned for it there was a lot of reeing about it in here.

No. 9346

>>9341
Necroing on /ot/ should be fine… it's a discussion board and documenting milk isn't a priority there which is the main reason necroing is an issue on a cow board like /pt/. Afaik it's not even considered necroing if you post new milk in the most recent thread on a cow, even if the thread hasn't been active for a long time. It's only bad if you made a non-milk post.

For /ot/ it's just bringing up an old topic and shouldn't cause issues for anyone since nobody will click a thread only to find out there's no milk, it's just some anon who decided to go "wow she's fat" or something lel.

No. 9348

>>9217
>>9221
>>9227
Some of the rule enforcement does seem to be over-zealous, but you guys are completely missing the fact that the audience of lolcow has grown and changed demographically to an extreme degree over the years. When a community only has a couple hundred or thousand members, it's piss easy to maintain without creating or enforcing many rules. There's been a huge influx of PULL, Instagram, tumblr, Kiwi Farms, etc. over the years, and I can guarantee you that this place would be unsalvageable if strict rules hadn't been created and enforced. Gossip communities are catnip for the worst kinds of people, and the rules prevent them from swarming the place and ruining the culture.

It'd be nice to be able to have heated arguments without getting banned tho.

No. 9349

>>9337
Yes if we can get a thread unlock with the labelling that would be doubly sweet.

No. 9350

>>9332

She is suspected of posting in at least two Alt Cow threads, the Gender Critical thread, and of course her own threads.

No. 9351

>>9332
You're the best, admin! I agree that it should stay here until everything is ready. Let's hope that others honor that as well.

No. 9352

Would it be possible for a janitor to clean up the kpop critical thread and dish out a few warns? The last one was awesome and this one would be as well, but theres a few newfags shitting it up horribly. There's currently tons of milk so I'd love to see the thread purged of awful shitposts.

No. 9353

>>9352
There's not much that can be done about it; on-topic shitposting is halal on /m/.

No. 9354

Can we try and cut down on tinfoiling? Some threads without any milk currently coming devolve into tinfoil after tinfoil and it adds nothing to the topic but pointless speculation and makes everyone look bad. Is it okay to report this sort of stuff more often?

No. 9357

>>9353
mate it's totally ot. it's posts like "uugh that was 9h ago sis", "that wasn't me it was some other anon", "idk who even goes clubbing", "idk who lets others film them while having sex" – all unsaged. it's a fucking mess and it deserves to be purged

No. 9358

Is this cow board run by actual trannies or what
>No racebaiting
I mean holy shit, why this is a rule.
Gook is a gook, nigger is a nigger and kike is a kike
All of them do equally stupid shit.
Literally no-one is going to get their sensibilities hurt for straight talk.
Is our benevolent (((admin))) one of the chosen?

Why the frequent use of buzzwords? This place is no chan board.

No. 9359

>>9358
If you want to be openly racist, go to 4chan where you belong. Racebaiting has always been against the rules.

No. 9360

>>9359
Why are the motivation for something like that rule? It has been in the chan culture for past two decades.

No. 9361

>>9360
What does it add to the conversation and culture other than being a tryhard edgelord? I think that’s the main issue.

No. 9362

>>9358
afaik It's not because Lolcow is trying to be particularly PC but it's more because it attracts either reeing /pol/posters or ignites whites vs asians vs blacks dumpster fires, completely shitting up the thread with 400+ replies of circular arguments and derailing. It used to happen all the fucking time and ruined multiple threads until it became a bannable offense.

>>9361
Yeah this

No. 9363

I have a question for the mods or admins. Has soapboxing been established as a rule or no? I remember conversation about that a while ago but that was the transition between the admins. some users fixate on someone’s political beliefs rather than posting any actual milk. I’m not talking about flat earthers or someone like Candance Owens who has dodgy shit other than views. I mean people like Morena who are just posted because farmhands don’t find her “woke”. I just don’t think every SJW or alt righter is a cow solely on their views.Any comments on this?

No. 9364

Admin there’s an active Amina du Jean thread in /snow/ but an anon posted a fresh one in /w/ to avoid auto-sage with tons of samefagging/bumping, of years old milk. They’re also currently spamming unrelated threads in /w/ with amina porn from years ago. Not really a big deal but thought something should be done because it’s obvious vendetta and was a huge problem with the past admins and mods.

No. 9365

>>9358
Race baiting just leads to arguments and unnecessary days long debates. I’m glad they have that rule on here tbh.

No. 9367

>>9354
Yes, report it so we can see it and access the situation.
>>9360
Actually, most chans don't care for it. In fact, most boards on 4chan hate /pol/ and /b/. Saying something edgy isn't racebaiting on it's on either, usually it's an anon sperging about something in /w/ thread.
>>9363
Those cows are cows for being delusional and paranoid, not just their politics. Take someone like Laura Loomer for example.
So yes you're right that politics alone don't make a cow unless it's very outlandish but there are usually other factors involved.
>>9364
Thanks for the heads up.

No. 9369

Why has cropped child pornography within Discord logs been up for 11 months?
>>>/snow/544188
>>>/snow/545064
>>>/snow/574953

Does this mean anyone can post cp as long as they crop it?

No. 9371

sperging around felix, nazis and jews is intensifying in the youtubers general thread. we obviously need the debate around him with current events but soapboxes have come out. if it could stay on topic as to youtube, the conversation will be more sane.

No. 9372

>>9369
That isn't cp and we looked into the Sosa thread months ago. We have confirmed who the reporting parties are.

No. 9373

>>9372
How is it not cp? Because it's cropped? There's a sexualized image and a cropped topless image of Sunny who's 14 in those pics.

No. 9374

>>9372
>We have confirmed who the reporting parties are.
So you're not removing cp because you assume who the reporting parties are.

No. 9375

>>9371
Seconding this. The latest couple of posts are nothing but infighting.

No. 9376

>>9374
Funny how you want cropped photos of what you sent removed, Michael.
>>9371
>>9375

Noted.

No. 9377

>>9376
>How is it not cp? Because it's cropped?
Again, answer the question instead of being avoidant. It seems you're acknowledging it is.

No. 9378

>>9376
>cropped photos of
So you're saying they're cropped photos of cp of 14 year old Sunny put out by Michael.

No. 9379

File: 1552825278319.gif (996.99 KB, 245x200, retard.gif)

>>9378
>>9377
For being someone who has been in an imageboard before, you sure don't act like it with all the sperg. Posting shit on sites that are used to archive antics of people, especially posting your own antics… Wow that is sperge galoré, it is almost like… Wait…
Wow, it is almost like posting your antics on a site used to archive ends up archiving them?!?

That thread does not constitute CP. You are making a fool out of yourself even more now, and I hope admin labels every single post everyone in your crew has made. Because this sure has warranted it in the past.
>Child pornography is considered to be any depiction of a minor or an individual who appears to be a minor who is engaged in sexual or sexually related conduct.

The posts you referenced contained a picture of a person holding their own neck fully clothed, a censored ID and a cropped picture of a womans sternum. None of these are a sexual act nor sexually related conduct.

No. 9380

>>9379
>The posts you referenced contained a picture of a person holding their own neck fully clothed
A 14 year old choking their neck.
>a censored ID
I'm making a complaint about the sexual depiction of a minor and cropped nude of them lolcow has hosted on its site not an ID.
>cropped picture of a womans sternum
You mean a cropped topless photo of a 14 year old showing their breasts.

No. 9381

File: 1552842280405.jpg (73.92 KB, 300x250, gleeful bulgarian frog.jpg)

>>9380
I really don't think you know what CP is although you just got the legal definition of it explained to you, but hey maybe it's dyslexia.

Those do not constitute as CP. If you really actually feel it is CP and believe it constitutes as CP, you can make a complaint to the police and get the exact same reply from them.

Up to you, do remind them though that you posted them yourself Michael and actually have child porn in your possession and distributed it. Which your dumbass has already admitted here three times and get slapped with actual possession and distribution of actual child pornography.. How embarrassing and cringeworthy, trying to wave around legal jargon without understanding it to cover up your dumb behavior and accidentally snitch on yourself. Instead of screeching autistically at the admin here, you should be worrying that someone has capped your dumb threats here and you admitting to distributing and possessing child pornography and filed an online tip with the info.

You just keep on digging that grave for yourself here, this is hilarious.

No. 9382

>>9381
>that someone has capped your dumb threats here
You're very cringe. A complaint isn't a threat.

No. 9383

>>9382
You are just a gift that keeps on giving. Admin already confirmed the thread in question has you posting the cringe. Everyone already saw those posts and your threats there, dumbass.

As for the cropped photo of the sternum and claiming the whole photo contains sexual features of a minor. The media in question is not indistinguishable to the viewer, as the whole photo has never been posted. Due to this the admin nor anyone not in possession of the allegedly uncropped image can confirm is there a visual depiction of a minor engaging in sexual acts nor is there any actual evidence to confirm that the subject of the photo indeed is an identifiable minor.

Due to this there is no evidence that the photo in question qualifies as media that would be classified under the exploitation of a child label.

You can obviously Michael mend this little problem, very easily in fact, and prove it is actually CP as you allege by posting the whole photo in question. Obviously though if you happen to post CP, do not be surprised if you have the cops contact you after about possession and distribution of child porn. But thank you for snitching on yourself three times already, can you make it a four?

No. 9384

>>9383
>Admin already confirmed
They confirmed they're a retard and assuming anyone other than one person would not want that up.

No. 9385

>>9384
Calm down Michael! You no longer want to share it all, what did Ciara promise you puss puss if you get all your sperging taken down?

No. 9386

>>9367
the thread is already in auto sage but wanted to give a heads up, the same vendetta anon from yesterday is spamming the Aminyan thread in /snow/ with unspoilred old porn and is ban evading, same fagging etc.

No. 9387

>>9383
>the whole photo has never been posted. Due to this the admin nor anyone not in possession of the allegedly uncropped image can confirm is there a visual depiction of a minor engaging in sexual acts
>prove it is actually CP
You're basically asking for nudes of a minor pretending you don't know they are one.

No. 9388

fatvegfemme Is full of spergs, powerlevelling, disability olympics. Since no one will assimilate please ban hammer better on this thread.

No. 9389

>>9387
Nah, I just think you are full of shit and using a false flag of alleged child porn to try and get your temper tantrum through.

No. 9390

I don't mean to get tinfoily but I seriously can't comprehend how Amina is making porn fucking old white dudes with strapons but her topic is in autosage and buried. Mods seem to make any excuse they can for her (infighting, no milk, now "pimp tinfoiling" wtf?) I've never seen the mods go to this length to protect a cow.

No. 9391

>>9390
Mods have said it earlier but just because someone is a whore doesn’t make them a cow. Not saying she isn’t worthy of a thread but the only posts in her thread I’ve seen are dominatrix porn that we posted here last year already and autistic analyzations of begnin tweets. I don’t think it’s protection, considering the thread was in auto sage for massive tinfoiling and same fagging yet the farmer responsible for that started spamming the pictures in other threads. That type of behaviour is only going to keep it in autosage. The thread is available to discuss in and isn’t locked. You can talk freely. can’t see why you’re so hell bent on bumping it and spamming the pics everywhere.

No. 9392

>>9390
maybe it's the cows posting in her thread that trigger the autosage, anon

No. 9393

>>9392
This. Idk what it is but the anons posting in her thread are somehow cringier than her. there’s one person who I’m pretty sure is the posting in here and tried to make the new thread who seriously doesn’t get sarcasm or being flippant. They’ll post tweets where she makes a bad joke three years and uses it for tinfoiling how she must be a human trafficking victim lol. She’s a flop weeb still clinging to relevancy, has been a hoe for years which is open on her part…dime a dozen. Nobody is a cow just for being a slut.

No. 9394

File: 1552913869668.jpeg (280.3 KB, 1125x1483, DD676C59-39D3-4289-A551-DCF65D…)

>>9390
Why are you so fixated on hookers and whores? You’re the same person tinfoiling and spamming up the Galaxy thread with super old receipts on Mikan after nobody on PULL cared on EITHER of your accounts. You can’t spam the site because nobody cares about your frothing radical feminist bullshit. Stop complaining about auto sage. The way you’re acting the Galaxy thread is going to be contained because of your spamming.

No. 9395

File: 1552914333535.jpeg (350.54 KB, 1102x2211, 78DFA8A6-8FFD-41B6-856D-A51E13…)

>>9394
literally chased off your alt account on PULL for spamming this autistic moralfagging radical feminist shit and came here to spam more, getting mad that nobody cares. Get the hint.

No. 9396

What's this about the GC thread disappearing?

>>>/ot/387893

No. 9397

>>9396
I’ll ask the other mods, but as far as I know no one has touched it. Sometimes threads get accidentally autosaged from a misclick. I’ve done it in the past myself, if it was going to be truly autosaged we would say something.
Thanks for bringing it to our attention.

No. 9398

>>9396
It hasn't been autosaged or moved, there's no record of anything changing.
>>9390
Read the rules on the cow criteria. Amina sperg is a clear vendettachan

I wanted to say that a new thread on Kelly Jean may be created under the condition her patreon content isn't posted.

No. 9399

>>9398

>"Amina sperg is a clear vendettachan"


Please for the love of pt, it has to be Himeka or Micky. After all of these years they STILL haven't learned, even after previous Admin confirmed it.

These bitches really can't let it go. Jfc.

No. 9400

>>9394
Imagine actually reading pull. Nice try but no, I just was surprised to come back to her thread after finding it again months later to see it's still in autosage with actual things going on but someone like Himezawa has absolutely nothing yet has a new thread.

>>9398
Uh I hope to god you're not saying I'm the Amina sperg when I haven't even posted in there recently until today? Yikes.

No. 9401

>>9400
Because the mods are in on it dumby. They're shady.

No. 9402

>>9400
You admitted in other threads to be the main person posting them and admin who can see your IP confirmed you’re obviously a vendetta chan. Your entire PULL account is dedicated to Mikan, Penus and Amina being sluts and feminist shit. Posts here are identical to the ones there. This is the complaints thread so unless you have a clear complaint leave it.

No. 9404

I think the uk weebs thread is hidden?
I can see it in the catalog but in the regular viewing /pages version it is not there? I haven't hidden any threads.
Just wondering if that is a glitch?

No. 9405

i wish we still had the transpassing thread. the gendercrit thread mostly doesn't interested me, i just wanna laugh at hons.

No. 9406

>>9404
The galaxy one right? Last I looked the vendettachan from the other threads was spamming it back to back with old Mikan screenshots. Mods could’ve moved it due to samefagging or it could be a glitch.

No. 9407

>>9405
It's stupid that we can have 80 kpop related threads but we have to direct all mtt troon related shit to one thread. If the fakeboi thread is still here I don't see why we can't have a male equivalent or the transpassing thread back.

No. 9408

>>9407
*One thread that evidently features a turbo autist as it's main contributor

No. 9409

I was wondering if the next Kpop Critical could be considered a General thread as well.

This would:
1. Decrease the number of Kpop threads
2. Promote more activity in 1 thread.

We've had a problem with infighting for the past few days because some think that if you don't have a hate-boner for everyone in Kpop you should stay in the General Thread. However, the General Thread is a hugbox so people understandingly post in the Critical thread.

No. 9410

>>9409
>Promote more activity in 1 thread.
You're just salty that the critical thread is at #20 while your stan thread is at #2…

No. 9411

>>9409
I second this. Kpop General should be a legit general thread and include both the positive and the negative discussion. It would alleviate a lot of other issues with those threads too.
The thirsty, circlejerky posting can go to the spam threads and the anons with genuine hateboners can fuck off to the vigilant citizen forum lol.

No. 9413

>>9410
? I've been part of the critical threads since they've initially began I just thought it would be a helpful solution.

What do you propose then?

>>9411
Exactly. That's why it makes sense to have it all in one massive thread.

The idol threads will be merged and kpop over-wanking can be in there.

The General can have critical and positive things so it's not a hugbox thread nor get awkwardly close to a Anti-Korean thread.

No. 9414

>>9409
I wouldn't mind it happening but it'll probably get too much push back from the people that go there because they hate kpop/koreans/korean culture.

No. 9415

There's so much legit milk, the threads are moving super fast, why change anything? Why would you merge a perfectly fine thread with another - just for the sake of the latter not dying?
Discussions about real rapists get interrupted by people chatting about which songs they're into lately and that just sucks.
Please dear mods and admin-sama, let us have the kpop critical thread.

No. 9416

>>9414
those anons are nothing but the vocal minority of shitposters at the end of the day, not the ones who bring the legit milk

No. 9418

>>9415
Not everyone wants to see a shitton of koreaboo threads anon.

No. 9419

For some reason the website is only updating to posts I've seen 6 hours ago, but still bumping normally. looking in the thread you can see the rest of the photos. I'm on mobile if that helps.

No. 9420

>>9409
or we could penalize infighting and clean up the thread? newfags are running around unwrangled

No. 9421

>>9419
Just came here to see if this has been mentioned. I'm mobile too and none of the threads are updating properly only when you click in to reply.

No. 9422

>>9421
yeah this is happening for me too

No. 9423

>>9421
Oddly for me I’m getting the opposite… threads loading up correctly/updating on mobile but not in browser on my computer

No. 9424

>>9421
Temporary fix for this: hide saged posts for the thread and then unhide them right after or just reply to the thread. It updates normally.

No. 9426

Happening on mobile and my computer.

No. 9427

At the moment I seem to be seeing some new posts, with hours of posts missing in between the new post and older posts.
Seems to be a problem for many, anyone know what causes stuff like this?

No. 9429

so my first substantial ban just ended and since all my other bans have been really short, i never attempted to appeal them. this one i did leave a comment in the appeal box. just wondering how you get back to see if there’s a response from admin/farmhands? do i just have to make another post so it leads me to the ban page? thanks in advance for anyone who answers

No. 9430

>>9429

Yes, make another post.

No. 9431

>>9397

Maybe that user was encountering this bug >>>/meta/9191. She didn't say if she looked in the catalog.

No. 9432

>>9427
>>9426
the tip that >>9424 suggested (hiding saged posts and then unhiding them) fixed it for me

No. 9433

>>9430
cheers anon, thanks for letting me know

No. 9436

>>9396
It hasn't been autosaged or moved, there's no record of anything changing.
>>9390
Read the rules on the cow criteria. Amina sperg is a clear vendettachan

No. 9437

Anyone still experience the loading issue at the index?

No. 9438

I nominate the PnP thread to be put on autosage if not locked.

>>>/snow/788725

No. 9439

>>9438
It has been on autosage for months. It should be locked at this point.

No. 9440

>>9416
This is true; because they hate anything Korean, they wouldn't be up to date with what is happening

No. 9441

>>9437
I’ve been alright with it and I’m a mobile user

No. 9442

>>9437
yes! the hide and show saged posts trick works but it's bit bothersome. weirdly enough, /m/ and /meta/ seem alright

No. 9443

>>9437
yes, and the recommended trick fixes have done nothing. threads haven't updated since yesterday for me.

No. 9444

>>9437
yes, i'm also having the same problems as >>9443

No. 9445

>>9416
>>9443
same here. If I click into a thread it's okay but no amount of refreshing or hiding and showing saged post makes any different to the index pages of pt, meta or snow

No. 9446

>>9439
It's such a sad thread at this point. I appreciate admin giving it another chance at least, but its done for.

No. 9447

I see no point in having so many kpop threads, especially ones dedicated to spamming pictures of people anons find attractive. Same could go for "cute girls with X phenotype" and "husbandos" threads. There should be some room for discussion in a thread, ideally. This isn't pinterest.

I guess the random meme image threads are kinda pointless too but at least it's not a weird internet shrine dedicated to people that are fuckable. Memes are specifically relevant to chan culture anyway.

Merging critical and kpop stan threads sounds like a shitstorm bc people can't help but argue.

No. 9448

>>9443
>>9444
>>9445
Can you guys try flushing your browser cache? I'm personally not experiencing issues on mobile or PC since doing some server maintenance.

No. 9449

>>9448
have the same issue with /snow. Cleared the cache, the board is still dead for me. Thought it's just my internet acting up but apparently not

No. 9450

>>9448
thanks, that worked for me. sorry I didn't think of that before writing about it here.

No. 9452

>>9447
Imo image threads are fine if there is discussion, like the husbando thread has. I don't get the idol spam threads though because there is already kpop general and people could talk about how much they love performer x there. If someone wants to collect images there is pinterest etc as you say

No. 9453

>>9447
I don't understand why having threads with similar topics is such a bad thing, or having a thread with little discussion. This isn't reddit.

No. 9454

>>9332
"The investigation is complete, we're getting ready to label posts."

Any idea when this will drop? Assuming it will be announced in-thread.

No. 9456

I hope someone can clarify something for me. If calling Plainey and Greg ugly and Moo fat are no contribution/nitpicking, does the same rules apply for the Dasha thread?

It gets out of control in there and it seems like milk is finally going to make a mild appearance. Unfortunately, it also seems like the nitpicking and million skinwalking posts are also going to make a comeback and might end up drowning out drops of milk.

No. 9458

>Do not post photos of minors where there is an expectation of privacy.

Mom Bloggers thread >>>/snow/480735 and >>>/pt/647743.

Expectation of privacy when the moms parade them out to millions online and in the media? Yay or nay?

No. 9459

>>9437

>>>/meta/9191

Right now according to the catalog the GC thread should be at the top of page 2 but it is not. On Android Chrome.

No. 9460

>>9458
Yeah it's fair game. Lolcow historically had the hartley thread for years and I don't see why that can't be done for mommybloggers with milk potential.
I guess
>>9456
Yeah it is, bans have been issued for nitpicking over the past few days. All three threads attract the worst newfags afterall.
>>9454
We'll be working more on it this weekend. Can't put a proposed date though, sorry for the tremendous 100 year wait on this.
>>9459
It might be related to the current bug unfortunately.

No. 9461

There is SO much blogging in the Jill thread. There is no need for the 2365th anon mentioning what they during uni - redtext seems appropriate at that point tbh.

No. 9462

>>9460

Re >>9459, this bug has existed for as long as I have used the site. I have posted about it several times.

No. 9463

File: 1553281219995.png (118.05 KB, 494x368, Screen Shot 86.png)

Is Repzilla sperg back again?
>>>/pt/647869

No. 9467

can admin or farmhands get a feel for whether or not the practical pedo shotafags in the vent thread are scrots? i find it hard to believe that, especially when the topic was first posted, that amount of shotafag farmers happened to be online and they all happened to be posting, and that so many would be supportive of the "just a drawing" bullshit. the topic in an otherwise dead thread moved too quickly and with too much acceptance to be organic

it really reads to me like a raid

No. 9468

>>9467
Might not be a raid but it gives me a suspicious feeling too.

No. 9470

I got banned this morning for something I posted 5 days ago in the momokun thread. It wasn't completely off topic since it was about her fate sperging. Makes it discouraging to post since it was unexpected. It wasn't a nitpick or even weight related. Are there new rules for the thread? I apologise, but I've been on the momokun thread since #10 and it's odd to get temp banned for something I posted days ago.

No. 9471

>>9467
I have had a strange feeling about the overly baity pedo confessions in /ot/ and /g/ overall. The posters are usually newfags and yeah. I can't be 100% sure though. I bet there are also some serious posters, naturally.
>>9470
You can appeal things like this, it's hard for me to follow up on the ban because you're on another device but you can see the new revised rules in lolcow.farm/rules for some more info.

No. 9473

Was the Kelly Eden thread >>39600 locked by accident/is there a reason? And can/should I make a new thread if it cannot be unlocked? Thanks!

No. 9474

This is, hands down, the worst-moderated forum I have ever been on.

No. 9475

>>9473
It was an accident, unlocked now. Thanks for telling us.

No. 9476

"Onision (and Laineybot) - Desperate Relevance Edition Anonymous 1 year ago No. 410906

Lainey has developed cow tendencies over the course of the Onion threads and according to the farmers, she's featured along with Onion as the second co-conspirator in this dramatic saga from now on. "

This was never debated previously by farmhands/admins but now Lainey is not allowed to be spoken about unless relating to Greg? I thought it was understood that she is a cow herself? Please give us an update on the rule changes with a sound reason as to why changes are being made, before admins randomly decide what they please, as its really confusing and seems flip-floppy

No. 9477

>>9476
It's not really random, anons in the onion thread are just incapable of integrating because the majority of them flocked from tumblr, twitter, and temp. It's pretty obvious that most oldfags abandoned the thread to only check up once in awhile because of how bad the thread is.
Lainey can be posted in fakeboi, if there is something relevant to Greg than it can be posted in the onion thread. So yeah that pretty much kills most nitpicking potential.

No. 9478

>>9474
it’s not a forum, go back to PULL

No. 9479

Could there be some clarification on the use of VPNs?
The concept of free speech has died my country so I've started using a cycling VPN to browse the internet. I've noticed that attempting to post on some VPN IPs results in an error page. I know a lot of people abuse VPNs to cause problems and post illegal content, so I would understand if VPNs are banned. I do however think that it's dishonest to implement a shadow ban without warning as it has the potential to affect actual posters.

No. 9480

Can we get more info on autosaging Shay's thread that isn't just, "hurr durr, cancer." That's not transparency. It's starting to sound like the mods are just trying to hide threads they personally don't like, instead of actually listening to the userbase. I feel like you guys are using autosage as a copout to just cleaning up threads. This is the second time now a cow's thread has been put in autosage because the mods couldn't be assed to just delete stupid, nitpicky comments and set hard rules for future threads.

No. 9482

>>9480
>thread op is poor quality, pic is for ants and not what thread wanted
>no milk at all just nitpicks about thread, shay's ass and chit chat
>autosage, which has been hanging over these threads for a while after many complaints here in /meta/, is finally brought down
>oh wow where did this come from the thread was fine!!!
just speaking as a regular lurker of the shay threads, this one took a really cancerous turn. the problem can be turned around, just focus on milk and less on the 1000th mention of her boil

No. 9483

Mod on Onision thread has lost it, and gone ban happy. Banning people with great contributions to the the thread. Not allowing discussion around Lainey who is a factoring cow with Greg.

No. 9484

>>9481
Lainey does awful things too but the myth that she's a bigger cow than greg is the product of a bunch of bored stay at home moms who want to nitpick her looks. find a behavior to nitpick.

>>9477
you called this 100% admin

No. 9485

Not a huge issue but I just noticed that every single page I go to has the exact same banner. Even If I close the window and reopen the site in a fresh one. It's supposed to randomize on every new page so it's really odd, is there a bug? Like I said, not a really important issue just something weird.

No. 9486

>>9485
admin did a server update (or something like that) a few days ago. try emptying your cache? it worked for me with things that weren't updating.

No. 9487

File: 1553339323349.jpg (34.08 KB, 350x350, image.jpg)

watching lainey anons lose their shit has been delightful, thank you admin

No. 9488

Admin are you being a tight ass over bandwidth is this why an anon board is getting heavily restricted in discussion? Do you need help with costs or something?

No. 9489

>>9460
Just happy to hear there is movement on it tbh. And by the sounds of it, some milk.

>>9483
>Banning people with great contributions to the the thread.

Where? Those threads have been worse than usual for a while, which is a decent effort.

No. 9490

what’s up with all the weird necromancy lately? did we get linked in some mommy FB group or some shit? all the necro posts are 100% unironic autism written by people who don’t understand imageboards. it’s confusing and kinda interesting.

No. 9491

>>9488
That's what it sounds like to me. I don't know why farmhands and anons are acting like this is an academic website, and everything you say has to be new information, and just casual discussion about a cow is the worst thing ever. It's a fucking chan board; you'd think they were actually being paid for this shit with how draconian they're being.

No. 9492

>>9491
the point of the site has been lost for some time. and the no nitpicking rule is one reason why people left fucking /cgl/. this isn't an imageboard anymore.

i know imageboards have rules and aren't just anything goes, but these threads aren't for archiving purposes, they are for us to use to discuss cows and stuff. the fact that admin is trying to "crack down" on /ot/ and /g/ should be a huge red flag to anybody, but she's using the trump method of saying stuff people likes in an attempt to distract them, then chimping out when people notice. she purposely refuses to answer questions and does things of her own accord despite having prior discussions. guess we can't expect much more from someone who was friends with the previous admin.

No. 9493

>>9492
Ironically, excessive nitpicking made me stop wanting to contribute actual milk to the onion the thread. It gets tiresome when something that actually is milky gets overlooked to discuss why a cow is soooo ugly/fat.

/cgl/ didn’t ban nitpicking, they banned drama. There’s still threads discussing ita “coords”, shit cosplay and shit makeup.

No. 9494

>>9493
As a user that was around years before tempcow I always found some anons would come in and soapbox an issue they thought was milk. Or they posted something and there wasn't much more to be discussed like how some anons get annoyed when we apparently sweep text message screenshots from victims under the rug cause we're not reiterating the same point 1000 of times.

Honestly it's not hard to scroll past a nitpick comment they're usually a line long. It's longer to come on to minimod the post and contribute nothing.

Some anons are aware cows themselves read the thread so sprinkling in an insult sometimes is just banter, I don't get how other posters get offended when comments aren't directed at them.

No. 9495

>>9479
You can 100% use a VPN. Maybe you got a IP that was already previously banned, just appeal and we'll remove it. If you're still experiencing issues with posting you can email me at admin@lolcow.farm with screenshots of the error message.
I know VPNs are banned on 4chan but they aren't banned here. I don't think VPNs are really abused much to care anyways.
>>9480
The Shay thread as been littered with repetitive nitpicking and derailing. And then you also get those constant "SAGE" minimods. It hasn't just been the new thread, I would say it got worse around the Dawn era.
>the mods couldn't be assed to just delete stupid, nitpicky comments and set hard rules for future threads.
This is an imageboard, we don't simply delete posts for no reason.
>>9483
>mod
Oh, anon.
>>9486
Seconding this.
>>9488
That's not how bandwidth works.
>>9491
Mira, Raven, Vicky, and Luna threads are generally good about this. I would even have to say I'm proud of the improvements in momos thread. Onision and Dasha's thread have issues because of constant newfags.
>>9492
You realize nitpicking has been in the rules for years?

No. 9496

>>9491
Yeah, this is (was?) a board for gossip after all. Some people here seem to have no idea what an image board is. Hint: it's not a heavily moderated subreddit or Admin's personal playground. Autosaging, thread policing and handing bans out like candy doesn't fend off newfags or delivers more milk, it kills activity, threads and boards. Why the change?

No. 9497

File: 1553357750070.jpeg (58.79 KB, 545x363, 99DE6F0D-2C34-4A15-AF36-BAD298…)

>>9494
How can you scroll past nitpicking if 89% of the thread is nitpicking?

No. 9498

>>9497
It's the same action of scrolling just longer anon. Even some of the 'milk' that's posted bores me so I just scroll, sometimes I don't even post if I'm not interested!

No. 9499

>>9498
>sometimes I don't even post if I'm not interested
The nitpickers should learn a thing or two from you. Almost all the decent milk in the thread got derailed.

No. 9500

>>9488
>Is Admin Jewish?

No. 9501

>>9497
If sage mode was reenacted it would be easy enough to filter through the posts without milk. I still don't understand why it was taken away. I guess to discourage conversation that doesn't lead anywhere but that does take some of the fun out of things. Plus it was nice to filter through the shit without feeling like it's being overly policed.

No. 9502

>>9491

Agreed can the onion and Shay admin(s) just get a life and let people bitch about some dumb ecelebs rather than try to police how people gossip lol

No. 9503

>>9495
i know what rules have been around for a while dumbass, i'm saying they're stupid. when i was a janitor with regina they were in the rules, but they were meant to punish users who had a history of nitpicking and not just stop it from happening in the thread.

i honestly can't wait until you get chased out because you're the exact opposite form of shit that the previous admin was. regina had issues but she certainly knew what the site was for.



>>9496
this. the heavy moderation is getting even worse. coupled with the fact that admin is making her own decisions for the site despite the fact that people voted against them

>inb4 the votes were close tho guise!!!

they were, but there's no point to voting if you're just going to make a decision based on your feelings.

No. 9504

>>9501

>>>/meta/9028

>The previous admin hard-coded the no sage feature onto /pt/ so I need to reverse it. It's not as easy as switching a button on or off but it's a work in progress.

No. 9505

Do we use the main onion thread if more milk regarding Lainey and Sarah comes out? I feel like that's not a fakeboi thing and not really directly Greg related, but if it's good (and actual) milk where does it go?

No. 9506

>>9505
It can go in the onion thread. The grooming is like a team effort between the two anyways. It's not a fakeboi thing at all so you're right.
>>9503
Users are banned for having histories of derailing,nitpicking, and blogging overall. Nitpicking happens in all threads, it's just the way it's always been. One off-topic post or nitpick isn't a big deal. When you look at the onion thread it's all some anons have in their post histories. Some anons are legitimately there just to nitpick Lainey while glossing over Greg's milk.
>there's no point to voting if you're just going to make a decision based on your feelings.
If that were true I wouldn't be asking users (who couldn't attend the townhall) for their opinions twice again after votes.
Complaints of "heavy moderation" come from the same handful of threads with moderation issues. Only a few bans are issued per day, more if there is a raid.

No. 9507

File: 1553365419450.png (123.24 KB, 640x1136, E167EB9E-AA11-4F0E-BD90-60CA96…)

>>8771
Lolcow has become USSR.
The threads you mentioned are just as nitpicky as the others, its just that you personally dont like some threads. Moderation is supposed to be about the userbase, not your ego.
Photo from the “hq” moo thread

No. 9508

>>9507
not sure what you mean. those posts are more nuanced than the non-contributing "she is ugly" posts shitting up the shay and onion threads.

No. 9509

>>9503
I was also a janitor with Regina, and we definitely had group discussions before doing shit like autosaging a thread. Hell, we had to ask before redtexting someone. It was definitely slower getting to every complaint, but I don't remember nearly as many complaints about moderation, just that we didn't get to stuff fast enough. Do the current farmhands have anything similar to that, or do they just do it on a whim?

No. 9510

>>9507
why are all of you so quick to jump to tinfoil hat conspiracy level shit about this? just accept that your thread is bad and move the fuck on

No. 9511

>>9506
admin, you know who i am, and i will say it again. i was at the town hall. you said yourself you decided to make the new boards despite the votes, hell we didn't even have a vote for /w/ during the townhall. the votes literally didn't matter. and by stricter moderation, those were your own words about your intentions. you need to stop trying to double talk everyone and thinking you're slick by half-addressing these issues that are brought up. you said that you are bringing about stricter moderation. you said that you decided to make /m/ because "votes were close" and you still refuse to explain why there was no vote for /w/. and you still keep trying to assert that you're being transparent when you're being everything but that. a transparent admin doesn't make a new board and have mods move threads without even announcing the board first. they don't make a board after a vote vetoes it. like others have said, all you're doing is making the site more hospitable for newfags and being weirdly anal about shit that no one gives a fuck about. and it's all because you clearly don't into image boards. anyone else who is made admin after you will revert a lot of the changes you made.

No. 9512

Does the new no lainey rule also mean that posting links to rehosts of her videos is not allowed either? is it allowed if greg makes an appearance in the video? if she talks about their relationship? if sarah's in it because talking about the grooming is allowed?

No. 9513

>>9460

Can you check the IP on >>>/pt/647907

>Screenshot of a restricted post

>I haven't been able to get into any of her new profiles with my sockpuppet accounts

No. 9514

>>9512
If Greg is in the video it's related to Greg isn't it? That's ok. Sarah grooming is already Greg related and is okay as well.

>>9511
/w/ was made without a vote or townhall yes, /m/ was asked about twice in this thread or the previous thread. That vote was a close tie.
I explained before that /w was made because it was my own choice to make moderation easier and to organize threads. This was said in /meta/. Since the creation of /w/ threads are more active and it's been easier for mods and janis to go through reports.
Think whatever you want. All the decisions I've made were discussed with the new staff and thought over carefully. People will always complain about the moderation here, no matter what. A few years ago an admin banned a bunch of threads on the basis of not "liking it", now making new boards to organize things a bit better is the absolute worst.
I really didn't expect any different. I'm going to continue doing my volunteer side job to the best of my ability, have a great day.
>>9509
Yes, autosage is discussed collectively within the staff. At the moment moderators cycle through whichever thread they're assigned for the month and will report back about certain issues or trends.
Getting to complaints happens quickly because we're covered across most timezones now. It's been a blessing when dealing with raids. As for the redtexting, it's not currently encouraged in the new ban guide. Before, redtexting was somewhat random from my understanding.

No. 9516

Re: the red text word filter

Have you considered the fact that it truncates URLs? In this example Daily Mail autocompletes, but not all pages will.

>>>/snow/789166

No. 9517

We have two DID threads, and the older thread just got resurrected with milk.

>>>/snow/663556

>>>/snow/109130

No. 9518

>>9509
The board under Regina was a mess, I recall one out of control staff member in particular who I complained about for sitting on her fave thread and redtexting theories that weren't her canon. She really fucked that thread up and ran off good farmers one by one. Oh, when she wasn't doxing herself. Old admin came back briefly to clean up the shit, as I recall.

No. 9519

>>9517
just give them a link to the new one?

No. 9520

>>9518
Regina herself was fine but her mod team was unbelievably retarded, maybe the worst we've ever had.

No. 9521

>>9520
They had to have some kind of mass firing of staff which first admin came back to help with (as far as he told me). I don't know why anyone thinks Regina's era was the good old days. It was the beginning of the rot, a free for all of giving nutjobs access to power here.

No. 9522

>>9511
>admin, you know who i am

look at liam neeson here with the you know who i am shit.

why does /meta/ always attract autists who have nothing better to do than larp as internet tough guys

No. 9523

>>9519

The new post in the old thread is an update on someone posted there.

No. 9524

>>9511
Lol calm down

No. 9525

>>9511
Imagine seething so hard bc admin made an executive decision with the goal of improving moderation and organization. A decision that ultimately improved the site already.

You crazy bitches think town halls are a direct democracy or something. Whoever's in charge will take the feedback into account but they call the shots in the end. Are you all 12 or something?

No. 9526

Can mods do something about the sperg in the Jillian thread?

No. 9527

>>9526
And IP check? - must be Jill's oat mylk contributing classmate or her friend trying to save face

No. 9528

>>9527
can we get banned for doxxing Molly on the Jill thread? I found her last name but I don't wanna get permabanned for doxxing the newfag

No. 9529

There's the same 2-3 anons Ree'ing about MJ in the Celebs thread and they've been doing it off and on for awhile and whenever no one responds they'll keep trying to force the conversation and the thread will go dead for several days. You can't do what we did for Melanie Martinez and make a separate thread? I don't even bother going into that thread anymore cause it's cancer. I'll be attempting to follow one conversation but then it'll get messed up with them talking about the same exact details from that show or the same YouTube video and the conversations cycles over and over again and it's exhausting to watch

No. 9530

>>9529
The MJ conversation is interesting imo, but I must agree with you, it can be annoying for those who don't care/wanna talk about other celebricows. The subject need a thread on its own (I would like to make one myself but as you can see, my English isn't that great)

No. 9531

why was PnP finally locked/a banned topic? it had dropped down pretty low being on autosage and it seemed pretty cleared up compared to a month or so ago (minus the obvious instafags)
where can we go for petty discussion of idiots in that vein?

No. 9532

>>9531
>it seemed pretty cleared up compared to a month or so ago
this is a lie. the quality didn't even marginally change, it was just slower.

No. 9533

>>9532
i still think the nitpicking was on par with most other threads in /snow/ it was just being very heavily moderated
idk i just like laughing at retards

No. 9534

>>9533
no, it was worse. worse than anisa's thread even. it was a shit thread through and through.

No. 9535

>>9534
i just feel like it's more natural to just let an autosage fizzle out but there are obviously a lot of anons that feel strongly about not talking about her for whatever reason so i get it i guess.
banned topic just seemed extreme to me.

No. 9536

>>9531

The newfaggery was intolerable. No one needs to see unspoilered pics of her snatch.

No. 9537

>>9529
Is this opposed to the same 2-3 anons having a cyclical conversation about die antwoord? Pretty sure that as soon as the hype dies down over the HBO doco that posts will slow. It's a celeb cow general, not specifics so unless admin would prefer that we stop discussing MJ can we all scroll past?

No. 9538

>>9531
Make a thread on PULL if you want to nitpick her lips everyday.
Make a thread on kiwifarms if you want a friendly wholesome user experience.
>>9529
>I don't want anons to talk about something I don't want to talk about
This is strange anon, the thread is moving fine. You can try to switch topics if you want or just ignore.

No. 9539

File: 1553557633760.jpeg (37.37 KB, 552x457, 64022138-73AC-44FB-8A91-B9A242…)

ALL I WANT FOR CHRISTMAS IS PERMANENT AUTOSAGE ON SHAY’S THREAD

No. 9540

>>9539
Same. Why and how did it get taken off autosage so quickly? And now that some retard has posted it on whichever camslut's twitter, more fucking literal whores and their orbiters will flock in to make it even worse. Hopefully they won't leak into the rest of the site…

No. 9541

File: 1553584888464.jpg (11.98 KB, 258x245, 0134 - WlHOCzS.jpg)

>>9538
>Make a thread on PULL if you want to nitpick her lips everyday.
>Make a thread on kiwifarms if you want a friendly wholesome user experience.

wtf i love the admin now

No. 9544

>>9531
Lots of the threads "content" was literally porn and talking about her lips/boobs/makeup. It was like robots talking about how a pornstars elbows are too pointy so they can't fap to her. I reckon the thread was full of fellow degens and dudes jacking off to her. Anons never spoilered stuff and used the thread to record her every move like an obsessive ex.
>THIS BITCH OVER HERE GOING TO GET GROCERIES
>THIS BITCH OVER HERE HAVING FRIENDS OVER
like cool, but that's not milky?

No. 9545

Not so much an issue, but a question. I know it's not allowed to post about people under 16, but if they're users of the site, they've been bagging on others and ended up outed themselves is that still a no go? Do we report them because i thought it wasn't allowed to use the site if you're under 18.

No. 9546

The altcows thread hasn’t updated for me for a week but I know there are new posts since it is on the first page of /snow/. Not sure if this is due to a bug or where to actually report this.

No. 9547

>>9546

Have you cleared your cache?

No. 9548

Out of curiosity will the pnp thread ever be unlocked? Cow is producing milk currently

No. 9549

>>9548
doubt it, you'll get buried just for asking too most likely

No. 9550

>>9538
That wasn't what I was saying calm the fuck down. I'm saying since there is so much too it would make sense to have its own thread like Melanie Martinez. I think most have been pretty harsh towards you but you are pretty shitty when it comes to speaking on handling the website with it's userbase. An MJ thread would be better for discussion because it'll have the info a person needs to make either argument as to whether or not he did it because posts about him end up taking a lot of space and dominating a conversation. You deadass just brushed over the whole notion and summed it up into some juvenile ~u no wanna speak u whine muh~.
I hope you become better at this because I've watched other admins behave on this site the way that you do and it always ends up with them being pushed off. You're too busy trying to sound like a persona of what an admin on here is supposed to be instead of just having a normal conversation with the people.

No. 9551

>>9550
Anon stop whining and start an MJ thread if you want it so much.

No. 9552

>>9551
I literally just said that I wasn't fucking whining? I wasn't even annoyed in post I just proposed something? I was more annoyed by admin being a try hard in the response? I don't make threads I mainly lurk but there's always been a culture on here to propose a new thread for people to make properly since I wouldn't be able to do that cause I've only lurked the past few years. But go off I guess?

No. 9553

>>9552
My phone is being stupid again sorry but I want to reiterate that I deadass was just making a minor suggestion that might be more interesting for everyone but I forgot this thread was cancer.

I agree that the hand that happen in Jill's and momkun's threads don't make any sense also

No. 9554

>>9552
>I literally just said that I wasn't fucking whining

This is an amazing quote, it should be on a banner.

No. 9555

>>9552
there are a surprising number of posts ITT defending the admin in the exact same pissbaby way she types. very mysterious really.

admin doesn't answer questions, so asking is just useless at this point. she's still never answered any of my questions unless it was her bawwing off-trip to defend herself.

No. 9556

>>9516

The link in >>>/ot/391208 is broken because of the word filter.

https://www.comicsands.com/pennsylvania-student-transphobic-federal-complaint-2632370212.html

No. 9557

>>9556
>>9516
Are y'all too retarded to copy the link and paste it in your browser?

No. 9558

>>9548
did she go to the shops again? or post a nude?

she had potential as a cow but the autism ruined that. admin even defied a majority vote not to allow hr back to give you all another chance, you blew it.

No. 9559

>>9550

shut up you autist

No. 9560

>>9557
If you have (accidentally or not) hovered over the butchered link it adds the [archived copy] text to it, so you have to select the link, then remove the tag manually. It's a hassle and it shouldn't be a big issue for the dev to disable to word highlight inside anchor tags such as links. Stop being triggered over someone addressing a clear issue with usability that can be fixed in 5 minutes.

No. 9561

hey just a quick question. Is sage not in the rules anymore? Someone said that, and I checked the rules and I couldn't find anything about it besides to not bump dead threads. sorry if it's something obvious

No. 9562

>>9561
Sage falls under "adhere to board culture"

No. 9563

can an admin or farmhand explain why these other words are showing up as redtext? i get triggered, but abusive doesn't make sense to me, especially when you're talking about being beat up or whatever. are you trying to reduce blogposting? over on /ot in particular it seems weird and it jumps out a lot.

thanks.

No. 9564

>>9561
>>9562
No, it isn't. Pretty much the only thing that will get you banned for not sageing now is necromancy.

No. 9566

>>9548
I don’t understand why pnp would be banned subject like I understand that her thread is full of retards but the bitch is so milky fml. Can’t it just be kept on autosaged?

No. 9567

>>9566
to be fair, anons were given plenty of opportunity to clean up their thread but they didnt, so i guess its a matter of find somewhere else to bitch about her lips and tits. pnp was interesting but anons were ruining it with horrible nitpicks and claiming milk but it was just more complaining about stuff that was beaten into the ground. same with shay tho. interesting but enough with her puss boils and wine habit. its okay for threads to go quiet until something happens.

No. 9570

>>9563
I don't get why oof is in red text.

No. 9571

>>9563
>>9570

maybe its because anytime anything regarding onion ppl start sperging about how everything he does is abusive then they blogpost about his abuse.

oof is probably bc its such a way to start argument. like "oof are you sure you wanna say that?" its like what liberals say before they dogpile

i'm not admin or mod so this is all just tinfoiling

No. 9572

>>9571
ahhh. i stopped following onion aside from wetland destruction a while back. makes sense, i guess.

No. 9576

Has there ever been a discussion about older cows and what to do with them when they're not milky?
I think it's a waste of space to have their threads floating around but some are just too iconic to be nuked completely.
Are we going to ever consider an archive board?

No. 9579

So many anons (newfags?) are not embedding Youtube videos.

None of these posts I have reported in many weeks have been redtexted.

No. 9580

>>9579
they need a warning if only to get them to read the rules / info

No. 9581

>>9579

if the mods red texted every ban or warning they gave out, you'd be in this thread bitching about how the thread is ugly from all the red texting.

No. 9582

>>9581

No, because obviously the other newfags need to see the redtext before they, too, fail to embed. That is the purpose of redtext.

No. 9583

This fucking hellsite has had a ridiculous influx of moralfags lately, screeching sexism, pedophilia and racism at any short, stringy straw they can grasp. Where the fuck did yhey come from? Did this site get linked to some radfem forum again?

No. 9584

>>9583
Way worse. Fatveg attracted spergs from tumblr and a bunch of camwhores came from shay thread after camwhores started linking to here on twitter.

No. 9585

>>9583
why would radfems be moralfags? they hate everything.

No. 9586

>>9585
That's exactly why lol

No. 9588

Moderation has been great. I feel like reports are taken more seriously and responded to very quickly lately. Glad we’re cracking down on new fags again. Thanks.

No. 9589

>>9579
reported a few, saw redtexting. works for me.

>>9584
The fatveg threads are like 10% milk and 90% cancer with nothing in between. hellweek when?

No. 9591

I've noticed that the use of contractions like ngl, lmao, lol and smh are becoming increasingly frequent in the threads I visit. These acronyms don't add much substance to sentences and I feel they should be discouraged. Even remarks like "I'm yelling/crying/D Y I N G" are rather obnoxious and have nothing to do with the cow. I don't care about the poster, I care about the cow.

Perhaps the moderation could consider deleting posts that break the rules? Since not all ban-worthy posts get redtexted, the posts are left up and users start to emulate them, presuming that those kinds of posts and attitides are allowed. The worst should be redtexted and left up as examples, but the "minor" offences (sage, non-contribution, etc) only clog up a thread. If you can't follow the rules, you shouldn't get to use the site.

>>9584
The language of the posts on Phoebe's (and Shay's) thread look more like twitterspeak to me. The "exposure" stunt in Phoebe's thread was especially cringeworthy. I'm glad it was halted in its tracks, kudos to the farmhands for that. It's curious to see farmers so actively wanting to sabotage milk production.

No. 9592

I don't really have any complaints. I just wanted to say I recently found lolcow and I've really been enjoying it. Didn't know this kind of place existed on the internet. Thanks.

No. 9593

Am I am just imagining it, or is the Kpop critical thread becoming more and more overrun with stans? Like it's starting to sound like the comment section on those Kpop news sites, complete with anons unironically using terms like "visual hole", hyungs etc. Plus they all use the Engrish-y phrasing that comes from the weird translations of Knetz comments.
And honestly, as pretty much the last bastion on the internet to be able to complain about the shitshow of a genre as a whole, it's annoying that it's been taken over this way.
Is there any way to possibly direct the stans over to the general thread?

No. 9594

>>9591
>>I've noticed that the use of contractions like ngl, lmao, lol and smh are becoming increasingly frequent in the threads I visit
I'm sorry, anon, but how is this bad at all? They are super common internet acronyms. So long as the post is contributing then the user neding their sentiment with a "ngl" isn't really an issue. It's just shortening a common phrase, like what?

That being said I super agree with the point about Phoebe's thread. It's flooded with newfags and the who expose page was cringy and cowtipping. Like when the anon tried to make an expose video in Jillian's thread. Mods need to nip that shit in the bud asap (thank you for that) - it really does clog up the thread and it always gets encouraged for far too long and I don't get why. Exposing cows will just ruin the milk flow.

No. 9595

>>9593
Uh… it's been full of stans since day one. The thread is more likely to end up being merged with the general thread in the future.

No. 9596

If anything gets banned in the kpc thread, it should be the nitpicking

No. 9597

>>9586
??? then they'd hate the stuff they'd have to moralfag about??? libfems are more of an issue, all their toxic sex-posi tumblr bs is painful.

No. 9598

>>9597
I think for most of us, the radfem AND libfem shit is cringy and annoying to deal with. Both extremes are just sad and don't have relevance when talking about cows yet they both clog up the threads with their opinions nobody asked for. Wish they'd be curbed more. Or simply fuck off.

No. 9599

>>9598
i guess i don't see too much radfem shit in the threads i frequent. is it bad on /ot/ or something? i can agree there tho, don't shit up a thread with shit opinions that don't belong.

No. 9602

File: 1554010100466.jpeg (136.05 KB, 1600x744, 1012039123-912.jpeg)

With how the website is being run, I had some ideas that could really make lolcow better!

First of all, because moderators like to ban anyone for posts they deem to be a non-contribution, we should have some sort of system for promoting posts that contribute to the thread, like some sort of 'up' vote button, and also a 'down' button we can press for bad posts, so we don't have to see them in the thread! That way the mods wouldn't have to ban or delete anything they don't like, the content would be buried for them.

Secondly, I think we should get rid of anonymity on this website. Some people like this 'image board' format because lets them post whatever they want and have a free discussion. Sometimes they even like to make posts of little value, I believe this is called a 'shit post'. This is very dangerous because it can sometimes lead to off-topic posts or people disagreeing with each other. Because the moderators have decided that anything outside of a narrow, arbitrary and vague definition of 'quality' or 'contribution' posts must be banned, it's only natural that we should attach our posts to a username. Having a name attached to an account would make each user think before they post, leading to better quality posts.
This way, the mods can have more control over their users!

Additionally, we should get rid of the image board style format. Image boards are designed in a way that anyone can make a thread on anything they want. Because the moderators have such strict standards on what is deemed thread/post worthy, we should just have a forum-style design. Having a forum-style thread for every subject of interest would save the mods having to make more boards and fracture the website further.

TL;DR Let's stop acting like that CREEPY "4chan" and make this place truly epic!

Hope to see these ideas implemented some time soon my fellow farmers :)

No. 9603

File: 1554010745771.jpg (44.57 KB, 348x470, stock-photo-an-illustration-de…)


No. 9604

>>9602
Now, this is epic.

No. 9605

>>9602
>Suggestion

Just go to Reddit, newfag

No. 9606

>>9602
Anyone who suggests turning an image board into a boring, pandering site like Reddit or a forum should be banned, imho

Just go to Reddit

No. 9607

>>9605
>>9606
>not being able to detect the glaringly obvious sarcasm
pls stop proving his point. I'm downvoting both of you for this.

No. 9608

>>9605
>>9606
You two are so clouded by being cunts for no reason neither one of you saw the obvious sarcasm. This is even funnier than the post tbh.

No. 9609

So we have an unholy chimera of radfem AND libfem moralsperging going on here.
>Why is it ALWAYS le white ppl shooting people down???? kek
>You want to date a guy shorter than you? Ew pedophile alert!!!!
>You acknowledge male overrepresentation in rape statistics? Y-you're a misandrist!
>RRREEEE stop liking problematic sexist media it makes me angry and I can't deal with people liking something I don't!!!!!
>Look guys you shouldn't misgender people gender dysphoria is a real illness!!!
>yeah anon but you do realize face taping IS racist and yellow facing….????
Replying to this sort of bullshit results into them throwing a tism fit with a rhetoric that doesn't make any logical or common sense, but allowing this sort of faggotry to exist here only attracts more of these types.

>>9602
I'm giving you an upvote OP, this is too epic for words lad

No. 9610

>>9602
You are the best lmao

>>9591
and you are the cancer that would love lolcow reddit

No. 9611

>>9609

Agreed, some threads started to be unreadable because of it and ot is starting to feel like tumblr 2.0 with that fuckery going on everywhere. Also looks like the respond "scrot" is a follow up to "handmaiden", whenever anons see opinions being posted that don't line with their own worldview. Take it to your MH thread or whatever.

Also wonder what happened to the hellweek plans? I think a week of banning all newfags and etc. would improve this current situation.

No. 9612

I'm sure this has been mentioned but in addition to "minimod" rule can we have a no "backseat OP" rule?
I hate it when no one else makes a thread, or are too intimidated to, but are going to sit there and complain about how the thread was made ("you forgot x info!" even though its a repetitive event with a cow, not picking the right OP image despite anons voting) or some other ridiculous complaint. If you have enough energy to bitch about the OP make it yourself. Also stop bitching about the "quality" of a thread. There's a hide thread option.

No. 9613

>>9529
>>9550
>>9552
>>9553
Just wondering why a separate Michael Jackson thread was made even though Admin specifically said here
>>9538
that it wasn't necessary?

There's a lot of people doing shady shit, basically ignoring admin and I think it's fucky behavior.

No. 9614

I can view the most recent posts in the GenCrit thread on my mobile but not on my computer. I'm not having this issue with any other thread.

No. 9615

>>9612
Isn’t that derailing?

No. 9616

>>9614
I've noticed the soundclout thread is constantly bumped but with no new posts. is this the same issue? (ie. I'm just not seeing the new posts?). the last post it shows for me is the uh, image of 'normie' DA which I keep thinking 'why is this still here'

too lazy to try clearing my browsing data but that might fix it, if you haven't tried it already, anon

No. 9617

>>9616
I tried that and it's fixed now, TY anon

No. 9618

Please please please lock the stop being a misandrist thread. It started off ok but it's basically turned into an unmoderated Man Hate thread before it got locked and revised.

No. 9619

>>9612
People are allowed to say a thread is badly made or like the recent random new Luna one, completely ill-timed. Don't assume someone better than you at doing them doesn't have a good thread waiting ready to go. Unless the cow is sitting without a thread for a day in a time of high milk flow, there is zero urgency to make a new one. There seems to be a panic that as soon as the first notice comes in, we need a new thread - when we do not.

Creating a bad thread for a cow who regularly has good ones is not a safe bubble where you only get congratulated for your hard work uwu. The type of threads that get bitched about are the badly written ones with lack of accurate updates, shitty thread pics that no-one wanted and so on. Read the room and no complaints will come in.

No. 9620

Admins must have the patience of saints.

No. 9621

>>9619

This.

OP sniping is a thing and the result is usually a shit OP.

No. 9622

>>9611
Report 'handmaiden' and 'scot' spergs for infighting or derailing if this happens.
>>9613
I didn't say a thread couldn't be made but I expressed that I didn't see it as necessary. Now we have the wonderful Finding Neverland thread.
>>9616
Just clear your cache anon you'll feel better I swear.
>>9618
Seconded, I'll lock that thread and leave the new "good guys" thread open.
>>9619
Basically this. Rarely do anons complain about a thread OP that has considerable effort put into it.
>>9612
There are bans issued for obvious derailing over a photo OP but if it's an anon pointing out missing information then it's fair game.

No. 9624

>>9622
Oh wow I didn't expect a reply so quick, thank you!!

No. 9625

>>9622
>Report 'scot' spergs
Aye!

No. 9626

File: 1554098293818.jpg (75.55 KB, 882x960, 1545086668566.jpg)

Tfw no April fools surprise

No. 9627

>>9622
Sorry for replying again but i think that one might need to be locked too imo?? Didn’t post in it but it quickly turned into the same thing?? I'm not trying to make it sound like people disagreeing that there are ok men should be banned, but every man centered topic gets derailed and suddenly there’s walls of text about abuse and at least 20 links for no real reason
OT is usually super chill, but in a sense i feel ever since the man hate/pink pill was reopened yet heavily moderated, anons are just finding anyway they can to sperge about it.
Like jesus, the nice guy thread literally turned into “if you let your bf watch porn you’re a cuckquean - unlike i who gave my bf pics of me in my underwear to jack off to”

No. 9628

File: 1554106371998.png (125.47 KB, 640x1136, 39F82780-E04B-4824-B2DC-C4D142…)

>>9626
it’s in the momo thread. it reminds me of a long time ago on here, we had some kind of random post generator. it was pretty funny.

No. 9629

File: 1554107258099.gif (609.02 KB, 250x183, sad_kong.gif)

>>9628
>tfw we'll never get anything as good as the pull/lolcow switcheroo again

No. 9631

>>9604
Have standards really gotten this low? Still, nice to know shitposting is now being encouraged. Imageboard culture and all that.

Anyhow, is sage still a thing?Because it doesn't seem like it much any more

No. 9632

>>9631
Admin is inclusive in recruiting towards all bodied and minded individuals. Your hate and bigotry towards different abled posters and being inclusive has no place on lolcow.

#spotthenazi #CANCELLED #bigot

No. 9633

My device wouldn't let me screenshot but a farmhand was put out to pasture in the decent man thread? Is it confirmed some of the moderators are complete cunts?

No. 9634

>>9633
Think of what day it is.

No. 9635

>>9634
I think its just that a lot of anons probably grew out of April 1st jokes. Tbh, a lot of the internet just recycles the same gags and jokes, so its hard to tell what is and isnt serious admin things at the moment

No. 9636

what is this years's april fool's prank supposed to be? does it add "Farmhand" to random posts or posts randomly from Farmhands' accounts because somehow every "Farmhand" post is total cancer. Generator or?

No. 9637

>>9636

Correct! We're autogenerated cancer! Have a lovely day <3

No. 9638

>>9629
Why would anyone want something that brought in more pull users to lc?

That was perhaps the worst April fools joke. Still can't believe that admin thought that was a good decision

No. 9639

>>9638
Because it was funny and cute, it was a nice prank

No. 9640

i wish the real april fools joke was all the annoying radfems shitting up /ot/

No. 9641

>>9637
I thought jokes and pranks were suppose to be clever and funny? For lurkers it just makes it look like the site is run by a bunch of…. well guess I wouldn't be wrong

No. 9642

>>9641
Considering there has been farmhands unironically "calling out" "transphobia" among other instances i legitimately couldn't tell(at first) but hey it was an attempt and maybe next year it can be more themed. instead of so overboard it actually rings more true than false to actual mods (at times)

No. 9643

nah this april fools shitposting from the mods is enjoyable. a lot of it seems like what some farmers would unironically post anyway. legitimately a good lul if you ladies would lighten up a little

No. 9645

>>9641
you would have hated the bot prank then, where every single comment was parsed by a bot and replaced by a catty nitpick. every single one in every single thread, even threads with time-sensitive milk happening had the bot there replacing every comment, some for days.

this prank left the threads still going and didn't upend the whole board, it's probably a good choice for admin in this first year. it also makes mockery of some of the past farmhand fuckups as well as the userbase. It's harmless.

No. 9646

>>9645
the bot was better, cringy mod autists showcasing their lack of ability to be funny is embarrassing.

No. 9647

>>9646
idk, it kind of works for me given how modding has been up till now. it seems like a laugh at the poor modding too. I would prefer them to use real quoted comments and not attempt to paraphrase the sentiments, because the originals are gold.

No. 9648

is it just me or is the altcows thread absolutely full of newfags

No. 9649

>>9646
>>9642
aw, it's only once a year. You'll be okay, nonnies

No. 9650

>>9648
It is. Hellweek when?

No. 9651

>>9645
Under admin that did botprank tho users weren't getting banned for their post not being deemed 'quality'. I'm sure another anons aren't a even engaging with the lolz so funny prank cuz they probably think they'll get banned for derailing.

This April fool prank did slow down discussion. Probably would have been funnier if mod team weren't so unpopular and seen as the fools most days.

No. 9652

>>9651
where did it slow down discussion exactly

No. 9653

Well I enjoyed the dark forbidden activity of replying to farmhands with smileys yesterday.

Different topic, but what's up with the anon who keeps trying to start threads with someone's legs and genitals as the op?

No. 9654

>>9653
that's porn spam, anon … just report it

No. 9655

>>9654
I thought so, didn't know if it was bots or robots though

No. 9656

>>9651
just like everything else, even the april fools "joke" was spergy mods jacking themselves off.

No. 9657

Is Shay staying in pt now?

No. 9658

Oh my god, there are some seriously miserable cunts itt.

No. 9659

>>9657
I wish she was. I've never seen anons get their panties twisted so quickly about a flakes thread as hers. Plus it is one of the few threads with very consistent content, nitpicky or not, as much as say Luna or many of the others. We're just missing her 'big break' of something especially milky, though i feel the dogfucker saga could've easily been it with a little more effort to stay on topic.

No. 9660

>>9659
The quality of that content is only marginally above the quality of the content formerly posted in pnp and anisa's threads. Shay's thread is currently one of if not the worst active threads on the site. You faggots are delusional.

No. 9661

Chronic lack of sage in the Alt Cows thread.

No. 9662

>>9660
I was asking because it was an obvious joke made by the farmhands, however it wasn't moved until later in the day. Literally no one said she has the quality to be in pt

No. 9663

>>9662
except this anon is saying that >>9659

No. 9664

>>9662
>"Literally no one said she has the quality to be in pt"
>the post I replied to: "I wish she was […] Plus it is one of the few threads with very consistent content, nitpicky or not, as much as say Luna or many of the others."
>"This trainwreck belongs in /pt/." is literally in the OP of her thread
alright

No. 9665

>>9664
Anyone who wants shay in pt just doesn't want to browse through the catalog. There is no difference between shay and any other camwhore thread except shes the most active flake in that category right now.

Her milk is always the same butt boil and e begging.

No. 9666

>>9664
I participate in shay’s thread and that “she deserves to be in /pt/“ note in the OP makes me want to kill myself

No. 9667

>>9660
jeez, look at the panty twisting begin

you might prance around with a stick up your ass over nitpicking, but what do you think even pixyteri was? you think even /cgl/ wasn't full of threads about her work out lines?

some of you act like this is some kind of news report site and not a catty gossip board. shame we've lost our roots, guess all good things go sideways eventually

No. 9668

>>9667
>the bah-but our roots!!!11 defense
Even the workout lines thing was a meme because she was claiming obvious rolls of fat as muscles she got from working out, it's funny because it shows how childish and delusional she was. The nitpicking around PT was never as autistic as a ton of snow threads at this state. Lolcow wasn't even a "catty gossip board" to begin with, it was to document and discuss drama, not to make up shit and ree over a camgirl having a zit.

No. 9669

File: 1554286627796.png (2.91 MB, 8072x3320, classics.png)

>>9668
hahahah when did you start coming to LC to believe such bullshit?

or is your memory that bad?

at least argue that you think the direction of the site should change instead of such lies. here, I will spoonfeed you a little from the catalogue, even, to refresh your memory of what lolcow 'used to be', so you can get such a silly notion from your head. some common classics that are not even that old since the catalogue doesn't seem to host further. enjoy. SUCH DOCUMENTATION, WOW!

when did that retarded meme start hahaha which one of you started saying it was just for documentation instead of gossip and then the rest started parroting it? is that the real april fools joke? some of us actually participated since well before PT was ever brought up in /cgl/ and aren't struck with Alzheimers.

Try looking up some others common qualities like zerodomon, kai, charms, jessica nigri on /cgl/ archives if you want to REMEMBER how GOOD EVERYTHING WAS, next time.

No. 9670

>>9669
I'm not the sam anon but the userbase has changed and also grown. We can't just nitpick and talk shit like we used to due to the sheer volume of spergs that flood in.

No. 9671

>>9670
that wasn't their argument though, was it? even if to an extent I agree with your logic there, their reasoning for why nitpicking like shay's thread isn't the same as classic LC is blatantly incorrect and I took 5 minutes of my life to provide them some screencapped evidence of it.

even if we nitpicking needs to be 'brought in' because of the influx of new users sperging, we're not a fucking documentary news article site and there's always going to be SOME LEVEL of nitpicking whether these QQers like it or not.

No. 9672

>>9671
nta but i agree and i hate the direction the site is going. newfags or not, the main point of the site is talking about cows, not simply archiving what they do. we're supposed to be able to bitch at eachother and bants a little. when you make all nitpicking and tinfoiling bannable it makes the thread nothing more than a shitty ED page.

No. 9673

Oh my god, shut the hell up already. /pt/ is supposed to be for real cows, not a standard literal whore to be nitpicked to death. Get over it, she's not /pt/ tier and probably never will be. Shay spergs are the fucking worst.

No. 9674

Please put both the Taylor R and Dakota threads back on autosage and leave them there. They attract the most obnoxious PULL spergs and tinfoil artists who refuse to sage even when there is no milk and consistently type like autists.

No. 9675

I really dislike how some words such as "abusive" are in comic sans red text. some people on the forums are genuinely perpetrators or victims of abuse. and in a technical sense it messes up links to posts if the words are in a different text format.

No. 9676

>>9674
Agreed. Nothing new/ interesting with Dakota in years and Taylor R is boring now.

No. 9677

>>9673
lmao why can't you get over that there are obviously anons who have a different idea of what defines a 'true' cow? do you need to go read the nice little image cut out I made upthread of a bunch of 'true cows' threads that the same thing as shays? it really seems like you just have a huge hateboner/vendetta over this particular subject. whether you like it or not, I feel she has and has had lots of milk, and based on the topics currently in /pt/, she definitely qualifies as much as many of them. (really, name one cow in /pt/ right now that doesn't have the same amount of physical appearance nitpicking. one. give it to me.) if all she was, was a literal whore with no milk she could go in the camwhore thread like the other 'literal whores with no milk' - but as it stands, she's had quite a few 'milky' moments even in the past bit. like I said up thread, in my opinion, all it needs is one more big milky moment break and for the users to reign in just a little during that moment to be 'PT WORTHY'.

not sure why you are having a spazz over the idea I think she should be in /pt/, as if you couldn't just hide the thread if it ever happened. you know what's even more annoying than 'ass boil nitpicks'? when people like you come into the thread to reeee over the 'quality'.

so buckle up, buttercup, since you seem to enjoy having your jimmies rustled. maybe one day you will be able to handle the jarring reality that there are people who just don't agree with you.

No. 9678

>>9675
>>9560
>>9556
>>9516

>red text filter breaks links


>>>/m/23645

No. 9679

>>9677
>she could go in the camwhore thread like the other 'literal whores with no milk'
She should tbh. If you remove all the nitpicking from her thread, she's only as milky as pumpy and megan used to be.

No. 9680

>>9679
I disagree. I also feel the reason people like pumpy, meg or even now charms have been lumped into that thread are because they are not actively milky. if they were consistently producing milk to fill threads they could have their own again, too. short of a few who are perma-/pt/'d (like pixy herself), those in /pt/ who are not consistently producing new milk are moved to /snow/ (as they have been before). that doesn't mean they aren't "REAL" cows when they do produce it. if you are basing your criteria off of the current cows then your judgement seems skewed because it's very close to fitting them. I say very close because I have already stated I feel she needs another 'big scandal' milk wise and for users to reign themselves in during it for her thread to fully qualify.

the bottom line is we have no set in stone check off list criteria for what is '/pt/'. it's more-so vague criteria plus the active feelings of the userbase. it's just not that black and white. and as someone who has been around for a long time I am arguing that she is very close to what /pt/ status has ever been in the past. if you want to redefine what /pt/ status should be in your eyes, then go for it. I have no issue with users aiming to change the site for their idea of improvement. but people complaining against mine and other's opinions of what is milky/pt worthy/whatever by throwing out little insults and spazzies is not improvement. its just autism-tier melties. improve the site by clearly outlining your new standards and contributing quality posts yourselves if that's what you want to do, don't try to tell me, who remembers old LC and old /cgl/ and went out of my way to show concrete evidence of my memories, that nitpicks and banter aren't what this board started as. (not saying that anon was you specifically, just putting that out there as a whole because I've seen nothing but 'twisted panties' when this subject comes up which does nothing).

No. 9681

>>9680
>>9677
are you done posting these autistic walls of text yet?

No. 9682

>>9681
yes; more insults instead of making any real reply. very nice of you to prove my wall of text's point

No. 9683

admin or farmhands, what's the protocol with posts that are ontopic or sharing milk but typed in an unintegrated way? I don't think these contributions warrant bans but I also feel it's been subtly shifting board culture.

No. 9684

File: 1554346461198.png (824.33 KB, 1306x998, dumbdumb.png)

>>9678
try again retard, when you hover over it

No. 9685

>>9669
>>9672
I don't think the board is for factual documentation but the fun of rampant shitty nitpicking has worn off a bit and it has been overdone and way too frantic ever since the late crazy chaotic period under the last admin imo and I think a part of the userbase is annoyed with that and prefers to read more serious drama with not entirely as much nitpicking for now. And would also rather be overmoderated than undermoderated. But your opinion/criticism is fair.

No. 9686

>>9685
i'm just worried that the over-moderation is going to lead to coddling newfags and making it harder for oldfags to want to use the site. plus the userbase is becoming increasingly cringier.

No. 9687

>>9685
there we go, reasonable discussion. this is something much more understandable and I think most people can at least partially agree with it.

the last admin's actions (or lack there of) threw the entire site culture off, no doubt.

>>9686
but I also agree with this. under the guise of fixing everything that's been 'ruined', are we going to lose everything we have had, too?

I've also noticed an influx of newfags pretending to be oldfags and parroting a lot of blatantly false garbage, mini-modding rules they don't even understand, asking to be spoonfed instead of lurking to integrate. these are much more harmful than an abundance of nitpicking, in my opinion. so are posts like some of the above where it's just shit flinging 'NO U ARE WRONG FAGGOT!' instead of properly explaining /why/ they are wrong, or offering their idea of a solution. if newfriends read these things without any rhyme or reason to them, they'll just end up parroting garbage too. it's like that stupid monkey ladder thing.

it's the same reason we went from no sage to people constantly screeeeing 'sage, sage or else!' because that's the saga of shit they joined the site in. only now has current admin started to even fix that. it's going to be a while til this crapshoot settles and there's going to be a lot of agreeing to disagree in the mean time.

No. 9688

Is there a reason Onision's many unaffectionate nicknames are being word filtered to simply Onision? Seems like an unannounced and pointless change.

No. 9689

>>9678
A few words were already removed last weekend
>transphobic, transphobia, abuse
>>9675
Abuse is the new triggered here.
>>9680
I don't really care much about the nitpicking because it happens in all threads, there's just a limit of how absurd it can be. Shay hasn't done anything legacy worthy or as crazy as some of the cows over at /pt/. That's not to say she isn't milky it's just not "marrying your son's best friend" or "trying to chain up your girlfriend" levels of crazy.
>>9683
You can report it and we can evaluate if they're newfags or not. It's not that much of a big deal as long as nobody is spamming or standing out but it sucks I guess. https://lolcow.farm/info
>>9686
That is the opposite of what we want holy shit. The rule revision is meant to condense things as much as possible in a way that penalizes newfags the most. Oldfags aren't going to be banned left or right for a shitpost or a standard nitpick. My moderators and janitors are told to ban based off a pattern of rule breaking and a lack of integration. I have staff from different timezones to be able to handle spam and gore, not to overmoderate. I hope that eases your concerns anon.
>>9687
>I've also noticed an influx of newfags pretending to be oldfags and parroting a lot of blatantly false garbage, mini-modding rules they don't even understand, asking to be spoonfed instead of lurking to integrate. these are much more harmful than an abundance of nitpicking, in my opinion.
I agree with this and it's been noticed.
>>9688
You just noticed? It was getting hard to read between all the 'trot clot slop grank stank lamp shruggly gruggly'.

I noticed some people were upset with some of my previous responses in this thread so I wanted to just say I don't mean to come off aggressive in any way I'm just very stoic.
I also wanted to ask if a townhall would be better before a hellweek or if you guys would prefer a hellweek first.

No. 9690

>>9684

It breaks the link. That's my point.

No. 9691

>>9689
my personal vote is for hellweek

No. 9692

File: 1554369622276.gif (1.28 MB, 440x300, giphy (2).gif)

>>9689
HELLWEEK!!!

No. 9693

>>9689
>I agree with this and it's been noticed.
it puts me at some ease that, that's the case. thank you.

even if I haven't agreed with every choice made, I think you're doing a pretty decent job at trying to clean up this site. so, thank you. I appreciate it.

No. 9694

Can you please do something about the anon(s) who constantly start infighting by desperately trying to get a reaction out of "dog-haters". They restart that argument again and again. For every "dog-hate" post (which is usually just somebody saying that we only dislike owners and don't really care for the animal itself) there are 10 posts reeing that all doghaters are psychos and just as bad as people who get off to torturing animals.

No. 9695

>>9694
Not an anon who starts stuff in that thread, but honestly the couple of times that a peeked into it, there were literally posts expressing joy at the deaths of dogs and even ones condoning killing them. When your thread regularly contains content like that you're probably gonna get push back.

No. 9696

>>9694
From what I've seen, it's usually the dog-hating anon derailing every thread with "I hate those dumb slobbering mutts all dogs are disgusting and their owners are retards, why doesn't society allow me to hate dogs" baits.

No. 9697

File: 1554381340219.jpg (134.56 KB, 1080x555, IMG_20190404_143325.jpg)

1/2
2 days ago this person started that "argument" and then it died down again.

No. 9698

File: 1554381452329.jpg (202.25 KB, 1080x877, IMG_20190404_143626.jpg)

>>9697
2/2
And now, half a day ago, somebody restarted it again.

No. 9699

>>9697
>>9698
>could someone stop this sperg who posted two posts in the venting thread about being upset by people wanting to kill and abuse dogs!!!!!!!
Do you even listen to yourself anon, the dog haters have derailed god knows how many discussions with their "I think service dogs should be killed" tier baits during the last year so it's only natural for people to post something like this.

No. 9700

>>9699
>>9694
>implying dog-hate anons aren't just the same man-hate anons that won't stop derailing every thread

No. 9701

>>9695
>there were literally posts expressing joy at the deaths of dogs and even ones condoning killing them
>>9699
>god knows how many discussions with their "I think service dogs should be killed"

If this happens so often, then showing proof would be an easy task, right? Yet instead of doing that you rather screech about imaginary hordes of dog murdering psychopaths - who simply don't exist on this board. There was exactly one poster who suggested to harm dogs and this person got shut down immediately (and banned if I remember correctly).

No. 9702

File: 1554388156685.jpg (278.56 KB, 1080x1439, IMG_20190404_162701.jpg)

>>9701
Things you'll find in the dog love thread
Yes, this anon got banned, but not before a fellow dog friend could express their joy:
>This made me crack up anon! Thank you for the life lesson

No. 9703

>>9700
bless
>>9702
keep pretending those two deranged anons are the norm and did not get criticised

No. 9704

>>9701
x hate threads are for edgy autists, anon. stop defending it.

No. 9705

>>9703
That's exactly my point, I know that they're not the norm, I'm just trying to get you to realize that you can't judge an entire group by what a single person wrote.
>one anon said you should hurt dogs -> everybody who hates dogs is a psycho!
>two people laugh about a cat getting killed -> they're exceptions!
Liking dogs does not make you better, same as disliking dogs does not make us mentally ill.

No. 9707

>>9705
nta but why can't you just accept that there are people who take it too far, and those people are the ones who stick out, AND those are the ones we are talking about. you need to shut up with this #notalldoghate shit because we're not talking to you. if you don't want to be grouped in with those people, maybe don't participate in threads that are full of the woman equivalent of mentally ill robots like most of the "hate" threads on this site.

No. 9708

>>9707
Why won't you get it?! There was only one(1!) anon who took it too far on lolcow! That boogeyman you keep talking about does not exist! You have no reason to constantly complain about anons commiting violence against dogs or wishing harm upon them, because it literally is not happening!

No. 9709

>>9708
given the rest of the thread i can't tell if sarcasm or not tbh.

No. 9710

>>9708
Don't bother anon, it's like arguing with antivaxxers. Never gonna change their mind despite your evidence and their lack there of. I don't go to that thread and don't give two shits about dog hate vs not but it's clear reading these posts you could have the entire threads ips revealed to prove your point and this anon wouldn't believe you.

No. 9711

admin - why even allow threads about any kind of animal hate here? they will just attract the worst kind of posting and people.

No. 9712

>>9694
>>9695
>>9696
*Don’t go into a thread to complain about the exact same thread. Hide threads you don’t want to see and take topic complaints to /meta/.
Rule 7 of /ot/, it'll be taken care of.
>>9711
As long as it isn't illegal or racebaiting it can be discussed in /ot/.

No. 9714

>>9711
>admin - why even allow threads about any kind of topic I personally dislike here? they will only hurt my feelings and I'm too retarded to hide threads.

No. 9715

>>9712
i personally think /ot/ is a fucking plague on the site and is basically /fem9k/

No. 9716

Can a mod warn people to stop derailing in the Moo thread? There's also anons trying to police other anons about what to talk about and that seems to happen every month in that thread.

It's slowly going back to the shit quality that it used to be before the move to /snow/.

No. 9717

>>9714
that wasn't what I asked - or meant - and I know perfectly well how to hide threads. thank you so much though.

No. 9718

>>9594
Like I said above, these acronyms tend not to add anything of substance to the discussion.
>There's a pimple on her ass cheek
>There's a pimple on her ass cheek lol
I'm fine with acronyms, but reading "lol" 20 times in a thread is quite exhausting.

>>9610
I come from /cgl/. It saddens me to see Lolcow become so much more…congested than 2 years ago. It's feeling more and more like farmers are here less for the fun of these larger-than-life personalities and more for the sake of attacking someone.
Have a look at a Kotakoti thread 2 years back: >>>/pt/280970

No. 9719

Popping in from the Onision thread just to give some feedback. I'm someone that is largely pleased with the new admin. I'm not a very active poster there in the Onion thread, I mostly read btw. Gonna give my 2 cents on the recent derailment over mod presence as of late.

Mods just need to leave these threads the fuck alone until sage gets coded back into /pt/. Once sage is in effect again, a lot of the comments that get users banned can just be saged so the anal readers of the board can filter things that are commentary rather than milk.

Until the sage shit is done, just leave the thread be aside from the "Lainey is ugly and fake troon" nitpicks. Filtering onion's name was a stupid move as well, all it does is annoy farmers. Draconian Lolcow isn't a cute era.

No. 9720

>>9719
I agree with you.
Like some other Anon said, this is a gossip and drama imageboard, not some dignified info gathering forum.

I understand that overly nitpicking someone's looks deserves an one day ban if it goes overboard. But honestly, almost every other thread has people poking fun at someone's looks. It's part of the gossip. How do you decide when it's just fun and when it's too much?

Banning any discussion about Lainey is just nuts. She is part of Onision's family and any discussion about her is also connected to him. Almost everything she does is because of Greg. It felt very balanced to me, when Onision wasn't as milky, people discussed Lainey. When he did something, it turned back to him.

Censoring the names is just way too much. Farmhand complains about Trot and Clot but weren't those nicknames made so no one would use their children's real name? And those are only names people use for them, so it's not that hard to understand.
I never thought it was hard to read at all, maybe for newfags. Creativity of the nicknames was lol-worthy a lot of times, it's just a shame.

Thread is killed.

No. 9721

>>9720
using the kids' nicknames facilitates talking about them. also those names are really gomi. people say they wouldn't want to hurt the kids but how would they feel seeing these mocking nicknames one day. they only ever need to be referred to as the kids and nothing more.

No. 9723

>can't post pics showing how ugly Onion and Lainey are
>can't talk about Lainey
>can't talk about Onion potentially breaking international privacy law
>can't call Onion G-urg because that would be mocking the almighty Onision. can't have that

The thread is slowly turning into a fan thread. Wouldn't surprise me if some farmhand is secretly an Onion stan.

No. 9724

>>9721
Why would two currently under 6 kids randomly stumble upon old threads on lolcow with parents who will most likely monitor them so they don't say anything bad about them? That's silly.

>>9719
I also agree with you and loving the new admin and staff. However, this decision wasn't the smartest. Censoring the names does feel way too far, especially when you consider how much effort must have gone into it considering how many nicknames there are for Greg and Lainey. We all call Momo Moo, not by Momo and yet this isn't okay? It's going to start scaring people away and not making them want to post at all cause who knows what's okay and not okay.

No. 9725

>>9724
you're cherrypicking, my point is the hypocrisy that most posters who use those names would express about why they use them, that they are somehow protective. but they aren't at all. and they're still denigrating names, for small kids no lss. and they are still very gomi. coincidentally the nicknames popped up with the influx of bored housewives in tempcow.

No. 9726

>>9725
Bored housewives on tempcow get a fucking life. Where you ever active on tempcow it essentially was just another feature for onion anons at the time I remember other uses complaining their cows threads weren't getting as much traffic cuz half the cunts on snow are there mostly for being weird looking obnoxious bitches, Onion has been online for like a decade consistently being the least self aware wanker alive and he has tried several times to start cults and he has filmed his exploits with girls he essentially paid for to live with him. I remember being on tempcow and seeing over 1000 active users in the thread. I doubt it was all bores housewives and it also split into a couple of different discord groups which one seemed to belong to a group of mods who came to be absolutely fucking hated much like the current team.

You only need to see how not active the main board is to see evidence of what a shite jobs new admin and mods are doing. How about for the recruiting of farm hands they need to prove they've actually been an active member of the site.

No. 9727

There is no need for moderafion of morality for what is discussed in onion threads. It is not our responsibility to hide his kids identity and protect their fucking names. Everything we discuss comes directly from the two thick cunts themselves. The whole point of an anon board is to discuss things without it somehow being linked to your individual identity. The very definition of a cow is that they publicaly and obnoxiously expose embarrassing shit or overshare details unlike the average person. That's why the average person her remains anon while we discuss the unconventional.

Why in the fuck are we being censored on public information wtf

No. 9728

I agree the Admins need to lighten up in the Onision/Lainey threads and stop derailing the topics by putting bans on stupid things. Bring back the saging function for non-milky topics like nitpicking their looks and tinfoiling. I'm sure the Admins are doing their best, but it really comes off as them trying to play dictator to a gossip site. If you expect the users to have some semblance of morality and want them to abstain from talking about actual children, that's fine, but banning people over nitpicking, tinfoiling, and armchairing ain't it, sis.

No. 9729

>>9728
You do realize that excessive nitpicking has always been against the rules, right?
The Onision thread has been on a steady decline since tempcow and it was pretty much unreadable because of the nitpicking.
There’s a difference between contributing to the discussion and “lol Lainey and Greg are ugly and stupid.” Sage doesn’t mean you can nitpick and it never has.

>>9727
>It is not our responsibility to hide his kids identity and protect their fucking names.

Posting about minors has always been against the rules. It’s not only the onion sprouts. The newfaggotry is strong in this one.

No. 9730

>>9729
This doesn't make any sense, anon. First of all, people aren't criticizing the children, they're criticizing the Onions' bad parenting skills. Most comments I've seen tend to be sympathetic towards the children because of how little attention Greg and Lainey seem to give them and how from what little evidence we have T seems to have behavioural issues.

In any case, the children are still extremely young and unlikely to be able to Google themselves. Besides, nicknaming them and their parents is more likely to protect their identity than some word filter constantly autocorrecting to Onision. It's not as though anons are continuously typing up the Onions' full first and last names over and over to make this thread the first thing that would come upon googling the Avaroes.

No. 9731

>>9723
>can't talk about Onion potentially breaking international privacy law

what are you even on anon

No. 9732

>>9717
i hate that for some reason anons can't let us talk about how thread quality indicates poster quality. fact is, the types of threads we have does attract certain types of posters, many who are cancer.

No. 9733

>>9730
bad parenting can be talked about using the terms "the kids", "their child" etc. stop the gymnastics.

No. 9734

>>9730
The nicknames are used in a degrading manner and discussion of even more degrading tinfoils about the kids being potential serial killers or being retarded.
>>9726
>>9727
>How about for the recruiting of farm hands they need to prove they've actually been an active member of the site.
All the farmhands are verified posters and contributors because I'm not that much of an idiot.
>>9723
Are you implying it wasn't already a fan thread with how often his genitals are discussed?
>>9720
>Banning any discussion about Lainey is just nuts.
Discussion of her isn't banned altogether.
>>9719
>Filtering onion's name was a stupid move as well
His name wasn't filtered. A few annoying nicknames were filtered.
>>9732
I guess you're right in that sense.

No. 9735

>>9734
with all due respect, i don't know what you intended writing this post, but it really just makes you look like everything anons are worried about. these aren't good reasons and tbh you sound personally butthurt that people don't like this decision. i don't give a damn either way, but this didn't help you, admin.

No. 9736

>>9735
do you really need a paragraphs long hand-holding essay to say anons were shitting on some kids for no reason or that farmhands are vetted? how many stupid nicknames do we need to address an idiot on the internet?

No. 9737

>>9735
if I were forced to repeatedly answer questions I'd already stated my position on I'd be a little butthurt, too

that said, nothing about admin's post seems inherently butthurt. more like they're just casually replying. the kind of posts that made an admin look bad were the hilariously wild bs we got from last admin where the farmhands had to frequently backtrack for them.

I like this admin's posting style in this thread just fine, personally.

what did they need to reply with for your seal of approval, short of agreeing with your personal perspective? just saying 'hurrhurr you look bad' makes it appear more like you are the butthurt one, to me. hardly constructive crit.

No. 9738

>>9737
stop calling admin a they.

No. 9739

the "sonfu" thread is gross shotacon pandering shit and should be gotten rid of. feeling "motherly protective feels" for anime boys is creepy, and the people who want anime characters to "grow up happy" are fucking insane.

No. 9740

>>9738
oh I'm sorry did I trigger you MISGENDERING admin, using common ambiguous english terms? god forbid I don't recite that admin is female, you might get scared there could be a male on our site! like the first admin! oh no! I realize now the error of my ways! how frightening that must have been for you, to have been so confused!

holy shit, admin, for the love of god please ban me just so I don't have the temptation to make fun of the retards that currently make up our user base. I don't have the will power to refrain at this rate.

No. 9741

>>9740
>acting like this
>calling others autistic

anon stop. i'm not even against the admin you just sounded like a sperg.

No. 9742

>>9741
it's very obvious you or whoever the poster I was replying to was trying to start the 'you can't use 'they' pronouns' argument like that kicks up in every trans thread, despite it being a perfectly normal term to use in every day english. of course I am going to reply with sarcastic over the reaction, it's the most ridiculous thing ever.

No. 9743

>>9742
no, it's just stupid to use they when you know the person's gender. we know admin is a she, they is for when it's ambiguous.(This is not tumblr, no one cares about pronouns.)

No. 9744

>>9739
lol admin should not have outright said "take topic complaints to /meta/," she's opened the floodgates to spergs who want anything and everything they don't like banned entirely instead of hiding the threads.

No. 9745

>>9743
uhh, hello? it's an anonymous image board, it might as well be 'they'. I don't give a fuck if admin is a girl or a male or xir or whatever the hell, it isn't relevant to the discussion. policing my use of pronouns over the singular 'they' in that one post is beyond retarded. this isn't your tumblr where you get to decide how every one else talks or labels things, what special princess are you that everyone else needs to adhere to your preference?

>>9744
nah, it makes sense to give a containment area so no one shits up threads. some of the complaints may end up valid/being worth taking into consideration. just because people sperg here doesn't mean it will happen, no reason to mute people from stating their opinion. likewise, having a place to bitch doesn't mean they can't still learn how to use the 'hide' function. or so I would hope. they definitely weren't using it prior to having a space to complain.

No. 9746

>>9745
This is weird and spergy.

There seems to be more infighting in /meta/ than in the other boards, holy shit.

No. 9747

>>9739
Eh, I thought it's been a refreshingly wholesome thread. Some of us have been posting cats and dogs ffs.

No. 9748

File: 1554548731993.jpg (7.33 KB, 250x228, 1499377770377.jpg)

>>9734
>because I'm not that much of an idiot.
>implying laughing at Gregma's microdick makes you a fan

No. 9749

Can you guys stop babysitting and censoring Onions thread? Can you stop censoring nicknames??
Dont give a shit about the kids nicknames though.
Poster “quality” may have gone up but thats only because 2 people are posting, youre killing the thread yet leaving other shitty nitpicky threads alone. Atleast be consistent, so i know i can just migrate already, if this is the site now sadly..

No. 9754

>>9748
Admins a virgin and a neet pass it on!!

No. 9755

>>9734
Frankly I think you're doing alright Admin, Ya'll don't realize, The less attention greg receives, The more explosive the eventual sperg will be.
Clogging up the threads will nitpicks at this point keeps him relevant. He's at that point of being ignored by all, Youtubers, Twitter peeps, Even hate sites. He's done at this point, Its all just about waiting for the reality penny to drop.

No. 9756

File: 1554560371469.jpeg (76.2 KB, 640x360, 56B7E2CA-5BD3-480A-98E2-822E02…)

>>9748
Implying that making multiple edits of Greg’s sweaty dick print doesn’t make you a giant faggot. Please go back to tumblr and/or your hugbox discord server.

>>9755
This. No one cares about Greg anymore. Onision farmers need to stop trying to play hero and let the thread die down for a bit. Just because a thread in /pt/ isn’t consistently active doesn’t mean the world is ending. It just means there’s nothing milky or interesting to comment on.
The Onision newfags are entitled as hell.

No. 9757

Did somebody complain about incels getting their posts deleted in the pink pill thread and call it "censorship"? Why are they back to getting redtexted and having the little robot sticker placed on their posts?
IMO, deleting their posts was better. Cleans up the thread, deprives them of the attention they want, and throws the time they spent writing essays to "trigger the roasties" directly into the void.

No. 9758

>>9757
this has been addressed a lot

>>9089
>I'm not going to allow my staff to delete posts people don't like unless it's spam or illegal content. Yes repetitive posts can get banned but I won't allow censorship on an imageboard, that's a bit silly.

>>9495
>This is an imageboard, we don't simply delete posts for no reason.

getting triggered is not a reason to delete a post.

No. 9760

>>9758
That's about Onion threads, anon.
Even if you apply that logic to the site as a whole, scrote posts have continued being deleted in the Pink Pill as early as yesterday, if you look at the thread and see the amount of "gone" posts.
I'm just wondering about the change of heart. In the first place, men are not supposed to post on LC, period. I don't think it's even an issue of censorship (their thoughts were never promised an equal platform as other users or respected as valid), it's pretty much an issue of rule-breaking for them to be making posts in the first place.

No. 9761

>>9720
>It's part of the gossip. How do you decide when it's just fun and when it's too much?
Because it's not funny anymore, and it was only mildly amusing in the first place. Unless your comment is a new and witty observation, you probably don't need to post it. The amount of discussion about lainey's herpes and gregs genitals and all the weird fanfic tier shit anons write about them fucking is so cringeworthy. Some posts make me seriously worried about the anons posting them. It's obvious a lot of them are ex-patrons who legitimately want to do him, and a few people even admit it openly as if it's not admitting they're retarded?
>Banning any discussion about Lainey is just nuts. She is part of Onision's family and any discussion about her is also connected to him. Almost everything she does is because of Greg. It felt very balanced to me, when Onision wasn't as milky, people discussed Lainey. When he did something, it turned back to him.
You can just not post though. It's always been an option, we don't have autopruning so there's absolutely no need to stop threads from dying, because they wont. I don't understand why people actually want to beat a dead horse and repeat the same shit over and over and over again.

Honestly if I were admin I'd consider locking the onion threads in milk droughts. No posts is better than eight million
>H E R P E S
>close up of onions dick
>lainey is transtender
>her hair is bad
>untidy house
ad nauseum.


some general shit;
I've seen people banned for "no contribution" when using reaction images and I reckon that's bullshit, especially if it's board relevant OC. Reaction images are a good way to encourage higher quality posts - I'd rather see a funny image than a boring text comment any day. It's a good way to screen newfags because usually they don't have a good reaction image collection and will make a shitty boring text comment. Encouraging OC is a nice way to cultivate board culture as well.

and can you tell newfags to stop telling people who've attached images to sage? Images cancel out sage. It's one of the most annoying newfaggy minimods I see and it takes all of my self control not to minimod the minimod every time.

and and I think a mod needs to keep an eye on the phoebe thread, it's all good atm but there are a lot of anons using sjw terminology legitimately and I think they're newfags only aware of that thread who think this is a callout site.

No. 9762

>>9761
I forgot one more thing related to discussion upthread; The spongebob mocking text a) annoying and b) is a normie meme and if you want to quote someone mockingly you should use greentext.

No. 9763

>>9761
where have you seen anyone get banned for using reaction images? must've missed that one

No. 9764

Really not happy with the changes to the Onision thread. It's killing my favourite thread in /pt/. Why punish everyone for the nitpicking of a few when you could just give them a short ban? I feel like the new staff are very unfamiliar with the culture of the website: reaction images are the bread and butter of an imageboard and people have been calling Greg stupid names since the beginning (I always thought it was inspired by the Vic Mignona ones). The point of anonymity is being able to say what we want and I feel like all of this censorship really contradicts that.

No. 9765

>>9763
It was a while ago but someone got a non contribution ban for it, I'm pretty sure I complained about it in the thread at the time. I'll see if I can find it, if I can I'll crosspost it.

No. 9766

>>9760
I don’t know where everyone gets men aren’t allowed on LC, they just aren’t supposed to be like
>guy here
>I’d bang her

Im guessing you only post on /ot/ or are a newfag, go read the rules again.

No. 9767

>>9766
I think you're the one that's new. Men have been disallowed from Lolcow since its conception. The only male allowed was the first admin.
If it's any different, that must've been a pretty sneaky, underhanded way of changing the rules.

No. 9768

>>9767
Samefagging to add, going to the rules page and ctrl+F "male", "man", etc has no results, but:
>/ot/
>6. Don’t report a post simply because you disagree with it, not everyone who disagrees is a man
>not everyone who disagrees is a man
The only implication here is that men are, indeed, banned. It's always been that way. Maybe you were thinking of Crystal Cafe with the "Men are allowed, just no "I'm a guy btw stuff" idea. They're the ones with that rule, not Lolcow.
Kind of a blunder that you told me to read the rules without actually reading them yourself.

No. 9769

/ot/ is truly the worst this site has to offer. it’s so remniscent of the worst parts of tempcow, it feels like half the people who regularly keep up with it are only doing so to find something to grab onto and attack for no reason. it’s the dumbest shit, too and it always reeks of projection.

i hate to be yet another complainy oldfag but i can’t help but remember a time a few years ago when this entire board just felt different. i miss those times.

No. 9771

>>9769
I personally like /ot/, and I've been using LC since it was first made. It's not easy finding other women who know about or are involved in chan culture.
It's opened me up to new opinions and perspectives that I definitely wouldn't have come across on 4chan, and I'm glad about it. Obviously, it won't always be some fun, happy club of purely civil discussion (I've witnessed and/or participated in enough foolish arguments and bans to know that), but I'm happy that such a place exists at all.

No. 9772

>>9769
/ot/ was literally dead years ago. You're honestly complaining just to complain because the only reference point you have is to a completely dead board. That's what you miss? Lol. I'm really not sure how you guys complain about ot when every other 'random' board on male chans is so horrifically awful, and cc is literally r9k in disguise. What reference point do you have thats so much better?

No. 9773

>>9768
The rules have been updated you utter faggot, this has been known as a female anon board since its conception. Your newfaggotry is immensely showing.

No. 9774

>>9771
i see where you’re coming from, and in the past i’ve had some good times on /ot/ too. i guess it just feels different now so i’ll just steer clear of it but i get why some people do enjoy it now that you mention it, because there are a couple threads on there that aren’t that bad at all.
>>9772
yeah, i’m complaining… it’s literally the complaint thread, anon. and to clarify i’m not saying just /ot/ was better years ago, that comment was more directed to the entire site in general, sorry if i wasn’t clear enough on that front. my post was pretty rambly. i don’t really see the need to draw comparisons to male dominated boards bc i don’t use any and so don’t have a great reference to compare. honestly it’s probably just nostalgia telling my brain lies and this site hasn’t changed as much as i think but who knows/cares

No. 9775

>>9773
>didn't read the rules
>starts insulting people who actually did
What is greentexted there is from the rules page, which was updated in February 2019. That is from the most recent iteration of rules. It's not anyone's fault you are retarded.
Go ahead and point out where in the rules it states males are allowed, or link to a post where the most recent admin herself has stated that male posters are allowed on the whole of the site. Or even the administrators before that stating that males are allowed, ever. You can't, because it does not exist.
I'm sorry your oldfag cosplay fell apart because of your illiteracy, but try actually reading the rules before shooting off your mouth.

No. 9776

>>9775
I misread your post I thought you were defending male posters but anyway you're prose style is shit

No. 9777

>>9776
Alright, anon. Somehow, I don't think taking concrit on prose from someone who confuses "your" and "you're" will help me much, though.

No. 9778

>>9777
That's grammar bitch but blah blah blah as u were(time to calm down)

No. 9780

>>9774
I know you're complaining, but complaining to complain is different. Regardless, I think it is nostalgia in this case. The only notable difference I remember, really, is that we never used to have to sage? I don't really see much of a difference in posting styles except that there was a lot more shitposting all over the site because we had basically no moderation, which is more like most chans, but I appreciate the moderating. I like /ot/ and I'm glad we have it, personally. It's not perfect, but if you've spent years on male chans, it's really a breath of fresh air and nowhere near bad, imo.

No. 9781

>>9767
I actually discovered a thread where people posted info about themselves from years ago and I was shocked to see how many of the users were men. Most came from /cgl/, there was bound to be a lot of men. I think most stopped coming after /ot/ and /g/ were created but it doesn't mean that it's always been an exclusively female site

No. 9782

>>9764
>censorship
I didn’t know implementing word filters was censorship?
No one but a few nitpicky farmers actually care about the nicknames being filtered, for the most part we’ve continued posting like nothing really changed.
No one cares if you aren’t happy about simple word filters. No one cares if you’re leaving lolcow. Get over yourself.

No. 9783

>>9766
>>9768

Try actually reading the Global Rules.

>Any posters with a phallus, do not come here for validation or to announce yourselves

No. 9784

File: 1554596550729.png (60.36 KB, 741x936, 1530874552932.png)

The previous rules.

No. 9785

>>9783
nta but that doesn't mean men aren't allowed, they just have to pretend to be women to fit in with the anon board culture. I know multiple men who come here and fit in fine; just like how on most of 4chan we have to pretend to be guys or derail the thread via incels sperging.

there has never been a 'no men allowed' rule. only a 'no actively stating or saying things that show you are a man' rule, which your quoted rule only reaffirms.

No. 9786

>>9785

My point was that anons are debating the rules without actually reading or quoting them.

No. 9788

>>9784
>>9783
Any males who come here and make themselves obvious instead of pretending to be female are pretty clearly only there to seek validation or shit up threads (which is precisely why their posts get deleted to begin with). If you're acting like a normal human being, there's no reason for anyone to believe you're not a female poster. For all practical intents and purposes, males are not allowed.

To get back on topic, I just want to back up what
>>8928
>>8929
have said. It seems like the mods listened before and went back to deleting their posts, but that's suddenly stopped. Robot bullshit doesn't belong here, or at least not in designated man hate threads. I believe it should continue being removed. They get validation from their posts being left up to mar threads, and from being given cute participation pixel trophies to show that they're special.

The practice of deletion that was implemented up til just yesterday was stellar. Not only did it clean up threads, it ensured no one else would or could respond to their bait. It seems like it's suddenly stopped, and I'd like to request that it be rolled back, or at least hear an explanation for the change (and a reason why it won't be reversed) from a farmhand or admin.

No. 9789

Shay anons are losing their self control again. The recent influx of new camgirls makes for some painful selfposting and nitpicking.

No. 9790

>>9747
>implying pretending your disgusting fetish for little boys is just "maternal love" is wholesome

No. 9791

>>9745
lel remember when I posted about people derailing over pronouns and you guys acted like I was lying? It literally happened here too now.

No. 9792

>>9788
Most of bait and robot posts are deleted, I think they only leave up entertaining ones. Yesterday when I refreshed pink pill a few baity smelling posts had disappeared. Ive seen this happen a few times before too.

No. 9793

>>9782
Omfg chill. Nobody said anything about leaving the site. People posting concerns are people who want to stick around obviously? You're everything wrong with the site at the moment if you're sitting around waiting to be offended by someone's opinion. People lashing out at each other are way more damaging to the site that a few stupid nicknames or a reaction image.

It's a minor issue but it makes me wonder what other changes will take effect in the future. Changing the nicknames feels very counter to the culture that thread has created. What jokes from other threads on /pt/ will be deemed "annoying" or "bullying"? Why is the punishment for derailing now to kill a thread and essentially punish all that enjoy it? Banning reaction images is very counter to imageboard culture. But you only chose to respond to one of my concerns and it was the most minor one.

No. 9794

>>9793
Don't worry anon, nothing else is likely to change. Look at the Momo threads - just as bad as Onision's was but gets little moderation. It's just the one thread that gets the overboard attention.

No. 9795

>>9790
Jesus christ calm down with the moralfagging. You guys are the pearl-clutching type that would think calling a coworker's kid cute or having a spouse shorter than you is pedophilia. Go yell at the anons who post 14 year old girls in the waifu thread for a change.

No. 9797

>>9793
>People lashing out at each other are way more damaging to the site

Fucking agreed! Getting banned for overly nitpicking I completely understand, but that's nowhere near as bad as the infighting that happens on this site. You see it all the time in so many threads on pt and snow and it honestly feels like it takes a backseat with the staff. Some people get offended and start attacking other anons over nitpicking, others just want to pick a fight over misinformation or tinfoiling, and none of them want to bother reporting it. I was under the impression that you don't engage in the fight if you report it cause then it makes you just as bad. Some anons need to take a walk outside.

No. 9798

>>9794
Moos thread is readable these days and the milk flow has been fairly steady

No. 9799

>>9791
I've always seen it as a derailment topic. I want to believe /meta/ is full of samefag with some of the retardedness we get here and that our entire user base isn't this stupid.

there's a specific kind of poster similar to that pronoun corrector/the grammar corrector who got banned up a few posts I see all over the place that must have came from some specific site and is holding onto it's culture, because their annoying derails are such carbon copies of each other it'd have to be a massive samefag otherwise.

No. 9800

>>9799
i didn't get banned.

No. 9801

The onision forum sucks. Too much banning and mod intervention

No. 9802

>>9801
Is it actually too much banning or did you get banned because you were nitpicking and now you’re upset about it?

No. 9803

>>9801
>forum

No. 9804

>>9802
that anon sounds like a newfag so probably the latter

No. 9805

>>9800
Unless you are misunderstanding my post, your post (or the person's I was referencing as banned) is literally redtexted.

Also what the fuck is this useless reply, what is your thought process that you needing to clarify your banned status has any merit? Almost completely irrelevant to the point of the post or discussion. If these are what the general quality of all your posts are like I hope admin seriously considers banning you til you can contribute to a discussion.

No. 9806

Even the anons currently complaining about the spergs itt sound like regular spergs itt themselves. Jfc. This thread used to have valid complaints, now it's all unbearable "CAN I SPEAK TO YOUR MANAGER" autism, chimping about thread topics that trigger you so hard that simply hiding the thread won't cut it, infighting, and pettiness.

No. 9807

so many anons ITT are bitching about cancer, when they are the cancer themselves.

No. 9808

File: 1554749888128.jpg (45.85 KB, 640x640, YZQH8lJ_d.jpg)

ITT

No. 9809

does anyone else think the true crime thread should be in /ot/ rather than /m/?

it's not really media, it's just a topic of interest. kind of weird to have it in /m/. it's like having an 'interesting animals' or 'science' or 'philosophy' thread on the media board instead

No. 9810

>>9806
>>9807
that's what makes this thread so entertaining

No. 9811

>>9809
True crime is a genre of media. I'm sure you could bend the rules if you really wanted to move the thread but technically the phrase is a genre name.

No. 9812

>>9811
i guess, but we have the leaving neverland thread in /ot/ (and i dont think it belongs in /m/). i guess i consider the true crime to be more along the lines of news/an interest and discussing cases rather than just sharing media, and a place to discuss our feelings about it rather than just sharing links and shit. it's like the leaving neverland thread to me.

No. 9813

>>9812
Fair enough. At face value it belongs in /m/ but then when you look at the discussion it's all about IRL crime and not about the actual docu as a piece. If the docu was talked about on its merits as a film or whatever then it'd be a true media thread. The way it functions I agree that it's /ot/. For True Crime this is probably also the case. The topic is technically media but the discussions are about the subjects of the docus, not about the technical merits of the pieces themselves.

No. 9814

admin i wish you would would consider the type of degenerate stuff you allow on /ot/ /g/ and /m/. it annoys me to constantly be told to "hide threads" as if the types of shit that frequent those threads suddenly disappear. those threads have very basic rules for what types of content should go on them, but barring that seemingly anything goes.

No. 9815

>>9814
Oh boy, another example of "pls ban anything i dislike, admin-chan uwu"

>threads have very basic rules for what types of content should go on them, but barring that seemingly anything goes.

Yeah, that's… kind of how imageboards work and always have.

No. 9816

>>9815
no it's not lmao. this site doesn't even work like that on it's main boards.

No. 9817

>>9816
Kek is this babby's first image board? They don't compare lolcow to reddit for nothing, the way this site (including the OT boards) operates is way more similar to a sub reddit than a normal board.

No. 9818

Just checking, is Venus Angelic's thread autosaged?

No. 9819

>>9818

yes!

No. 9820

>>9814
what's degenerate on ot, g and m?

No. 9822

Huge influx of newfags in the fatvegfemme thread on snow. Can we autosage

No. 9823

>>9822
there will always be an inflow of newfags on whatever thread, we all started somewhere. hopefully they will heed farmhands reminders and integrate. phoebe is amusing and hopefully she wont go the way of pnp or the munchies. but i will piggyback on you and say that disability sperging isnt milk. and her thread isnt specific with counting purchases but uwu poor anons are annoying too. at least people who count out the value of recent purchases sage. sjw cringe will never stop being cringe tho

No. 9824

the camwhore thread is pathetic and should be on autosage imo. all they do is nitpick camwhore's appearances and talk about how ugly they are and how veiny their boobs are. stuff like that. like gee wiz woman's bodies are not perfect guys.

its especially weird because it's either a bunch of weird girls sitting through porn to find awful quality milk or the camgirls themselves self posting there. I don't know which is more pathetic but overall it's a really bad look for the site. just my .02.

maybe it will get good someday but for now it's just trash

No. 9825

>>9782
I almost never post but personally I don't like calling the ugly gargoyle by his dumbass internet name because of exactly that - it's a dumbass internet name. He thinks it makes him cool or some nonsense and it sounds super dumb and I don't want to oblige him by using it.

And personally, I don't like this shit:

>>9734
Like it's just whatever nicknames the new Admin arbitrarily finds annoying, apparently? It's not what the people who actually use the thread find annoying, it's one person's personal preference being imposed upon everyone else. Its petty and incorrect for a board admin, and perhaps a sign of worse to come.

No. 9827

>>9822
hellweek will rain pain upon them shortly. be patient.

No. 9828

>>9825
actually, people who use the threads also find those nicknames for the children cringey and tasteless. calling the kids names really can't be defended.

No. 9829

>>9828
>calling the kids names really can't be defended.
Honestly, just call them T and C if you Have to talk about the kids. Newfags do it with the onion girls all the time.

No. 9830

>>9829
just call them the kids

No. 9831

pls delete the porn in gender crit thread thank you

No. 9833

Someone claiming to be Kady Rae is back in the Alt Cow thread >>>/snow/797606. Will mods respond this time?

No. 9834

I want to mirror and post laineys latest video in the onision thread since kalvin's video on greg references and shows clips from it. Do I still need to put this in the fake boy thread? Personally,I feel its relevant to understand the context of the current (albeit, pretty boring) drama as a whole.

No. 9835

>>9834
It's related to Greg, so it's fine in the current thread.

No. 9846

Why the cow sticker? >>>/pt/652781

No. 9849

>>9846
>Leaves huge wall of unedited rippedtxt, doesn't see the problem.

Anon you made my eyes bleed.

No. 9851

>>9849
i wish they'd like delete and archive this stuff.

No. 9853

Can ya'll stop calling people fags/faggots? Nothing wrong with being gay, yet "newfag", etc are being thrown around as if they're bad.(newfag)

No. 9855

>>9853
>this level of newfaggotry

maybe this isnt the site for you newfriend

No. 9869


No. 9873

Not a complaint but just wanted to say that I love the Hellweek theme. It's remind me the good ol' time of the Spergchan saga and its Kira-Kira theme. Thanks Admin-sama!

No. 9885

>>9829
I was referring exclusively to Greg's nicknames, as referenced in my post about why I don't call him by his edgelord internet name. I don't talk about the kids, the shit people call them is pretty uncomfortable. I just think we should be able to call the sewer onion whatever we want without it being filtered.

No. 9925

Can banned people still post in /meta/? My ban was issued on the 14th, but I was posting here just yesterday. I didn't get the banned message until today.

No. 9926

>>9885
Granting him his edgy chosen online handle seems like a bad move to me too. Everyone knows whom you're referring to in the fucking Onion thread despite the weird nickname variations. At the very least filter it to a demeaning name and meet us halfway admin-sama.

The kids are better off without the gross nicknames. I don't know who thought that was a good idea to call a child "Clot".

No. 9927

>>9926
I don't know but I've wanted to complain about that one for a while, it's really gross and the kids did nothing wrong. I never said anything because especially with the old staff I thought it'd just start a dumb argument and nothing good would come of it, but I hope those "nicknames" are filtered out now at least.

But yeah, here's hoping they'll relent Greg's side.

No. 9929

>>9925
You're good, it was a 1 min ban warning so the ban has been expired.
>>9926
Come up with more creative demeaning names for him then.

No. 9936

Wanted to agree with anons about the no talking about Lainey rule.
Mods have said take it to the fakeboi thread but I see the Onions as a unit now. Ever since the Sarah grooming thing, I just don't think she should be exempt from criticism.
Nitpicks are retarded but why can't people discuss her videos and or talk about her?

No. 9937

>>9936
>I just don't think she should be exempt from criticism.

she isnt though. talking about her in relation to greg is fine but constantly commenting about her offenses to the trans community isnt a greg issue. if something is milky as them as a unit, sure. but not everyone cares about her only wearing binders for videos or her shit dangerhair choices. i think what admin and mods are doing are fine with their thread. its not funny or interesting to see countless screenshots of gregs junk or taylors face and near constant comments on how she will never transition. its fucking stale.

No. 9939

>>9936
You can still talk about Lainey if it relates to Greg (i.e. child grooming) or take your issues with her shitting up the trans community in the fakeboi thread. Nobody needs or wants to see her boring vape/clothing haul/tattoo/hair videos, the thread has improved without her.

No. 9940

>>9782
It's annoying censorship. The thread is dead most of the time now so no, I would disagree that things have gone as usual. gEt oVer Ur sElf

>>9734
I wish you'd fuck off and stop baby sitting the Onion thread. Who cares if you think the nicknames are annoying? As far as I can see, the nicknames aren't something anyone has ever complained about.

Also wtf with banning talking about Lainey? Wtf would anyone go to the transtrending thread when we don't care about that? Lainey is a cow and Greg's sidekick and I don't see why we can't talk about her in the Onions tread without it being attached to Greg. Literally not a single soul asked for this policing. Kindly fuck off.

>>9939
No one wants to see any of the dumb shit greg posts either but we still do. She's a cow, and she did the Sarah grooming all on her own. The thread is fucking boring.

No. 9941

>>9940
Agreed. I'm starting to think people and mods are going softer on Lainey because she's actually trans supposedly now. She's still a child groomer and still defends Greg so I still think she's terrible.
I also whole heartedly agree about the nickname thing. Nicknaming the kids I guess IS a bit much although Clot and Trot isn't that offensive imo. I don't think anyone has ever complained about nicknaming Greg or Lainey though, and that rule is absolutely retarded. If their nicknames are forbidden, then shouldn't Raven's or Momo's be not allowed either?
Is there an actual reason as to why we can no longer use names like Onision ect?

No. 9942

>>9929
What's your problem? What's so bad about G urg? Why does it bug you so much? Why is something no one in the thread ever had a problem with now filtered because of a singular person who happens to be admin? It sounds like for whatever reason your autism is triggered by a nickname and you're trying to force it on everyone else like a big dumb baby. If for some reason a silent majority hates the nicknames then do a poll or something, otherwise this is just petty bullshit that's killing the thread.

No. 9943

>>9942
This.

G urg and S hreg have always been used. I haven't heard anyone except mods complain about the nicknames. I'm happy to follow rules but an explanation as to actually why we can't say it would be nice.

No. 9944

>>9940
Talking about her isn't banned. The strawmanning is amusing. Grooming and poly discussion or anything related to Greg would be relevant.
I guess I'm sorry you guys can't discuss her soda video in the onion thread.
>>9941
Why would being trans matter or not. She's been larping for years.

edit: filters removed so you can stop being insufferable about your god given right to call him gruggly

No. 9946

In a broad sense all of Lainey's videos have to do with Greg because he is pushing her to be the breadwinner since he is losing income. He is probably the source of these lame video ideas.

>>9944

So her soda video should be discussed in the Fake Boi thread as the red text instructed, despite it having nothing to do with gender?

Would starting a thread for Lainey on /snow/ be a viable compromise?

No. 9949

>>9941
stop even slightly defending giving lousy nicknames to innocent children.

>>9946
oh god I suggested that when she started beautybot and naaawww we don't wanna.

must be sad to have your lainey shitposting circle broken up but the rest of us are fine about it.

No. 9950

>>9946
Yet onion anons chose to nitpick about how soda has just as much sugar Starbucks is and other hot and quality takes. /s

No. 9951

>>9944
How is that straw manning when people were being banned for talking about her? As another anon said, arguably everything she does can be considered related to onion, especially since she’s been groomed by him into her own shitty person? And like another anon, how does her video have anything to do with trans trending to even make sense to take it there? Why would we need to discuss her independently when everything she does is related to onision. You shouldn’t be banning anyone.

The real straw man is you pretending like she’s just nit picked just because and not because she’s a shitty person shaped by Greg.(Ban evasion, yet again.)

No. 9952

When a ban appeal is accepted and the ban overturned because it was unwarranted, is the red text removed?

No. 9953

I can understand where the line is drawn in Moo and Onion threads, but I don't think I see it in the Dasha and Luna threads. Some of the stuff seem so minor that it's silly to pick about compared to the super dumb and creepy shit that Dasha and Luna do. Are the skinwalking posts allowed now in Dasha's thread? The old staff stopped it because there was too many of them and they all stated the obvious, that Dasha is acting out the movie Single White Female. It's like constantly calling Moo fat and the Onions ugly, we know that already. In Tuna's it's been rinse and repeat for many threads now with milk trickling here and there. The same stuff gets repeated over and over for these threads.

No. 9955

>>9940
>The thread is fucking boring.
Or maybe, just maybe, Greg and Lainey are boring. There's currently nothing particularly milky going down in the grease mansion. It's ok for a thread to die down when nothing is going on. An example for farmers knowing when to avoid posting where there's no milk? Our queen's thread. The Raven anons were also pretty good at leaving the thread alone until something milky happened.

No. 9956

>>9951
>how does her video have anything to do with trans trending to even make sense to take it there
I know you're banned but fuck you're retarded. Lainey is a transtrender that's why you were told to talk about her on the transtrender thread. No wonder the threads went to shit if brainlets like you were the only thing keeping them alive.

No. 9957

>>9951
>>9950
imagine fighting this hard to talk about a shitty soda video

No. 9958

>>9955
Yeah, I understand wanting to talk to farmers even during milk droughts but that energy is better spent socializing somewhere else or at least in /ot/ or something. Nitpicking cows that aren't dong anything lulzy can't possibly be that fulfilling anyway.

No. 9959

>>9958
There's an offical lolcow discord farmers can communicate on but since it's modded by our admin and it's not a hugbox, they won't utilize it. It's also not Onision centered.

No. 9961

>>9956

NTAYRT, but that would be derailing the Transtrender thread.

They should just start a Lainey thread in /snow/ to dissect her boring videos. There would be nothing barring them from also discussing her relationship with Greg.

No. 9962

I rarely post in lolcow but just wanted to drop my two cents on the onion thread.

Look i check in one the thread maybe every 2-3 days for a quick update and both onision and lainey. I really would rather not have to fucking go to snow to read up on her thread again, its annoying and honestly pretty redundant because these two fuckers are basically joined by the hip at this point. Literally, majority of their spregs are about each other so I don't see why we need to separate the two.

I get why lainey was restricted previously because she wasn't a "youtuber" but now that she is, why the fuck can't she be in the same thread as her husband so they can be youtubes best husband duo?

Y'all had no issue when it was vixmas or billiegate so why would it matter now? Unless she has divorced him in secret and ghosted him, why can't they be discussed about together?? They're basically synonymous with one another in terms of spregout topics and behaviour, so why the fuck not?

Also why is the word grug corrected to onision?

No. 9963

>>9962
>why can't they be discussed about together??
They can, see >>>/pt/647967
It's only a problem if you're solely talking about her.

No. 9964

>>9962

I only suggested that they start a thread on Lainey as a compromise because Admin will not cede. Like I said earlier, Greg is pushing her to become their Youtube cash cow.

The prohibition on nicknames for gREEEg baffles me because we have some downright derogatory nicknames for other cows. But it looks like Admin has removed the filter since yours got through.

No. 9965

>>9963

I think by "together" anon means in the same thread.

No. 9966

>>9963
together as in the same thread.

Yes, i think they're basically synonymous with each other but I AM aware that they have some videos or spregs about themselves.

For example that soda video, why can't we just let them chat about it in the thread. It's just going to be 10-15 comments about what a stupid cunt she is and how onision has further destroyed her perceptions of reality with his grooming. Then we move on.

If you make them post that shit in the fakeboi thread then the rest of us have to shift through that shit to get to her updates, which I know I personally wont fucking do. We end up just missing out on context for her future spregs this way.

And then when milk does finally roll in, we get all these anons referencing shit we don't know cause we cbf following the other thread, and it'll probably end up being just a constant stream of 'lurk moar newfags' call outs with sprinkles of lengthy referencing from the few dedicated farmers left.

For the sake of future archiving and referencing, can we just fucking let them talk about lainey in the thread? She will inevitably be once again heavily involved in onion milk and ofc anons are gonna want to start digging up all her old shit to testify what kind of character she has.

No. 9967

>>9966
>For example that soda video, why can't we just let them chat about it in the thread.
Because it's 1) not milk 2) nitpicky 3) boring.

>And then when milk does finally roll in, we get all these anons referencing shit we don't know cause we cbf following the other thread.


Crossposting isn't hard. Look at the Onion Flakes thread for a good example of milk that's been crossposted. Stop being lazy and making shitty excuses. If you want to nitpick Lainey, do it in /snow/ not /pt/. Better yet, take it to the anti-o discord servers.

No. 9969

>>9967
hearing about lainey making an entire video bashing the sugar content of sodas when her own matcha fraps from starbucks is almost double the sugar content is a helluva more interesting than Greg's #1001 twitter spreg about how shane dawson is a pedo.

Without greg, lainey is just some fakeboi who enjoys making videos showing everyone how much more superior she is in terms of nutrition, childcare and healthcare. Without lainey, greg is just a dying cow, mooing the same old milk over and over again until he fades into obscurity.

But together, they're still a producing diary cow, albeit a pretty sickly one with clogged teats.

Leave them together, anons. Alone they don't deserve their own threads, but together we'll at least have some material to read while taking our morning shits.

No. 9971

>>9953
Thank you for mentioning the Luna thread. It's been so stagnant for the last couple of threads but it still gets wow ugly nails, lol she fat and so on. And it has that weird clique of stans.


For the folks fighting about Lainey and Greg, did you miss the years of warning? Like, actual fucking years. And yet it was still durr Lainey looks like a foot and has terrible skin. The same old nitpicks ad nauseam aren't milk, and if that is all that is keeping the thread alive then what does that say about the milk to be had?

No. 9974

>>9956
I honestly almost never post in the threads but o k sure, I'm shitting it up with my non existent posts.

>>9967
No one goes and checks the onion flakes thread to get information on what the onion and lame are up to.

Lainey is literally only in our sphere because she married Greg. She's not important enough to have her own thread, I think most people only keep up with her because she is married to Greg, not because she's a transtrender. That's why she doesn't belong in the transtrenders thread. No one would care about her if she wasn't with Greg. I don't want to bother with digging through the trender thread because I really could care less.(Ban evasion)

No. 9979

I stg it feels like onion snowflakes itt pushing for discussion in discords and wk cuck KaikingfagLainey. It was during temp all the fractured discords happened and the thread and mod team got fucked up with incessant infighting.

Just call it the fucking Onion's thread and let both of the sad cunts be discussed, the thread is slow moving enough it really doesn't require much effort to skim topics you're not interested in. Anons are hardly reading every fucking thread on this site to see if they're interested you skim over words it really isn't difficult to not insert yourself into a discussion you're not interested in.

No. 9980

>>9974
>I don't want to bother with digging through the trender thread because I really could care less.
then she isn't that important to he conversation. case closed.

No. 9981

>>9949
I'm not 'slightly' defending the children's nicknames. I said I can see why it should be banned although it never offended me. The reason it never offended me is because I don't find it interesting at all to talk about their kids.
Learn to read. It's completely understandable why they shouldn't be even spoken about. The only time I can even see a reason to mention them is concern when these two retards have teenagers in and out of their homes, eg the billie saga and sarah's visits.

I was asking why Lainey and Greg are no longer allowed nicknames. Greg especially. Noone has complained about their nicknames and it seems like a sudden rule.

No. 9983

>>9979
>I stg it feels like onion snowflakes itt pushing for discussion in discords and wk cuck KaikingfagLainey.
Not wanting the Onision thread to be snowtier (filled with nitpicking) isn’t whiteknighting Lainey.

It’s obvious that the people complaining about Lainey not being able to be discussed on her own are the ones that are responsible for the thread quality declining for the last 2 years and are triggered that farmhands are actually banning for things against the rules. If you want Admin to permit Lainey’s content without Greg in the Onision thread then get your act together.

No. 9984

>>9983
I agree.
Just wanted to say that I appreciate the ban on n Lainey talk when it doesn’t pertain to Greg in the Onision thread.

I don’t give a shit about her boring videos. They aren’t milky at all. I don’t need a recap about her trying different sodas. And comments like, omg she’s totally overreacting. Drink diet soda. So nitpicky, pointless, and completely devoid of milk.

No. 9985

Hey, can anyone tell me if an auto-refresh on individual threads was implemented here recently? Suddenly my browser is choosing to load the page endlessly but it's never done this before. I think it would update every few minutes or so, because I'd see new replies on the page but it wouldn't constantly try to load. Does this even make fucking sense lol. Using Chrome on an iPad that's fully updated on all apps. Thanks.

No. 9987

This new admin is a bigger cow than anyone on this site

No. 9989

>>9985
To me the site has always auto-refreshed. I have Chrome and I'm on laptop.

No. 9991

>>9989
I can confirm, the only difference is the auto refresh timer isn't shown like on 8ch. If you want fun leave your favorite threads open to see deleted replies.
>>9981
Nicknames were never a rule, some nicknames were temporarily filtered for making the thread confusing to read. The filter is removed now like I've stated before.
>>9987
Anon, don't flatter me.

No. 9994

>>9981
>Clot and Trot isn't that offensive imo
Anon these are offensive, they are children. I didn't address your other points because this is the one I want to answer.

No. 10000

I hate how the theme doesn't apply when browsing Catalog. I check a thread in dark mode because it's pleasing to the eye, and then once I open the catalog IT BURNS. Please, make the themes applicable when browsing Catalog, thanks.

No. 10005

>>9994
Hence I said 'in my opinion'

No. 10010

File: 1555893061218.jpg (46.09 KB, 609x480, KLc6SZX.jpg)

Hellweek ended today at 12AM GMT, in order to evaluate what worked and what didn't we will have a townhall on May 5th 8PM GMT, same time as our last townhall. The time may be changed if there is enough demand.
The primary topic will be related to the future of lolcow and possible major technical changes, I think it's