No.4266
I think that yuri should be exempt from the term "sex" to preserve the more pure nature of the board. As yuri is a pure form of love that does not involve any gross insertions or ugly males. So the "no sex" rules still hold, and girls playing with each other is A-OK under that
No.4267
>>4266I won't delete yuri for now. It's a heartwarming and cute aspect of human affection.
No.4268
modified the wordings
No.4271
>>4270naturally, but there's much less gay stuff that gets sent around and it's not my sexual preference.
No.4272
judging from Q4 2019 reports what you posted with nudity would be fine as long as it's not sex. Likely my standards will be the same as 4chan/cm with more openness to nudity.
No.4333
welcome to the rape zone
No.4336
What a blunder.
No.4337
what's the deal with rape?
dunnnn biribiripewnpewn biribiripewnpewn
dun dooroonroonroon dun dundooroon
No.4338
think sending threads like that to /jp/ would be better than locking them
No.4343
It wasn't off topic as much as it was a disagreeable topic that divided people into two camps. If someone were to make the thread on jp it would be fine, but that was a /qa/ styled thread and on-topic.
No.4345
I don't really understand why people flipped out like that. Then again, I didn't see 51131.
No.4347
>>4345There were two posts. It was something oddly written. I guess he was drunk.
No.4348
>>4347Was it RL stuff? I don't see a point to the moralfagging otherwise.
No.4349
>>4348I can't quite recall the exact wording, but >>>/qa/51131 was written something like, "rapists exert all your pent up lust so you don't have to," the other post was a reply to >>>/qa/51133 saying something like "don't disrespect labor for putting in the work."
No.4350
Ultimately the final choice was made by a majority opinion against promoting rape making me feel confident in moderating it. Having empathy is an important trait a person can have. I'd rather /qa/ be a board of people who look out for one another rather than demean others with an indifference towards suffering.
No.4351
Not sure I feel the same way. Although I guess since it was on /qa/ and not /jp/ that decision was fine. Otherwise I'd be against moderating based on majority opinion (which looked to be more funposting than anything nearing the end)
No.4352
>>4351I mean by this that often times I want to delete something but won't act unless I read a signal from someone agreeing with me. This keeps out some bias.
It's not moderating from polling, but affirming that I'm not acting solely in self interest even when I have my own opinions.
No.4353
>>4349Those do sound odd.
>>4350I can't say it was a bad call, but the second reply was good. The last rape thread, too, was okay until the /pol/tard stepped in and then everyone jumped on him. I suppose moving to /jp/ would have been passable, I don't want kissu to start accumulating taboos.
No.4354
>>4352If the thread itself was reported I've got no issues. If people wanted to have a bit of fun with self-moderation and that led to actual moderation then I'd probably prefer people be allowed some fun with it as long as nothing really becomes all that serious. (Although maybe that's not particularly the best on /qa/, so this probably would only apply to a /jp/ thread)
No.4361
One thing is taking measures against /tv/ style shitposting, which does tend to come in excess, but another is getting frustrated over generic /a/jp/ shitposting which has been present since time immemorial. Taking a stand against it not through legitimate criticism but with [s4s] "cutie" posting also leaves a bitter taste in one's mouth. Such behavior doesn't shed a positive light on kissu compared to other spinoff alternatives.
No.4362
>>4361>Taking a stand against it not through legitimate criticism but with [s4s] "cutie" postingWhere?
No.4363
>>4361After that downtime and that short 4/qa/ thread, it reminded me that kissu doesn't need to have moderation to save it from shitposts. At most now I think that it should've just been moved to /jp/ where more teenbro-like posts are allowed and left to the posters to decide what to do with it.
I have to agree that moderating such harmless shitposting so heavily does reflect a bit poorly on kissu in comparison to ota or gn, which show their ability to deal with shitposts without moderator interference and sometimes even make something fun out of it. I'm not implying that kissu should be covered in the complete trash that gn/ota have to deal with as well, but a bit of kuso here and there that isn't too far out of the ordinary is healthy, and should be one of the things /jp/ encompasses. Not to mention that it shows trust in the people posting to not go off the deep end and turn a thread into /pol/-lite
No.4619
>>4607No he isn't.
I don't care if he's the admin, he still needs to lurk moar. Most of his users have been using imageboards for much longer than him and he clearly doesn't grasp their culture completely yet. He could also learn a thing or two with his co-admin.
No.4621
>>4620What do you mean by "change"? I want him to learn more about it. He's going to be forced to if he consults his co-admin about it.
No.4807
>>4619People who use the phrase "lurk moar" are almost always newfags.
No.4846
>>4807Why would they be? Literally no one uses it anymore. The concept of lurking before posting is dead.
No.4863
>>4563veriny is fine, if he was a newfag this site would probably be bad
No.4912
>>4846>Literally no one uses it anymoreYou're literally delusional, and that's not a joke
No.5395
>>>/qa/60303
I dispute this perma on the grounds that it's too rude.
No.5397
How the fuck does that warrant a permaban?
No.5398
telling people to leave and/or kill themselves is protected /jp/ heritage teenmin
No.5399
>>5398I'll leave the ban up on /qa/ then
No.5400
Still don't understand how it's banworthy. Plus you're proving he was right when he called you overzealous.
No.5401
>>5400I've known this guy for about 2 years. He can say whatever he wants about me. His positive contributions are constantly weighing against outright maliciousness and attempts to leverage people's emotions and situations for control.
No.5402
Also very disappointing to see that a problem we discussed at length months ago (>>>/poll/170) hasn't been improved in the slightest.
No.5403
uh >>/poll/170
No.5404
>>5403the cites table is a bit dead so crosslinking seems to have some issues.
No.5405
actually... why is it not crosslinking
>>>/poll/170
No.5406
regex patterns not matching I guess
In anycase, what's the point you're trying to prove? The mod in the other thread admitted I was right and /jp/ is a good alternative to /qa/
No.5408
>>5406In the last 30 or so posts of that thread, people were talking about the loss of anonymity, and here we are 7 months later and you just permabanned a poster not for a specific post or rule violation, but for his accumulated posting history, while referencing one of his posts in the ban message.
No.5409
>>5408yes, but he's actively let himself be known to me and used his identity to push favour. If you see this as an erosion of potential trust then fair enough, however this is a resentment that I've stored up and my emotions have kind of exploded.
No.5411
>>5409If you talk to him off-site, is there any reason why this couldn't have been sorted out between only the two of you? Sorry but this is just really unsightly.
No.5414
>>5413Tell pissmin to delete his bullshit as well then, because I have a right to defend myself from untrue slander.
No.5415
>>5414I'd love to, but I can't now that it will be a point of contention that people will want to bring up.
No.5416
There's nothing more to say, and nothing more that other people will want to hear. It's personally motivated and behind the scenes meta. I shouldn't have made it a pub ban
No.5418
>>5417For shame! Anonymous still believes they were telling the vermin to kill themself and not /qa/'s favorite flying fish! I can't believe people could forget her so easily...
No.5423
>>5396Trying to rationalize your actions as a form of "self-moderation" -- or some kind of preservation thereof -- is a complete and utter bastardization of the phrase. From what I recall, they were among the voices who chose to speak out against your banning of >>>/trans/1723, which -- need I remind you -- is literally a call
for greater leeway in self-moderation. Moreover, that was another case in which
>>5408 rang true. This action smells only of you airing out a personal vendetta against someone while they have no means to defend themselves. Not only is that cowardly and disgraceful, it's a blatant abuse of authority. Apply to team4chan™ if you plan on keeping this streak going.
>>5406That's a rather surface-level reading. Re-read your own posts:
>>>/poll/185 >Yeah, I'm looking at people's IPs>>>/poll/390>There is no community to running the site. It's people ordering changes to be made and bitching when something isn't the way they want it.Better yet, re-read the critiques of >>>/poll/369, and while you're at it, you can add >>2972 >>2974 >>3135 and >>3329 to that list as well. While partaking on your cross-board, meta cultural exchange, it's very important for you to notice the echoes of previous posts and threads in newer ones. For instance,
>>5355 echos the sentiment of >>2401 (and the now deleted thread which originated on /qa/ that was much longer), similarly the points brought up in >>2972 echo throughout >>>/poll/975 and the
arguing discussion in
>>4243, in particular "Verm has an reprehensible tendency to dismiss entire walls of text based on a single sentence, or otherwise reply saying that he's not going to reply." For a more broad view of how moderation should be handled, you can also view the opinions >>>/poll/570.
My point in asking you to notice the echos of those threads prior is this: if the same points are being brought up continuously, or reinterpreted and rephrased, then the reasons for bringing them up hasn't gone away yet. And, evidently, they haven't.
No.5424
>>5401Ah yes, the good old stggs tactic to shake off bots who ban trolls still seems to be working wonderfully even today by the looks of this thread.
No.5425
Why is it that only the mod and the co-admin are rational and easy to reason with? Why does the admin himself have to be such an obstinate, hard-headed butthurt cunt? He's really giving as much reason as possible for people to hate him again like they did on 4/qa/ back then. And now he started behaving like Kazisho or other mods there who held a personal grudge with coolmin and permab& him and his trip for retarded reasons.
>>5424wut
No.5426
>>5418shhh.....
we are all Anonymous
No.5430
>>5423I'll reread the second text-block where you quote the poll, this is just about the first line.
Kissu has no place for mod-stalkers and baphomet posters or imageboard-staff who flip-flop between supporting 8gag, teenshit and kissu.
If this is what 4chan is, then that's how it's going to be. I am not going to let everyone into kissu and the two people in question were both banned because they associate with me too much in non-imageboard channels such as IRC or Steam. They are (likely) making such a fuss because they think that personal association with me outweighs what emotions I ignore while talking with them in private channels.
No.5432
>>5430>I'll reread the second text-block where you quote the pollPlease read it thoroughly.
>the two people in question were both banned because they associate with me too much in non-imageboard channelsHow does that make your actions any more justified? The whole reason people choose to use imageboards is because of the lack of a continued identity. You're moderating like a petulant forum moderator. Of course, that much is to be expected when, in a sick twist of irony, you've shown no regards for the anonymity of users.
>Kissu has no place for mod-stalkersSaid the IP-stalker, Admin.
No.5434
For starters, I think both parties in this case suffer from immeasurable egos, that will surely never allow one to get along with the other. That being said, I think from an admin's position the proper path to take would be to not pursue some personal grudge or entertain the belief that you should moderate the poster and not the post. Call it idealistic if you want, but moderation based on what the posters see is much more preferable than based on what you can see, and I'm fairly sure that most people here would rather moderation be more clear and related to the board than not.
>>5430That's not exactly 4chan levels, retarded, it's a bit of a step further. 4chan mods don't even bring their off-site baggage to users on the site for the most part, they just hold vendettas against posters for what they've posted. You've deluded yourself into believe that you know what's best for everyone when you most certainly don't based on how contested most of your decisions are (even if some of them work out in the end). A good approach to being a competent administrator is to not approach moderation as something to do for yourself, but rather as a way to carry out the will of the community, and you most certainly are not doing that with these actions. It's rather childish and unbecoming of someone of your status. Really take a step back and try to look at this from a perspective other than your own to realize just how foolish this sounds to anyone who isn't yourself. You may think yourself so high and mighty for removing who you solely perceive as someone on the level of the worst imageboard schizos, but in reality you're being petulant and infuriated with someone whose personality directly clashes with your own.
This really does help to clear up what I think that /jp/ should be. It should be a place free of your stalking and arrogance, where people can feel more free to say whatever without triggering the overbearing admin over the accumulation of their posts he's been stalking. I couldn't really define it in my thread because the examples didn't really exist, but you've allowed for everyone to see the thought process of yours I considered while writing it. It doesn't really need to be as free as I stated in the post, people have certainly made legitimate arguments against that, but it should be free for anyone to post and have their posts be considered independent of who they are.
>>5425You really don't need to try and pit me or cool against vermin, it's unproductive for everyone and a general annoyance to me. Also your posts are more filled with insults than arguments, which I guess is normal for an /a/ poster, but unconvincing for others.
No.5435
>>5434What's the point of trying to be argumentative when he's going to ignore everything due to being an obstinate arrogant piece of shit?
No.5437
>>5436Well, you did a good job at it yourself, so it's not necessary for me to. I'm just expressing indignity because he never learns from his mistakes and continues to keep making them constantly.
No.5438
>>5430>I am not going to let everyone into kissuIf you mean there are certain *people* you don't want on Kissu, you don't really have a choice in this matter. No matter how many proxies, VPNs, and mobile IP ranges get banned, people who really want to post will find a way to post. What you can do is keep certain kinds of *posts* out of Kissu. But in order to have that leverage, you must desist from banning people for who they are rather than for what they have recently posted. Otherwise you will slowly build a community of ban evaders with no respect for your decisions, which is exactly what 4chan is like. The right way to moderate is to remove *posts* that harm the board, and issue *temporary* bans when someone persists in making them.
No.5439
>>5432>How does that make your actions any more justified? In an ironic twist of irony, you're defending people who give up their anonymity to curry favour with staff members in order to defend self-moderation(and anonymity).
No.5440
>>5439In a predictable development vermin asserts his twisted logic on others and believes himself to have won.
No.5441
>>5425Get in a mod's good graces by posting enough good things that they'll give you a discount when you shitpost too hard. Should have used an ota analogy instead but those are getting old.
>>5432>How does that make your actions any more justified?He justified his actions plenty. These posters are testing the limits of what they can and can't do as admin cock kissers and now that it backfired they're concern trolling. It's so transparent it's pitiful.
It's understandable that the admin would take these people's history in account considering their off-site relationship and I'd personally be VERY paranoid of anyone I knew had connections to 8ch post-2015. Sociopaths flock to smaller communities like flies to shit. The problem is if this will become a slippery slope moment and he starts doing this with everybody. If you want to put him together with team4chan, consider the fact that, unlike kissumin, they do all of that shit and more but leave no trace for accountability.
>>5434 thinks that's a good thing even though it's obvious it's one of the reasons that shit hole is how it is.
The situation could have been managed much better, like have a private talk about it, or delete the post and issue a warning, but then again it's impossible to know if any private warnings were given and any claim to that effect will be countered by the other part, whether in good or bad faith.
No.5442
>>5438You can cross fingerprint browsers on the same machine so there is actually a way to ban persistent ban eviders if you really want to[1]. And besides, I do think vermin is giving too much leeway to them when he could just swing the ban hammer be done with it. Some people just cannot be reasoned with and you're just better off blocking them off completely. I wish I could have that in imageboards.
1-
https://yinzhicao.org/TrackingFree/crossbrowsertracking_NDSS17.pdf No.5443
>>5439I was posting here completely anonymously. It was you who identified me through my post history because you're a power abuser.
No.5444
Also of note that just like the Chihaya spiral, the meta spiral some boards fall into is very hard to come out of. Between the heated talks about the site layout and this, there's been a lot of heated meta discussion recently.
No.5446
>>5440I don't see what you're seeing. All around me I see people bending over to support someone who on multiple occasions attempts to suck up to authority figures and throws away his anonymity with pseudo-avatars
No.5447
>>5441I don't believe the lack of trace for accountability is a good thing. I don't like the idea, for the most part, of tracking users and only accumulating the bad they do while ignoring their fair or good posts that do exist. For the current poster in question I think they are capable of making good posts, but their /a/-like elitism hold them back from being good most of the time. Also their ego makes them post dumb stupid posts or try to put themselves over others by arbitrary means in typical /a/ fashion.
If he were just to only post garbage I'd be on board with removing his presence, but because he has the capacity for nice posts I don't think a complete block is necessary like I would think it to be for the social media posting gnfos schizo or other drama obsessed schizos that have no capacity for quality in any form. If you are the poster I believe you may be, I think at one point you even identified them as a positive presence on /jp/ in the past. Unless that was a case of mistaken identity of course.
No.5448
>>5442>if you really want toI'm guessing you're implicitly referring to the uproar over privacy this approach would create, and I agree. But I have doubts as to its effectiveness even if we went that far. All you need to do to fool that system is find a way to tamper with your browser's fingerprint. Non-technical users would have trouble, but once you end up with a large number of banned people, the techies will create solutions to help the non-techies.
>Some people just cannot be reasoned with and you're just better off blocking them off completely.This is true, but there's no need for the moderation to guess whether it's the case when they ban someone. Instead, they can start with a short ban, and if that doesn't deter misbehavior, they can escalate to longer bans. Mods shouldn't start out with permabans for anything other than CP posters and known proxies.
No.5449
>>5439>Get in a mod's good graces by posting enough good things that they'll give you a discount when you shitpost too hardThe exact opposite happened though? He banned me simply because I said "kill yourself immediately" as a response to someone who posted on /pol/. And it was completely out of a butthurt personal grudge because I insulted him privately a few times before. Go read /trans/.
>These posters are testing the limits of what they can and can't do as admin cock kissers and now that it backfired they're concern trollingI was never an "admin cock-kisser", I just happened to be friends with the other two staff members before kissu even existed. I'm also not an 8gag poster. Using a single board there for a very specific purpose from time to time does not make me so.
No.5450
>>5449Messed up the quote:
>>5441 No.5451
>>5446If it doesn't work in gaining favors with authority figures what's the problem? His meta posts here in no way appeal to me, who views them as annoying /a/ trash, or to cool who most likely sees them as trying to stir the pot with drama. My opinions are based solely on the whole of his contributions, and vern doesn't want to look at any posts made by him and consider them possibly positive, he just wants to blanket everything associated with him as bad.
No.5452
>>5449>He banned me simply because I said "kill yourself immediately" as a response to someone who posted on /pol/.While I don't want to see bans for personal grudges, assuming that's what happened, that was a bad post which deserved at the very least a deletion.
No.5454
And while I find them annoying, I don't think that you can just accumulate a board with posters who are always good 100% of the time. Surely there will be more people that in the future will be similar in that they will have their good and bad moments. And if /qa/ is to be a place where those types will get banned for being too kuso at times, then I think /jp/ should be a better fit for them. Please do realize that the boards are not identical and what is allowed on /jp/ does not need to be tolerated on /qa/, and that would be what keeps /qa/ from degenerating into ota.
>>5452Yeah, a deletion would've been for the best, maybe even a temp ban. Vermin had a million ways to go about it, and he chose the worst one in a fit of emotions.
No.5455
>>5454Is vermin a girl?
Is she single
No.5456
>>5439I would expect anyone of integrity to do the same. I cannot imagine a single scenario in which I would ever want moderation to apply because of circumstances outside of what's posted on Kissu.
In both cases thus far you've also completely failed to provide any justification for your claims other than your opinions alone. To you, the first was a, "community troublemaker," and, "I know he'll (post politics) again. (unclear)" In this case, it's that this person tried, "to curry favour with staff members," and made a single mean post. The response to both, a fucking
permaban, make you come across -- and I don't use this word lightly -- unhinged.
No.5457
>>5455yes
yes
but you shouldn't test your luck
No.5458
epic, cites fucked...
No.5459
working on original
No.5462
>>5456Yeah, I definitely love /pol/ and politics even though the reason I told that poster to kill himself was because he posted on /pol/.
This is the thread he's talking about by the way; >>/>trans/1652 I only stole that one from gnfos and posted it on /jp/ because I thought it was funny in a silly and absurd way, similar to old /b/ humor.
No.5463
>>5462Oops: >>>/trans/1652
No.5464
>>5456just read his posts
No.5466
>>5464Wow he had
the audacity to disagree with you on multiple points.
The horror! I can only imagine such trauma you must have endured! Beyond that, it seems they occasionally complain about "the norms." I have no idea what you're talking about. If that's the bar for a permaban, you ought to ban at least half of the site.
No.5467
>>5466What am I to say. If you're a sucker for this kind of person then there's nothing I can say because you like this type of behaviour, but taunting mods in #4chan using the sites name... I didn't know about this until a mod told me a few minutes ago... is over the line and puts a black star on my own evaluation of your own objectivity and ability to judge other's character.
No.5469
>>5467>I have no idea what you're talking about.>you're a sucker for this kind of personTruly a way with words and never an opportunity met that was not squandered.
No.5470
>>5464Fine then, if you want people to read his posts so bad, then let them. If you want to make this discussion about the poster, then the people should be able to evaluate the poster themselves. I think that this idea would be like what was theorized in the early days of kissu about how to handle bans, where we came up with the idea that people could evaluate and determine if the ban should stay or not. In this case you've made the ban about something only you can see, so it's only fair that others be let in on what their history looks like so they can determine themselves whether the perma is warranted or not.
No.5472
I'm not a fan of the person affected and I do think the place would be better off with him removed or restrained but doing a public ban over a personal matter was not the right choice of action, I think.
Regards, 3rd party observer
No.5473
>>5472yeah, I shouldn't have. I fucked up making soup and hadn't eaten much.
>>5469why do I have to explain things...
No.5476
>>5473>why do I have to explain things...Why shouldn't you?
No.5477
>(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)
For real? C'mon, V. It's like you want this place to burn down.
No.5479
>>5476It's joke. Of course I have to explain things, but I thought I was clear.
>>5477The site will burn down on itself into another shitty dramaboard if nothing is done about people abusing it's reputation and trying to pick fights with other imageboards.
No.5480
>>5479He wasn't trying to pick a fight with them, it was his warped way of trying to advertise on there. Just like you have a warped view of how to approach moderation and "getting rid of" drama
No.5482
>>5481You deleted the pastebin so I can't look at it and have to make a guess on it's contents. The only reason you're even still posting here is because every other imageboard you touch rots away into drama.
When kissu is a mess of fighting with other imageboards you will leave to some other place and repeat the cycle anew.
No.5483
>>5479kuso post
>>5470Respond to this, vermin.
No.5484
>>5482I didn't delete it. It expired.
No.5485
>>5482>The only reason you're even still posting here is because every other imageboard you touch rots away into drama.Sounds legit specially when you consider
>>5453 and the fact places like ota are overflowing with this important /jp/ heritage making it a very charming place.
No.5486
And yeah, it was pretty much this:
>>5480 I dropped a casual mention of kissu in hopes of advertising there while also trying to hold a conversation with the mods as to which direction they were planning on taking 4/qa/ since they also purged off the soy spammers from there. Didn't even get banned.
>>5485What are you even talking about? Also, it's pissmin who's causing all this drama. He's the one who created this entire clown circus, not me.
No.5487
The mod accumulated a list of his posts and wants me to post it, but my problems are what he does outside of the site combined with the occasional utter garbage post.
>>>/test/1888
No.5489
>>5487https://desuarchive.org/qa/thread/1391026/For the sake of a fair judgement from everyone, here's also him at his worst back on 4/qa/.
No.5491
Users shouldn't be banned unless they can reasonably anticipate that their conduct might lead to a ban. Why not have a 3 strikes system? It could be something like this:
1. Warning: For any conduct detrimental to Kissu.
2. Ban of 30 days or less: Only for specifically prohibited offenses, or for users who continue to misbehave within 30 days after a warning.
3. Permabans or bans over 30 days: Only for illegal conduct, proxies/VPNs/Tor nodes, or users who continue to misbehave within 1 year after the lifting of a ban.
No.5492
>>5489¥first reply>You're annoying.>Хopoшopottery
No.5494
Somewhat surprised that nothing happened earlier given all that history
No.5495
>>5494*history between the two of you
No.5497
>>5491I like this, but I disagree with permabans, think that should be saved for the truly hopeless. Others can just be ban bans. Maybe even instating some kind of system where a /qa/ ban doesn't necessitate a site ban, like how before somebody got banned from the seasonal boards because they couldn't stop talking politics in it.
No.5500
>>5497Yeah, I was thinking more as a maximum ban that the administration could commit to not exceeding so that people don't end up with surprise permabans for their first offense if Vern makes a judgement about their post history they don't expect. But the specific numbers should be debated and adjusted.
No.5502
>>5487Just for clarity, the poster himself was onboard with his posts being shown so that others could evaluate whether vern was right in his decisions or not.
No.5503
meaningless
No.5505
>>5503It's not meaningless, posting a users history without their consent and encouragement is a whole hell of a lot worse than if you were to do so with it. That you don't realize this is baffling.
No.5506
>>5501Who are you calling a scum? Me or him? I gave permission for the mod to gather and post some of my post history since Hibikid had already revealed it in the butthurt public permaban anyway, but those are mostly just random posts instead of my individual threads. Please look at
>>5490 >>5498 as well.
Again, it's not a problem for me to just pack my stuff and leave. The only reason I post on kissu is because I'm friends with the mod and the co-admin. I would've left long ago if not for that since Hibikid has pissed me off more on multiple occasions with his antics.
No.5507
Man reading drama like this really takes me back to the olden days...I hated it then and I hate it now.
No.5508
if this is an attempt at engineering prime /qa/ drama then it's a damn good 1
No.5509
>>5507If only people were capable of taking it easy, all this could be avoided...
Truly a timeless principle
No.5510
>>5507>>5508>>5509I really didn't mean to cause any of it. It's 100% his fault.
Does it really look like I'm a bad poster who only seeks drama from my post history?
No.5511
>>5510It certainly is his fault for starting it, but you're not doing any good by continually picking at it trying to make things worse.
No.5512
>>5506>Who are you calling a scum?Vermin.
>I gave permission for the mod to gather and post some of my post history I still disagree with it happening to begin with. "Exposing" a user's post history is antithetical to the very concept of anonymity.
>>5510>Does it really look like I'm a bad poster who only seeks drama from my post history?Not particularly. To be fair... I wouldn't consider you "the best" of posters, but hardly worthy of a ban.
>>5511How? How? Giving a user the finger and excommunicating them is the most extreme option possible. For them not to defend themselves
at all, even if they do so in a way that's not flattering to their own image, would be ridiculous.
No.5513
>>5512Don't get me wrong, he has the right to defend himself, I just don't think that all his taunting is that necessary. Or his trying to bring off-board stuff into it as well like in
>>5481There was certainly no need to say something directly like that off of private chats.
No.5516
>>5515I agree, there was no reason for all this to ever become a public issue.
No.5517
>>5511>>5513Yeah, sorry about that, but I only have so much patience with a person. He constantly tries to piss off his own users on purpose and doesn't listen to actual arguments when they are provided.
>Or his trying to bring off-board stuff into it as well like inThis really didn't have much impact or consequence at all. Berun brought it up with him in a weird unnecessary way. It just fed into his retardation even more unfortunately, which is why he had to make this post later:
>>5480 No.5518
Is it over yet?
No.5519
>>5518yes
no
maybe
i don't know
can you repeat the question
No.5521
You're claiming to want descallation but this past conversation by has been anything but. There is no reasonable way this can be considered a resolution but rather attempts to strong arm everyone into a certain unshared perspective.
But for the benefit of Cool's sanity I'll stop pressing it for now.
No.5523
I don't give a shit about any of your interpersonal drama, but this isn't settled until the permaban is removed, or there is justification that he should have expected it.
No.5524
>>5523Cool says to stop so I'm stopping here.
No.5525
>>5524Alright. As I see it, the specifics of this case don't matter much. The issue is surprise permabans, and there should be a community consensus whether we have those or not. But maybe it would be for the best to have a new thread about that in a week or so when things have cooled down.
No.5526
>>5523I evaded the ban the moment it was issued if you didn't notice: >>>/qa/60308
>>>/qa/60312If he didn't ban me again when I did that then I guess it's because he was having second thoughts about it. He did it again in this thread but only because of berun making a mistake and saying something without a proper explanation that fed into his dumb shit even more.
No.5603
I don't care about vtubers, I have tried watching them a few times to see what they're all about but the appeal is lost on me. I never liked streamers and slapping an "anime"-style model onto them is not going to change that.
I'm guessing a lot of the kneejerk hate for them is like when KanColle got huge and artists who used to draw Touhou moved to KanColle and conventions were flooded with KanColle stuff. When something new seeps into the spaces you frequent and becomes inescapable, you begin to feel like remaining indifferent is not an option and you need to have an opinion on it (you don't).
Kuso thread. (the one I was going to post this in)
No.5604
>>5603Do people need an opinion on visual novels or manga adaptations? Even the question of sub vs dub doesn't require an opinion, but for some reason the way people enjoy media is more important than what's actually being discussed
No.5605
>>5603I don't think the comparison to KanColle is really an apt one. There simply wasn't a cult of personality behind the characters like vtubers have cultivated. Quite frankly, there wasn't one. More than anything, they resemble traditional idols, but the attention they draw is increased several fold by the fact that rather than needing to appear in media, or create and perform music, they themselves are the ones constantly putting out content, instead of occasionally appearing on some variety show, or radio show, or in acting roles. It's really no wonder then why the creative output of their fanbase is as high as it is: vtubers' constantly evolving nature means that artists and the like are encouraged to be more timely with their references to garner more recognition. This is in stark contrast with TV anime, for instance, where artists usually have a week to produce things if they want to make any specific references to what happened in the latest episode. Furthermore, the at least limited audience participation causes viewers to build a parasocial relationship with the streamer, making them more "possessive" and boisterous in their support for a given vtuber, since they feel more attached to them than they really are given the one-sided nature of the "relationship."
So, no, it's not like people complaining about Shimakaze or whatnot. It's more like people complaining about idols or K-pop.
No.5606
The mod team here is really proving to be humourless over-zealous assholes.
No.5607
*farts on you*
No.5608
*bans you*
No.5612
based on what
No.5613
based on real japanese history