Ask them here.
Is there a way to delete posts from the catalog?
>>4696Moderators can, janitors cannot. moot said in the past that ability is not likely to be extended to janitors.
>>4680Has Anyone Really Been Far Even as Decided to Use Even Go Want to do Look More Like?
>>4698I'll cut u up u cheeky cunt.
>>4698>He hasn't really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like!Top Kek
>>4698You've got to be kidding me. I've been further even more decided to use even go need to do look more as anyone can. Can you really be far even as decided half as much to use go wish for that? My guess is that when one really been far even as decided once to use even go want, it is then that he has really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like. It's just common sense.
>>4698For a minute there I thought thought this was being posted in the spam filter thread.
Did you preorder yet?
>>4867Do you accept 4chan™ Janitor® Dollars©?
>>4870
You know, as people who should be encouraging quality posts and deleting obvious shitposts, we really set a bad example.
>>4874Speak for yourself ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
>>4874 The difference is that our shitposting isn't public shitting!
Since nobody answered in the channel.What is the official stance on "winter ball" threads?
>>4925I was told to delete them. But last year we were told to leave them be as long as they were civil enough.But in the end they'll cause boards to spam each other, just like last year.
Less of a question and more of a general informative thing./lit/ has been having stealth threads about booktubers for a while, which one's they'd fuck, etc. but after a users harassed a 16-yr old girl off Youtube a year ago, it became an epic screencap about how terrible the board is.Recently, several posters have been trying to recapture that magic by searching for and posting female literature channels and then harassing them, while other posters get into /b/-tier shitposting about chaining girls to radiators, etc. all seemingly in an attempt to go further and generate replies by making people disgusted. Now it's at the point where people do have legit personal information on Youtubers and tease posting it for attention.So if you ever check /lit/, be on the lookout for threads about 'Carli,' or "___ has a new video," or about Youtube channels in general. I'd like to kill this /b/ garbage before more people jump on the bandwagon.Thank you for your time.
now that's what I call /j/ quality
Is there a way to remove 2FA on my "account"? My phone got recently destroyed so if ever I got logged out I might not be able to get back in.
>>6156email the pink palm tree man and they can reset
can we get a ban request template for when someone is being a stupid retard?
>>7644That's "ironic shitposting"I would take a template for "lurk moar" personally
>>7645Believe it or not but I've been told that not all "ironic" "shitposting" is "ironic shitposting"."Ironic shitposting" goes something like this:>That's "ironic shitposting">I would take a template for "lurk moar" personally*insert wojak*
>*insert wojak*
>>7645no but what if they're not shitposting and they're being serious?>>7648you should be careful about posting selfies on 4chan bro, never know what kinda creeps are on here...
Why is Hiroshimoot so inactive with 4chan?
>>7666He's like The Queen. A ceremonial figure that possibly influences things in the background. But also a human shield, absorbing all liabilities associated running 4chan.
>>7676i saw him post once. he asked, "any problems on 4chan? Thank You!" it changed my life.
>>7676Well that's ghey
>>4680What's the vetting process like for janoomers? Is the team protected against collectors and leakers? By protected I mean both personally (i.e., identity safe from) and legally (liability) from the actions of bad actors?
As a business owner myself, I have this idle curiosity to know how 4chan works from a business perspective. Like, a management hierarchy? Like is there an office somewhere with a 4chan accountant that handles payroll every week? A 4chan HR rep? Idk, it's just so cool to see such a high traffic website NOT be an oversized corporate machine like most "social media" companies. Given it's reputation I don't know if 4chan could ever go public but i'd definitely buy shares.
>>8869RA is the Chief Simian Assault Officer, that much is in the SEC filing.
>>8869>Like is there an office somewhere with a 4chan accountant that handles payroll every week?
>>8869>he's never been invited to corporatedamn bro definitely not in a mod track position haha
>>8866>>8869going to be totally honest with you, you're probably not going to get an answer to these, sorry. there's a reason the information isn't made public
>>8869I'm picturing GrapeApe in a suit, filling out paperwork at a desk.
>>8904POV your payrise just got rejected
>can't change /j/ to tomorrow theme
you can use custom CSS (with an extension like stylus) and paste https:https://s.4cdn.org/css/tomorrow.710.css for /j/ if you really want to
>>8997I just want her back...
are there any performance reviews for janitors? for example>too many of your cleared reports are actually rule breaking: [example]or>you have too many br's that don't result in bansetc
>>8999if you're doing something consistently wrong we will tell you. assume no news is good newsalso someone's about to be over 9000 so make sure it's a good post or you'll get a negative performance review
>>9000
>>9001u fail
>>9000alright, I just assumed one day all my mistakes would pile up to bite me in the ass and I would be left with nothing, just like real lifethanks!ps this was the sickest meme
whats the deal with loli? i thought that illustrations (even computer generated or hand drawn) depicting clearly underage children sexually was illegal in the US? Some googling shows a few legal opinions on it; https://www.robertmhelfend.com/criminal-defense/sex-crimes/lolicon-illegal/
>>9013I am not a lawyer. The Protect Act of 2003 makes it clear that it refers to an obscene image that shows a child who can be identified. Under federal law, as well as within the bounds of the First Amendment of the US Constitution, it is not illegal to have loli in your possession. Some states have more specific laws regarding this, however. For more clarification regarding this, I'm sure a Mod would be an excellent source of further information regarding its treatment on the site.
>>90132d/illustrated content is not illegal but is banned on basically every board except /b/. we've been doing this for years. don't worry about it. we take care to make sure we're running a tight ship. plenty of porn sites host the same sort of content, too, and they're still up just fine
Why is stacking BRs bad? Just accept all of them. Also, how would you know if someone is truly spamming if there's only 1 BR pending but 20 other posts were deleted?
>>9013>i thought that illustrations (even computer generated or hand drawn) depicting clearly underage children sexually was illegal in the US? I'm not a lawyer either, but I've heard and read about this for years. No, it's not illegal by default, no. There's been some previous legislation on this, but it was struck down as unconstitutional along with some other things, quite some time ago.You CAN find a few cases in the US where someone has been caught with 2D loli, but virtually all cases fall into the following category:>A: The suspect was caught with real life CP, or abusing kids for reals, and the jurisdiction he's in has some sort of obscenity clause which they threw on to pad his charges and sentencing.>B: The suspect is already a convicted sex offender, but they were on parole and they were in fact busted because they violated their parole conditions (which can be as extensive as to forbid any kind of pornography consumption or even using the internet, optionally computers altogether).>C: Someone in a jurisdiction with relevant obscenity laws was importing a quantity of physical printed material with 2D loli, customs was actually paying attention this time, and he gets slapped with some obscenity charges under the argument that he was "intending to distribute" and gets fined for it.>Some googling shows a few legal opinions on itBeing that it's one of those moral outrage things, you can find some people either looking to tell people what they want to hear, or they're so upset that they weren't reading properly. A lot of people will interpret things as meaning ANY sexual depiction of an apparent underage character, this is not the case.What it's actually about is depictions which closely imitate the likeness of a real life minor individual (such as a child actress), this seems like it can be somewhat grey, but a commonly qualifying example is the face of a real life minor shooped onto regular porn, which is enough for CP charges and prison time.
>>9013On examples of real life minors, one case which stood out when I read about it was of a man who had a sexual and romantic obsession with an underage neighbor. One of the things he was nailed for was that he had been developing his own "sex simulator" which featured a virtual depiction of her, which he got CP charges for.This was some time ago, and who knows how 'lifelike' it was (perhaps he used a photo of her), but I believe also that there were some stalking things as well, so he was in trouble for more than just that.At any rate, when it comes to 4chan, we actually run an incredibly tight ship on that part, actual CP is virtually always reported, and action is always taken well within the hour, usually well under half an hour. Other big forums and social media sites are nowhere near as vigilant or responsive to this, some of the stories of inaction by say, Twitter staff, reads like a black comedy with notable cases of how they have outright refused taking action until the Federal Bureau of Investigations forced them to.We get characterized as the filthy anus of the internet, but the truth is that this anus is wiped and washed with great frequency.
>>8997Doesn't work. Cant one of the eggheads here write a simple browser extension which colors this board dark?
>>9050>We get characterized as the filthy anus of the internet, but the truth is that this anus is wiped and washed with great frequency.
>>9051Install the Stylus extension on Chrome or Firefox, create a new style for /j/, and paste the CSS inside of the curly braces. Doesn't look that bad, textarea might need some better colors.
>>4680when do i get my first paycheck??? it's been 3 years
please re-open /qa/ and make the happenings thread an eternal rolling sticky or something/trash/ kinda sucks as a home and /bant/ is somehow even worsealso I'm using a question mark so this counts as a question?
>>9062As one of the regulars and sometimes baker of /hap/ it really has gone downhill in recent months. I'd volunteer to janny /qa/ if it was actually re-opened.
>>9055Nobody likes a dirty butthole.>>9058Hey, that works. Can't wait to get my identity stolen!
>>9062I think we should salt the earth where /qa/ stood.
>>9070/qa/ was a decent board before the soiteens took over. It had a very varied userbase due to threads being moved there from all over the site, and it was really comfyMaybe thread creation could be locked, and mods could create an eternal thread for each board and one for /hap/ (i know it won't happen but i can dream)
Why does it have cant even on the board when I dont understand what it did then. Fucking ridiculous,
>>9072
>>9072whoa this board isn't fucked any more
>>9072I'm sorry to hear that you're feeling frustrated. I'm not entirely sure what you're referring to when you mention "cant even on the board," but it sounds like you may be experiencing some difficulties with a particular task or situation.It's important to remember that everyone encounters challenges and difficulties at some point, and it's okay to feel frustrated or uncertain. However, it's also important to approach these challenges with a calm and focused mindset in order to better understand the situation and find a solution.If you're struggling with a specific task or situation, it might be helpful to take a step back and try to break it down into smaller, more manageable parts. You could also try reaching out to someone for help or guidance, whether it's a teacher, a friend, or a professional.Remember, it's okay to ask for help and to take your time in order to better understand a difficult situation. With patience and perseverance, you can overcome any challenge.
>>9071I very much disagree, it was a wasteland long before the wojakcancer completely enveloped that board. I don't remember anything comfy about it at all, much less any kind of fruitful discussion, it was a dumping ground for meta threads (ergo a glorified /trash/) and people crying about how /pol/ should be deleted.
>>9072YES OR NO?
what do you when someone evades a mute and continues their conversation like nothing happened? this happens semi frequently in certain generalsI br a post for offtopic and when the other anon replies they reply with a new IP like nothing happenedsometimes off topic again or on topic, but aren't they evading at that point? even if the original post gets banned nothing happens to them as they just evaded the mute sometimes even both people are off topic but keep goingdo I keep br'ing? do I ask for a rangeban? do I just give up because why bother? would like some input
>>9127you should focus on the content of posts and not who the poster is. if they want to evade they will, and if they flagrantly do so (posting their ban or saying "LOL JANNY TRY AGAIN" or whatever) sure hit them for evasion. but if you br a post and what seems like the same poster makes another post that is on-topic you have (almost) no way of knowing for certain if a mod was immediately on it and downgraded to a warning or if its a totally different poster who just seems to be the same or if it is indeed evasion. why br an on-topic post just because you suspect its from a troublemaker? you'll just drive yourself insane especially if its a longstanding general, not to mention you'll get people seeing that "wow janny is banning [x]poster, time to report every post I think is his" or worse "better pretend to be that poster and bait janny into banning me so I can complain!" or worse still "wow i bet [x]poster is janny look at how they do whatever they want and never get banned when I report them."I'm speaking from experience on this. focus on the content of the post and not the posters.
>>9132this is good adviceIts much easier to go about your day treating nobody as an evader at first and letting mods direct you towards GR9 instead. By the time someone is determined to be GR9 on sight, there's little guesswork left for you since those types of posts are loud and proud of their evasion.
I am just curious, but is there any archive of very old 4chan emotes? I think they were a thing... Maybe some old guards here may remember
>>9132>>9136thanks for the advice guys, maybe I was a little overzealous on thisI have seen some of those comments you mentioned actually, I'll try to relax from now on
Can we ban or /trash/ /vg/utg/?I don't think I've ever seen discussion about a video game in there, just about the characters, and there is a large amount of pseudo-avatarfagging with characters from the game as they just discuss waifus or wander off-topic. In my opinion, there just isn't enough legitimate discussion being had to justify the rampant rulebreaking, much of which is problematic because users use the report system to report posters they don't like, and /vg/ already has an endless onslaught of reports, many of which are much more important (NWS being a super common one) than trying to sort out off-topic drama between recurrent posters.
>>9154generals struggle with content droughts in unique ways..Whats happening in there probably isn't always optimal, but there are also other generals like it in their 'waiting room' state. My two cents is that the malicious rulebreaking isn't at a point where a mod should dual wield hammers and start tearing it up.
Does Sage work on /j/? A mod dared me to try it out.
>>9181sage
>>9181>>9183Reported
What's even the point of warning for NWS? I feel like every borderline NWS image/coombait is better off outright BR'd as off topic, is that even the right call for those?
>>9193Dropped a warn for NWS on a blue board for this post. It felt appropriate.https://archive.4plebs.org/tg/thread/88365755/#q88368033
>>9191
>>9193plenty of borderline NWS images are on-topic. it really depends a lot on the board. e.g., /tv/ and /v/ are probably bad about using lewd OP images to try to generate off-topic discussion, but in lots of other boards, people may attach a board-relevant but perhaps slightly too spicy image to their post, so a warn is fine. in the case of warnings for NWS, at least personally, i don't even see it as a "punishment" per se, but literally as a warning. equivalent to telling the poster, "hey, i don't want to have to ban you, so please tone back the images just a hair." if the image just gets deleted, then there's a chance the poster won't notice this and so could go on to post lewder images and get themselves banned
>>9191bro did you just announce a report? reported.
>>9193sometimes anons seem to put a genuine effort into censoring things (or posting things that seem censored enough) but the end result is still nsfw, or a poster is making a good faith post in posting something lewd/nsfw but is highly relevant to the discussion and/or sought by other anons in the thread and the poster simply wants to do a good deed by posting said stuff, even risking a vacation if necessaryin those cases, the content must be removed, but it would be mean and not healthy for 4chan to apply punitive BRs
>>9193Let me explain: an OT ban is 1 day local, GR5 is 3 days global, so if you're BRing the user for the highest possible ban, as you should to avoid stacking, something that is NWS should be BRed as NWS independent of topicality. 3G > 1L, got it? Using Off-Topic on coombait is fine on most boards (the exceptions being boards where the images are topical like /v/ or /vt/) but so is deleting the file, it's a matter of whether or not the thread is worth keeping.So what about NWS warns? It's pretty simple. There's a list of things which we consider to be worthy of NWS warnings and you should use the template if you spot them. These include things like hyper nipples through clothing, female areola, pubic hair and cameltoes/hyper bulges. So, what is the point? The point is that GR5 is a 3 DAY GLOBAL BAN, if what the user is doing does not warrant a 3 DAY GLOBAL BAN but is against the rules then that's a good reason to warn them.What a NWS warning isn't for is the 2nd part of >>9199There's no such thing as a poster in good faith breaking GR5 except for exceedingly rare accidents. What you're describing is upvoting the user's actions because you feel that's the right thing to do, which I can't agree with out of principal. Not only are 100% of GR5 bans completely avoidable by simply posting a link to the image or video, but these users should also be punished because you should not reward someone for willing and knowingly breaking the rules. A warning is always a reward when the poster expects a ban for their actions, you're validating their behavior and they'll do it again if and when they feel it benefits them since they now know that they will not incur a punishment. Nuance should go both ways.
>>9201c'mon dude you know i can't read
>>9201Just FYI, OT ban can be 3 days too for some boards like /jp/.
>>9206So much for taking it easy.
>>9206i think that's the norm and 1-days are the exception
>>9000>>9003Good, I was afraid that bad performance might be reflected on my paycheck at the end of the month. >>9060Mods will reevaluate this request in about 2 more weeks
AM I DOING A GOOD JOB? I HAVEN'T GOTTEN ANY NEWS AND I KNOW NO NEWS IS GOOD NEWS BUT I STILL CAN'T HELP BUT WONDER
>>9300the answer is yes
>>9300one time a mod told me "keep up the good work" and it made my heart sing
>>9302>one time a mod told me "keep up the good work"And then everybody clapped.
>>9305she went to my highschool
>>9302I just got a 8% raise on my last janny paycheck.
>>9302this happened to me but then a few weeks/months or something later a mod told me i fucked up something
>>9368don't worry bro, we all fuck things up on the site occasionally. just gotta keep communicating and learning from mistakes.
>>9369Somewhere there is a perfect janny whose BRs are on point, who clears the right things and who has never said a single fucking thing on Discord. He or she is silent and faceless and no one knows of his or her existence.
Why are there no guidelines at all in here or discord? Something that clarifies rules and their enforcement like during orientation.
>>9386if you have questions, you can always ask. most of the rules are pretty self-explanatory, though. they are (imo) written in plain english
>>9387have mods thought about adding image macros/meme images to the irrelevant catchphrases/copypasta rule
>>9395are they really so much of an issue that you think there needs to be a rule against them? if so, explain why/the circumstances surrounding your perception of the misuse of them
>>9401primarily basedjak images- misuse applies as they aren't used to convey emotion/for humor as other image macros are, have nothing to do with almost any board, and are often used for the purposes of a GR3 or similar violationmy understanding of rules is that the ban reason should fit as closely as possible to the violation, presumably to explain to the poster what content should be posted or not, even if the poster knowingly broke the rules and will evade in less than 5 seconds and break them againirrelevant catchphrases/copypasta is sometimes a more accurate description of the violation than a gr3, and in a similar vein, irrelevant 'macro/meme images' would be more suitable for a post than a gr3
>wordfilters apply here toowow
when a big off-topic thread gets moved, does the OP get banned along the way? or are they effectively rewarded for slipping past the radar by letting their thread continue on /b/ or /trash/ for a short while after?
>>9407I regularly see those listed on the bans page with a 1 or 3 days banhttps://www.4chan.org/bans
Is it possible for a janitor to delete/BR a sticky? My initial assumption would be we can't, but I've never wanted to test out of fear it'd actually go through.
>>9409this is my #1 fear
>>9409Yes it is. quite annoyed me once to see a janitor BR my board's sticky.
>>9411Huh, I wonder how difficult it would be to have that changed? Can't imagine a good reason why a janitor would need to delete/BR the post after a mod made it a sticky. Regardless, thanks for clarifying.
>>9403>primarily basedjak images- misuse applies as they aren't used to convey emotion/for humor as other image macros are, have nothing to do with almost any board, and are often used for the purposes of a GR3 or similar violation*insert basedjak564.png*This is GR6 - Ironic Shitposting.There's no good explanation in the rules for why that is, but essentially all of GR6 is predicated on the notion of not allowing low quality posts that don't add anything to the discussion. Most of the other templates are pretty self-explanatory (the ASCII macros template is actually irrelevant ASCII macros in the rules), but not ironic shitposting since the example is pretty bad by today's standards. What a basedjak quote and le dans ze maymays trolololol xdddd has in common is that neither of them contribute anything to the discussion, whereas someone could be ironic in a post while shitposting and still make a valid contribution to a thread, much to the amusement of other posters and lurkers. It's not uncommon for people to use greentext to imply that someone means something (not quoting them) and then attaching an image to said post for comedic value. That at the very least is transformative and makes an argument upon the original text rather than just basedjaking the poster. This isn't to say that using a basedjak is automatically a rule violation, it's about how it's used.>irrelevant 'macro/meme images'GR6 applies to both text and images, so you can use irrelevant catchphrase/copypasta for shit like "reply to this image or your mother will die in her sleep" or "+1 to image limit and no contribution".
>>9420i see what you mean, thats a great rule which does cover ソイjaks
>>9420I've since used ironic shitposting for this however, there's threads like >>>/v/645967517 which while may be genuine questions is unfortunately accompanied by basedjaks. I get 4chan culture does change and that janitors only have a remit to enforce the board rules, not steward or affect board culture, at least not overtly. Cats, anime girls, pepe, wojak, trollfaces etc. have all been used as part of a rich image-based information channel complementing written communication. What gets used changes across time and is a part of 4chan culture. I don't want to exert undue influence where I shouldn't- but I also signed up as a janny in part to preserve my board, and 4chan as a whole, and part of that is removing things which imo are completely inimical to current board culture (think frogs on /a/). Basedjaks should be treated the same on /v/- 99% they are used in bad faith or the lowest effort trolling, bringing in external culture linked to all sorts of 'non-video games' and actively hostile towards 4chan things. To that end- yes gr6-ironic shitposting covers a lot of it but it doesn't cover posts or threads where basedjaks are used in conjunction with an otherwise passable legitimate post. The actions I have available are to delete the file, which doesn't inform the user of why the image was deleted, or use gr6-ironic shitposting, which isn't applicable due to the assumed legitimate nature of the post, image notwithstanding. As warns/bans serve 2 purposes, one to inform user type A on how he can post better next time, and to delete posts from user type B, which is the lol-4G-on-off sort. I can't adequately address user type A in threads like >>>/v/645967517. This is why there ought to be an addition to the gr6 irrelevant copypasta/catchphrase rule. GR6 irrelevant copypasta/catchphrase would serve these cases better.
>>9411i don't remember if i tried this or not. certainly thought about it, at least.
Why did you kill /qa/ and leave a single locked thread up?
>>9428cuz it's funny
>>9428>a single locked threadpour some respect on /hap/
>>9424>to preserve my board, and 4chan as a whole, and part of that is removing things which imo are completely inimical to current board culture>think frogs on /a/>Basedjaks should be treated the same on /v/This is way too complex an issue and I simply don't agree with it. Instead, I'd invite you, /a/ and /jp/ to open /biz/ and to:>think frogs on /biz//a/ does have a template that allows one to wholesale remove catchphrase/unoriginal threads but it so happens to be mod only. Even if you were to get one on /v/, it would be mod only, you'd be joining your fellow /a/ janitors in asking mods to use it. Is this a good rule? Let's just say that if janitors have to enquire several times as to how/why something is or isn't /a/6, perhaps it's not one of the good ones.>passable legitimate postQuite frankly you acknowledge that no rules are being broken. There not being a global rule that allows us to get rid of those just for existing is a good thing, there's not enough of that on 4chan and it seriously hurts the consistency of moderation even within boards let alone across the whole website. Bad threads should be allowed to die naturally since embarassment is the most powerful dissuader, that's whole point of the olden tradition of posting after lurking.
>>9433>embarrassment is the most powerful dissuaderAlmost correct, being ignored is the most powerful dissuader but this does not happen commonly or consistently.>Quite frankly you acknowledge that no rules are being brokenI have not. The text of a post is separate to the image being posted. Basedjaks are posted in bad faith 99.99% of the time and I've experienced no negative feedback regarding their removal with off-topic or existing gr6 templates. An update to GR6 irrelevant catchphrase/copypasta simply provides more accurate feedback to the warned or banned user about why such action was taken. It's relevant that most of the time, the offending image is paired with text that can be hit with an existing template, but there are times where the image itself outweighs the text by some degree.Consistency of moderation is another issue which is, and I'll pull the same card you've used, a complex issue. I don't agree that it seriously hurts it in any significant manner- consistency varies between rules, varies between boards, and I'd wager for jannys who are intimately familiar with most common threads on their boards, consistency varies to some degree even between threads. Threads with basedjak images already get removed on /v/, I know they seem to get away with it on /adv/ for example and if that's how /adv/ jannies and mods roll then so be it, but it being fine on /adv/ doesn't mean they're fine on /v/. Same with frogs on /a/. I'm not privy to /a/ jannying, maybe you are, but I'm sure /a/ janitors remove frogs all the time without having to ask a mod.
>>9434>Basedjaks are posted in bad faith 99.99% of the timeThen how come that 100% of the basedjaks on /adv/ at this moment in time are good faith posters asking people for advice? Should they have their posts removed just because their image isn't "board culture"? There's no actual rule that bans stuff like basedjaks and frogs just because they exist unlike ponies, guro, anthro porn and NWS images.>and I've experienced no negative feedback regarding their removalAnd I've experienced no negative feedback regarding me not removing them.>is paired with text that can be hit with an existing templateThen the text is what's rulebreaking.>where the image itself outweighs the text by some degreeThis doesn't change anything since off-topic applies to both text and images and there's no higher rule that the post could be requested as since GR6 is a warn (lol).You're dancing around the rules. Precedents set by mods or janitors are not rules.>seem to get away with itNo one's getting away with anything. No rules are being broken. This wojak and frog genocide position isn't magically right just because people band together and say that it was, is and will be.I'll ask you this: Can a basedjak/frog post not be an extremely high quality post?What matters is the "0.01%", the non-rulebreaking posts, regardless of how few or how many of those posts there actually are. Boards like /biz/ have a sizeable community of resident frogs and they're not 99.99% bad faith posts. I'd rather that there are people that read this and turn their heads at you suggesting that 2 harmless threads on /adv/ should have been removed over their innocuous images rather than having people that choose to nod along with shitty precedents just because threads with images that they don't personally like are getting removed and that's a good thing (unless they reply with a gigachad saying that).
It's a chicken and the egg kind of thing. I get both of your points because I've seen how posting X/Y/Z as an OP image causes a thread to derail, but there are cases where people ignore the bait and have a genuine thread (the best outcome.) There are definitely bad faith threads out there and while it's always better to give the benefit of the doubt (THE FIRST LINE IN THE DAILY REMINDER) sometimes a judgement call is needed but I think removing the entire thread is harsh if the text invites high quality discussion. Like at worst remove the image/OT replies before it becomes unsalvageable. Off-topic garbage should be pretty easy to distinguish from genuine posts with unfortunate image choices.
who spilled coffee on the servers?
>>9302the only time I get a mod message is when I did something wrong lelThankfully haven't gotten one of those in a long time
>>9435>This wojak and frog genocide position>suggesting that 2 harmless threads on /adv/ should have been removed over their innocuous images>Then how come that 100% of the basedjaks on /adv/ at this moment in time are good faith posters asking people for advice?Your posts only mention /adv/ and /biz/. I have explicitly stated things not ok on /v/ may be ok on /adv/. I am aware of the wojak/frog genocide view among some users, not aware of anything I posted to have led you to believe I support those views. Your experience of basedjaks being ok on /adv/ is exactly that, being ok on /adv/. My experience of basedjaks on /v/ is that 99.99% of them are not ok. These things don't conflict. The one concession I can make is that I'm now aware changes to a global rule affecting all boards is something other jannies may feel strongly over, even though an update to GR6 irrelevant catchphrase/copypasta renders it more fit to deal with the increased use of image macros that don't originate from the usual places 4chan got them from.>And I've experienced no negative feedback regarding me not removing them.Lack of unsolicited feedback regarding inaction is, in my experience so far, so rare to be almost unheard of, and similarly useless as a performance indicator. Mods need to ping jannies regularly just to get reports globally cleared, let alone clear certain posts that may or may not be reported. Lack of feedback regarding /v/ WRs/BRs at least indicates it's acceptable, which means basedjaks as used on /v/ are not actually welcome.
cont.>Then the text is what's rulebreaking.>This doesn't change anything since off-topic applies to both text and images and there's no higher rule that the post could be requested as since GR6 is a warn (lol).There are posts that aren't off-topic, aren't quite trolling/flamewar, isn't ironic shitposting, and without a basedjak, would otherwise be acceptable. Unfortunately, the addition of a basedjak establishes a post as in bad faith or contributes to derailment. On /v/, that is. In those scenarios, a warn that says, 'hey that image macro you used is irrelevant', would be useful.>This doesn't change anything since off-topic applies to both text and images and there's no higher rule that the post could be requested as since GR6 is a warn (lol).A warn informs the user of why something was removed but allows them to continue posting, with the hope that they don't repeat what they did. As GR6 is a warn, then why not update it to be more accurate? >Can a basedjak/frog post not be an extremely high quality post?On /v/, I've yet to see one. I've seen passable posts, salvaged by deleting the file and any replies to the image macro. But a file delete does not inform the user why it was deleted. I think your arguments are being informed by experiencing the use of basedjaks without any sort of ulterior motive. My experience has been the opposite. Adding image macro to GR6 doesn't really infringe on how you janny or board cultures you're familiar with or the user experience on those boards- you and any other mod/janny still has to make a judgement call about whether or not something is irrelevant.
>>9442>>9443>are not ok>would otherwise be acceptable>establishes a post as in bad faith or contributes to derailment>why not update it to be more accurate?Because for starters you'd be making millions of images punishable by GR6 for no good reason since 'irrelevant' pertains to the topic of the board. The point of 'Irrelevant Catchphrases' is to get rid of completely nonsensical pastas that have nothing to do with a given topic, not get rid of pastas wholesale. A version of this for image macros is counterproductive. Most images used on any given board are already non-topical reaction images.Whether or not users like/dislike something and are vocal about it doesn't mean that the underlying thing needs to be purged from any given catalog. /biz/ will not shut up about women, even if they're clothed sometimes, does that mean that I have to purge every single woman in the catalog to prevent/stop derrailment? I won't. Egregious coffee + off-topic text can get BRed, everything else file deleted, and normal images don't need any intervention regardless of whatever happens in the thread. On the other hand users who derrail these threads will get BRed and deleted, being the last recourse deleting the thread all together if it's too far gone. Users do not get to make rules even if they try, in their own way, to influence moderation passively through reports or actively by posting. There's much more of a case for punishing the most egregious off-topic posts in a derrailed thread as a means to stop it from happening in the future than to warn, and hence remove completely, every OP with a picture that users dislike regardless of other factors. The point being that users should not get rewarded for attempting to remove rule abiding threads. This approach firmly upholds the rules without "taking sides".
>>9442>>9443>Lack of feedback regarding /v/ WRs/BRs at least indicates it's acceptableThe absence of evidence is not evidence in of itself, at best you can say that there's a likelihood however high or low that it's "acceptable" and that they're "not welcome" on /v/ (whatever that means). If it was an official policy site-wide, it would be in the rules (probably).>A warn informs the user of why something was removed but allows them to continue posting, with the hope that they don't repeat what they didIt also removes the post and is invisible to anyone else whereas file deletion removes only the "offending" image and anyone looking at the thread from within or without can tell that the file was purposefully deleted. Most things should indeed be requested but there are circumstances where this is not required, we have enough discretion to delete some threads and files rather than requesting them.>ulterior motive>bad faithFor starters, we cannot read a user's mind or see IPs. Only the most obvious of posters or patterns should ever be considered as something that's kill on sight. Someone posting a basedjak does not mean that they're a raider duly intent on ruining our website. There exists such a thing as the benefit of the doubt. There's a large gap between deleting duplicates and BRing for spamming. The same is true here.>board cultures>user experienceConsider that you can no longer use anime pictures on /adv/ because janitors there say they're contrary to /adv/'s normie board culture and... bad! Can you imagine how shit the user experience must be for those affected? That's currently the reality on some boards in regards to wojaks and frogs.
>>9444>Because for starters you'd be making millions of images punishable by GR6 for no good reason... Most images used on any given board are already non-topical reaction images.Images used to supplement text with emotion/added context are on-topic in the context of serving as an additional information channel that supplements on-topic text discussion. This is something done in good faith and without ulterior motive, e.g. not to invite derailment, off-topic posting, etc.>Whether or not users like/dislike- Users do not get to make rules even if they try- The point being that users should not get rewarded for attempting to remove rule abiding threadsThis has nothing to do with the opinions of users. Please don't assume anything I've argued for has any origin in seeing what gets reported or what anons complain about. It comes from seeing how threads get derailed or started in bad faith, and desiring a more accurate warn template.>For starters, we cannot read a user's mind or see IPs. Only the most obvious of posters or patterns should ever be considered as something that's kill on sight.You must not visit /v/ much and I don't mean that in any derogatory sense, from your posts you seem to be jannying on a board where users are typically more behaved and don't use image macros in bad faith often. >Consider that you can no longer use anime pictures on /adv/ because janitors there say they're contrary to /adv/'s normie board culture and... bad! Can you imagine how shit the user experience must be for those affected?For this scenario to be more accurate, those anime pictures would create reply chains of derailment, flamewars, invite off-topic and/or /pol/ posting, and further irrelevant catchphrases etc. The user experience as a whole is improved by the removal of basedjaks on /v/. With the discretion you've noted that we have, sometimes I feel a WR saying 'hey this image macro is irrelevant' would be useful, instead of reaching for off-topic or flamewar etc.
when are we going to get a non-english warn BR template? the posts that get warned are deleted anyway, it feels like a waste of time to ping mods for such a minor offense
>>9447Seconding this. It doesn't have to be every board, but some really need them.
>>9447+1
>>9447I agree with this but I think for it to be a template we can use it would have to be added as an official rule which is probably a Big Deal™
>>9452I was thinking about this. English being the official language of 4chan is not really written down except in the /int/ rules. Maybe it would be a good idea to formalize that as GR18.
>>9455But only the King's English. Get a warning for omitting the 'u' from flavour, colour, Harbour, etc.
>>9456what was the flavor of the color at the harbor
>>9455It may actually be worth formalizing when non-english is acceptable, and when it is not. I think a lot of people who post in non-english don't even know they're really breaking any rules, they just think jannies/mods are being assholes.
>>9459Yeah, us being assholes is just incidental.
the rules page says ban evasion will result in a permanent ban, but the ban evasion template is only 30 days, and posters are apparently allowed to resume posting if they've managed to slip under the radar after 30 days? what's up with that?
>>9469there's still rules for /asp/ which hasn't existed for years now. it's out of date and wrong.
>>9469This feels like a topic for senior mods to address (and I doubt they'll give us a full explanation), but my understanding is that serial evaders DO get ban on sight status, but that there's no point permabanning every IP they touch since they'll hop anyway, and only users severely detrimental to the site seem to get rangebans.As for why regular evasion is just a 30-day, I assume it's psychology.>Shitty users who would evade anyway don't care what the punishment is, ergo the lie doesn't matter to them.>The average user might evade if told "you only need to be careful to not get caught for 30 days">The average user probably will just play it safe and wait out a 1- or 3-day ban if threatened with a permanent ban for evasion.And trying to keep track of every single ban evader ever sounds like more work for the mods than it's worth. They keep track of the ones who are determined, serious, or destructive enough to warrant it.
>>4680fuckin' magnets, how do they work?
>>9469>and posters are apparently allowed to resume posting if they've managed to slip under the radar after 30 days? what's up with that?not sure how you ever got this impression
>>9479other janitors asking if X or Y poster is still considered an evader. it's what kinda confused me in the first place. after thinking it over a bit I'm kinda realizing this might be prying a bit too deep under the hood, so I'll just accept the rules at face value.
>>9469Because most IPs are dynamic so someone else would just get their permaban and be unable to post, then a mod would have to manually unban the IP when they complained on IRC. The ban evasion template literally only gives people a ban screen that says "Ban evasion." and 30 days, that's literally it's only purpose. There's a lot of limitations in regards to how much you can enforce ban evasion but if someone is identifiable or is found out they will get banned again.>>9480People ask because if they just use GR9 they could get an innocent person banned for 30 days since janitors can't tell for sure when someone is ban evading. Literally only use that template if you're told to. You can 100% substitute it for any other applicable template when another rule is being broken. The template itself doesn't do anything special behind the scenes so there's no point in using it just to tell someone "Ban evasion." If someone is continuously evading time-outs or bans while breaking the rules, just request them for the rules they're breaking. When someone isn't breaking the rules but you think they might be evading you can always ask a mod to check. It's not worth obsessing over evaders anyway since if you go down that rabbit hole you'll realise that there's only so much that can be reasonably done about it. You should instead strive to use it as reluctantly as possible and to waste your time on more fruitful endeavours.
I've noticed inconsistent application of /vt/2 recently and I realized that either I don't understand the rules or janitors have very different interpretations.As such, I think it would be beneficial to have some semblance of documentation for such a subjective thing, to unify how we apply this rule.I have a few questions on this subject:1. Is ANY content shown on a vtuber's stream fair game to be posted on /vt/? We have precedent for handcam streams, cleavage overlayed on top of a model (kson), and almost full body cams without face visible (squchan, who is a relatively small indie streamer). All of these go unreported and I have not seen any action taken against them by mods/janitors.2. Are NSFW images/videos allowed on /vt/ if they are uploaded elsewhere and linked? For instance it's quite common that people will upload 18+ art to catbox and link it in a thread. Again like above, I have never seen these posts get reported or be actioned on by mods/janitors unless they are blatantly off topic. If we are allowing this "exception" to the rules then what other rules get the same treatment?3. From /vt/ rule 2:>All VTuber discussion should pertain directly to their streams and content.Notably, this rule acknowledges streams and content as separate things. So when I think of "content" outside of a stream my mind jumps to social media posts on sites like twitter, tiktok, instagram, patreon, etc.So, based on this phrasing should anything uploaded to a vtuber's primary social media account be considered on topic content?Based on my current understanding, the answers to the above question (in terms of how the rules are enforced currently) are 1. Yes, 2. Yes, 3. No. It's question 3 that confuses me, because logically if we say that anything a streamer puts out under their name is fair play AND that potentially rule breaking content can be linked to externally, then the answer to question 3 should be yes since it's just a combination of the first two questions.
>>9516>2. Are NSFW images/videos allowed on /vt/ if they are uploaded elsewhere and linked?This isn't an exception to the rule. The reasoning is that if the file isn't uploaded to 4chan and you have to go outside of the website to view it it's got nothing to do with keeping blue boards work safe for 4chan users viewing content on 4chan. This is consistent with what is said in the FAQ about it, it's simply not explicitly denoted anywhere that links cannot be NWS as far as the rule is concerned (they can still break other rules though). The same applies to crosslinking to a NWS board (it could still be off-topic for example). The rule is entirely grounded on people being able to browse blue boards in public, if they go outside of those that's their problem.>AND that potentially rule breaking content can be linked to externallyThe reasoning behind GR5 and external content has nothing to do with any other rules since no other rules are concerned with offering a safe browsing environment in public./vt/1 is a very general rule mostly concerned with what is and isn't discussable on the vtuber board. Every single rule and template after only exists as to clarify something that is off-topic and that a general template wouldn't explain properly to the users being banned for it.
>>9516>/vt/2>directly to their streams and contentI think this is the most important part of the rule since it prefaces everything else. Someone discussing the weight of a vtuber because they said/posted it is fine from the standpoint of discussing the stream/tweet, and so on. But discussing the weight, height, age, etc. outside of the context of vtubing, a 2/2.5/3D character streaming, has nothing to do with the board's purpose. Similarly not everything that a vtuber posts or streams might pertain directly to vtubing. Realistically, from the standpoint of applying the rules, it doesn't matter what is and isn't said on stream or social media, at all, the CONTEXT in which it is posted is far more telling than whatever capacity of fact checking you could endeavour upon by looking up clips (yes, you don't watch streams let alone the ones from my favourite indie chuuba). Someone discussing height when it's mentioned during a stream that is happening makes sense contextually and is directly pertaining to streams and content. Someone mentioning height outside of that context (streams and content) might very well be engaging in discussion that's disallowed by /vt/2, and if it's not evident by the post itself then looking at the reply chain usually clarifies what is being discussed (the context). Whether most people want to admit it or not they're most likely already operating in this way to some capacity since it's logistically impossible to know every single /vt/2 thing that ever has or will be posted, and the same can be said about all other rules, it's much simpler to look at the context and to make a decision about it based on that. I also think that this is the fairest way to go about it since we shouldn't be giving some guy 3 days for liveposting something that was said on a stream while someone who is mentioning age or whatever else outside of that context is most likely discussing IRL shit and the conversation they're having (context) should evidence that.
>>9516>We have precedent for handcam streams, cleavage overlayed on top of a model (kson), and almost full body cams without face visibleThere's nothing in the rules about any of it. If a vtuber does a stream it just has to be in their capacity as a vtuber, the format of the stream matters very little. So it's not handcams or BIG BADOONKERS CAM streams that are allowed, it's all vtuber streams and content. If they're full blown 3DPD streaming that has nothing to do with vtubers, similar to how flesh streamers aren't allowed to be discussed on /vt/. Content creator and vtuber shouldn't be conflated since someone who vtubes could still make videos or streams that have nothing to do with vtubing, and them being vtubers shouldn't allow that content to be discussed on /vt/ similar to how eceleb discussion isn't allowed outside of random boards.Another thing that is important to mention is that a vtuber also being/having been another vtuber is not off-topic since they're vtubers (the topic of the board) and it has nothing to do with IRL shit (it's vtubers, not real people shit about the voice actor behind the model and her relationships, physical apperance or personal life). A VA's unrelated work outside of their capacity as a vtuber is not the same thing as their previous vtuber incarnation or some sort of alt vtuber account they also stream under. Equating the two makes no sense and has caused a lot of cognitive dissonance in regards to what gets removed from the board and how users perceive the rules from it.
>>9522Didn't even know we had an FAQ, but yes the explicit callout on treatment of GR5 makes a lot of sense.>>9523>Someone discussing the weight of a vtuber because they said/posted it is fine from the standpoint of discussing the stream/tweet, and so on. But discussing the weight, height, age, etc. outside of the context of vtubing, a 2/2.5/3D character streaming, has nothing to do with the board's purpose.I do not understand this distinction at all, if a vtuber talks about their weight they're already bringing up some aspect of their real self in their stream content. It should be perfectly fine for people to talk about it and speculate at any point in the future once this happens, even if it is never brought up again.>CONTEXT in which it is postedChanging how we enforce rules based on a vtuber's stream seems like a recipe for disaster to me.Let's say you have chuuba A, who is openly dating another streamer and features them in her content, and appears on his stream as well. It should be fine to talk about that relationship.Now you have chuuba B, who was openly dating another streamer but has gone back and deleted all vods/references.From what I understand of your "context" since that relationship no longer pertains to the current stream content, it's a violation of rules. I think this is kinda stupid though, since it was at one point part of the stream and we should be agnostic to what the streamer wants.This is also just not practical... It's not possible for jannies to know every intricate detail of every vtuber discussed on the board and watching a few clips won't clue you into their history at all.
>>9524I agree with everything you're saying, but if you read the post above yours it's obvious that there's no consensus on the rules.This image is a good summary of why I'm frustrated about enforcement.
>>9516from my understanding:1. yes2. yes, if it's hosted offsite and topical3. yes, if it's posted to a vtuber accountI think the main application of /vt/2 has been consistent in curbing doxposting and other discussion coming from digging into personal lives. opening a thread with a picture of kson with no vtuber context is /vt/2 gray area but /vt/1 actionable imo. >>95261. ok, vtuber stream2, 3. questionable vtuber contentlarge corpos seem to have a rule about keeping things "virtual", so I don't see these being too common. overall, I've been treating immersion breaking selfposts as much lower priority for action than private account digging or relationship trolling.
>>9527If the answer to question 3 is yes then all of the examples in the image should be allowed.
>>9525>It should be fine to talk about that relationship.Only so far as it pertains to a stream or content. People wanting to talk about their relationship in depth outside of the context of them vtubing together are ultimately talking about 3DPD e-celebs.>has gone back and deleted all vods/referencesThis is irrelevant. The intent or actions of the vtuber does not matter. A chuuba dating another streamer openly ends at where the announcement begins. If they stream together it's relevant to that interaction but talking about it with no relation to vtubing is just rulebreaking.I'm not arguing that we should watch streams, I'm saying the opposite. If you cannot discern that something is rulebreaking with what you have at your disposal it's perfectly fine to clear or to not act on it.>>9526It is ultimately THIS retarded an issue. I don't think that 3 should be allowed and 1 and 2 are pretty much the same thing but one is in a stream format. If people try to discuss aspects of 1 or 2 in depth they should still be banned, same as if people bring up aspects of 1 or 2 for IRL shit purposes that are completely unrelated to vtuber discussion. A vtuber saying/showing something shouldn't give you a free out of jail card for you to bring it up 50 years later for off-topic discussion purposes. I think that there's a difference between "X once did a stream where her reflection showed up in a mirror" (this is not discussing her appearance, doesn't matter if it's true or not) vs "X's face was leaked in a stream, I saw it, she's hot, pic related."
Cosplay is also a bit of an issue because there are vtubers that:>cosplay themselves>cosplay other vtubers as vtuber content>have cosplayed other vtubers before becoming vtubersAnd arguably if cosplay is allowed in general then these images should be allowed to be posted so far as the context is a cosplay thread and not what the vtuber looks like. Saying that someone is X is fine for 1 and 2, but for 3 it's falling outside of the board's topic since they were not vtubers when the cosplaying was done. I don't expect us to ever have a coherent response about minute bullshit but I think that we can all agree that people shouldn't discuss vtuber's IRL appearances since that's what's written in the rules.
>>9529>The intent or actions of the vtuber does not matter>A vtuber saying/showing something shouldn't give you a free out of jail card for you to bring it up 50 years laterThese two statements are in direct contradiction.This is basically what you are saying:Vtuber action 1: talk about their height in a stream -> it's ok to talk about their height on /vt/Vtuber (in)action 2: do not talk about their height the next day -> it's no longer ok to talk about their height on /vt/ Vtuber action 3: talk about their height in a stream the following day -> it's once again ok to talk about their height on /vt/Substitute a day for a month or a year, it doesn't really matter. Either way you are shifting what is allowed based on what the vtuber has said/done recently, and I don't think timegating discussion makes any sense.>>9530>people shouldn't discuss vtuber's IRL appearances since that's what's written in the rulesNo, that's not what's written in the rules. The rules disallow "IRL" content without expanding on what that means (does it mean appearance? voice? height? age? ethnicity? accent?). There are tons of streamers who make recurring jokes in their community about how short/flat chested/etc. they are and discussion on those things has NEVER been an issue, even though that is very much about a vtuber's IRL appearance. Anons will also make comments during handcam streams about how cute and small someone's hands are which don't seem to trip any alarms either.
>>9532What I mean is that the intent of the vtuber should not be a factor that's taken into consideration, at all. If it happens on stream it's free game since streams are allowed to be discussed. If people then decide to go off of that and discuss IRL things, then they're breaking /vt/2.The rules state that discussion should pertain directly to streams and content, this means that so long as it's a stream by a vtuber, in their capacity as a vtuber, it should be allowed to be discussed. This has caused conflicts with the rules because most of these grown ass adults have the opsec hygiene of a teenage girl on Twitter subsequently X, but we do have some precedent surrounding vague statements not being rule breaking like "x is fat" (disliking vtubers is allowed on /vt/ btw). What I've parsed from my discussions with mods and loose comments made by them is that the intent behind /vt/2 has more to do with not wanting /vt/ (and 4chan by extension) to be a doxx forum (in my opinion). The only real way to allow people to discuss streams where vtubers disclose IRL shit is to request the IRL shit being discussed.If a loose post like "x is fat" is fine, then are people allowed to discuss whether or not x is fat if they stick to vague terms? Should only specifics be requested? Where does vtuber cosplay Z (in its capacity as content) fall into all of this? This could very well be a thing where warns or bans should be issued according to the severity of the discussion, but a mod might very well deem that nothing outside of specifics matters to them.So to answer your first >(You), height (etc.) should not be mentioned at all in any capacity unless it's some vague statement and there's no in depth discussion on it. I cannot any context whereby someone could mention IRL specifics while not trying to discuss IRL shit. It's not a matter of shifting what is allowed but rather what could possibly be relevant to the stream without going into IRL shit.
>>9532>without expanding on what that meansA board's sticky usually, but not always, offers some clarifications about the rules. /vt/'s sticky very clearly denotes that>their real lives>relationships>appearancesare>"IRL"Like I've said previously much of what you're giving as examples are vague things which I know aren't rule breaking because a mod has given me feedback regarding them. What janitors or mods are perceived to do or not do cannot be deemed as there being a consensus or official policy on something. Like multiple people have said before, you included, "there's no consensus" and "very different interpretations."The only things that we all agree on do not frustrate us because it's logical smooth sailing:1. If someone discusses activities done by the voice actor of a vtuber that have nothing to do with the vtuber they should be requested;2. If someone says a vtuber is in a relationship they should be requested;3. If someone posts an IRL picture of a vtuber they should be requested.And even all of these have particular caveats that completely ruin any sort of easily reachable consensus:1. If a vtuber talks about their IRL activities during their vtuber streams and content should those be discussed?2. If a vtuber is dating another vtuber according to vtuber streams and/or content should it be discussed?3. If a vtuber cosplays themselves and/or other vtubers as vtuber streams and/or content should they be discussed?I'm posing these questions rhetorically because the answers to all of them require too much nuance to be easily communicable to any new or even old janitors. Particularly the 3rd question is a big spanner in the works because the content itself could violate the rules in a way that both should and shouldn't be allowed due to precedent. Pandora's box will truly be when, not if, a vtuber streams with their avatar while showing their IRL face.
How does the site decide when to wrap text in a post? Sometimes I see sentences get wrapped after only a few words and other times the post extends halfway across my monitor.
>>9625What's a monitor?
>>9625I'm not sure about the answer to the question, it's probably CSS doing weird calculations. there's a setting under the misc section "force long posts to wrap" that caps them out at 75% width of the screen if long posts are an issue for you. I use that and it improves readability a lot
Parenting board when?>most 4channers from 2004-2010 are now parents >/pa/
>>9632Eventually, one mod or janny's toddler is gonna shit and then parrot the words "clean it up, janny" from their parents.
>>9632First I need a worksafe blue /soc/ so I can finally meet my future 4chan wife.
>>9632Not a bad idea, but it should be a text board like /news/ to avoid pedoshit/pedobait.
>>9635I feel seen.
>>9632I for one do no not want a board that propagates parenting advice from 4channers
>>9640>noo ablooblooo 4chan bad waaahI don't know why you became a janitor if you have this mentality. it would be a comfy board and would have funny content. but it's a pretty low priority board on the docket for creation when so many other boards would be WAY more successful. in general I think 4chan should be more active in creating new boards and testing out new communities
??? dont use this as an opportunity to question my credentials lol. i became a janny precisely because i was tired of bad actors and trolls becoming more and more common and driving down the kind of quality and effort of posting that would be required for the kind of board you are talking about. Perhaps I shouldnt have internalized the concept, but the negative stereotype of '4channers' is not one that existed when i first started posting.I just question the viability of having a board for parenting on the same site where we are constantly having to deal with people posting CP links etc. Also the idea of a child being connected to this site essentially through the proxy of a parent scares me a lot. Very likely the majority of the posters on this in-theory board would be sincere, well-meaning individuals, however there unavoidably would be bad faith actors and other people who just propagate harm through pure ignorance, the idea that a child's life could be impacted by posts from those latter two categories disturbs me. If 4chan is going to be connected to *real* children like this, even if not directly, then the issue of safeguarding arises - even with the somewhat wild-west mentality of the site (which I am hugely in support of), we have a responsibility to ensure the safety of children (indeed possibly in the near future one enshrined in law considering the increase in laws/bills about online safety etc, and depending on how enforced they are.), thats why we have the underage rule!!Look, 4chan is about having fun, and I am all for the idea of creating new communities etc, but any action 4chan takes needs to be thought through carefully and interrogated for adverse possibilities, this is probably why we dont see much change or new shit. Millions of people use this site, not all of them well-meaning, and the things posted here and communities that arise here can have real world implications. We aren't some 4fun little project, we have a responsibility to our users
>>>/adv/ already exists.
>>9649
>>9649You're not wrong and I have no dog in this argument, but I do want to point out boards have overlaps all the time. Homebrewing overlaps /ck/ and /diy/ and a mecha anime could concievably have relevant threads on /m/ /a/ /co/ and /tv/ depending on how you spin it.
>>9651Mecha Monday threads on /tg/ and discussion of mecha as part of roleplaying and wargaming
>>9651sure, but I think that a parenting board would be a direct subset of /adv/, no?
>>9653Only if advice is sought. Sometimes you want to share common experiences or silly stories. It is, as with most parenting things, very easy for parents to overshare because we are naturally proud of our little goblins, and therein lies the worry; the type of GR1/CSAM person is going to prey on that, and a GR3/troll person is going to find an easily triggered and inflamed audience.
>>9654yeah that's not a bad point. might be fun as an april fools board and see if it goes anywhere
>>9651Is anime allowed on /tv/? I frequently see threads deleted.
>>9656Yes
How hard should we really enforce board topic rules on the AI slop threads? I hit these OC characters everyday and they keep coming back so I'm unsure that my requests are being accepted at all. Another thing is that there are so many people posting them in bulk that to ban request them all would easily start clogging the queue and would require constant vigilance, not to mention that one can't really tell if these prompts are actually board related or not with 100% accuracy and not some obscure character anon felt like sharing.The AI prompt threads in my board are already starting to devolve into general drama, they easily recognize each other because they prompt the same shit for 20 posts and start dumping them in bulk so they report each other a lot.
>>9655>might be fun as an april fools boardMight be fun to turn the entire website into Normie Chan./adv/ becomes Parenting Advice/po/ is Laundry Folding/pol/ is Facebook/a/ and /co/ are Shit the Kids Watch On the iPad...the /v/ boards are also Shit the Kids Watch on the iPad
>>9641>so many other boards would be WAY more successfullike what?
>>9644brother, you should see the advice propagated in the tens of thousands of "parenting" related facebook groups. At least on 4chan people will call you a retarded faggot for recommending X Y and Z
>>9660jackie chan
what happened to /b/ at approx 10:20pm est today, all threads were purged - never seen that in my life
>>9673lurk moar
>>9673mods playing a practical joke i imagine
>>9673that was me. sometimes i do that when i'm bored and get rid of all the 'generals' and just enjoy an actually somewhat "random" /b/this post was brought to you by hph
>>9692>sometimes i do that when i'm bored>>9673>>9690see?Mods Are GODS!!!!! :3
>>9692pls do it moar often it's fucking greatlast time i remember you did it all the anons went "OH SHIT M00T IS LE BACK!!!!!1!"top lulz
Is there a shortcut to give a warning (esp on the queue like with the quick ban request thing) or do you just have to click the checkbox each time?
>>9893you have to click the checkbox each time.
>>9894you vill click ze checkboxand enjoy it
>>9893this is the mod teams way of encouraging you to ban everyone ;)
>>9893wtf you can warn people??
>>4680it's becoming more and more apparent to me after all this raiding between crystal cafe and /r9k/ that generals are a cancer on the boardit's currently bumfucking the report queue with no moids/no grills allowed flamewar threads.1/2
>>9987for a board that is particularly designed to encourage original posts, allowing containment within generals just fosters the same old shitposting.i highly encourage the mods to change the rules for this board to act like the /v/ spinoffs, where janitors have a template to WR/BR general threads.2/2
>>9987>>9988what's the question?
>>9989how much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?
>>9991sneed
>>9988generals have been contentious on /r9k/ for years. considering that very fact, they must have therefore been around for at least as long. i don't foresee them going anywhere. your best bet is to ping a mod when you see these ridiculous slap fights and report abuse. we can warn or ban them as appropriate
>>9998thanks for the response; i'll keep this in mind
Gonna be traveling for a bit next month so I was wondering are there any policies I need to keep in mind as far as accessing janny stuff from a different location than usual, or from something like a hotel wifi or whatever? (Besides praying I don't accidentally catch some other random guy's ban...)
>>10035i've accessed janny stuff from countless different places and no one has ever said anything about it. don't think you need to worry. only problems i have had with some like hotel wifi/air bnb stuff is when they block 4chan lmao. its rare though.
>>10035>(Besides praying I don't accidentally catch some other random guy's ban...)I see "ban evasion" bans quite a bit on mobile networks or random hotel wifi. It's not a concern, it doesn't infect your janny account with a ban evasion cookie or whatever.
>>10035it doesn't matter. you know how anons smugly post about turning airplane mode on and off to evade? you basically just do that and you'll be fine. I've seen tons of awful bans on my mobile network. and this isn't even exclusive to janitor tools when I had a >paid pass it'd happen too but airplane mode on and off would fix it. since it's the IP itself and not the pass getting banned you're not doing anything wrong.
>>10035Just don't log in to janny on hardware you can't trust. Use their wifi on your phone, but don't log in on a keylogger-infested cybercafe PC with a crusty chair and an oddly sticky mouse.
>>10037>>10038Ah ok, yeah I was a bit worried if I accidentally logged onto my janny account on a banned IP it would stick to it, but if that's not a concern then I guess it's not a big issue.>>10039Yeah, would either be my phone or my laptop, I'm not planning to logon to anything on any shared PC.
>>4680why doesn't /j/ have a catalog?
>>10041I always assumed that because /j/ has unlimited pages and no API one or both of those prevents the catalog from generating
the REAL reason may SHOCK and ASTOUND you. a little 4chan tradition called WHY BOTHER
>>10043jej
>>10043>>10046
>>10050lol
Sooooo what’s up with the StarCraft pinned posts lolI feel out of the loop but it’s just not very often we see pinned shitposts and it’s not even April fools day
>>10054/b/ is the starcraft board? duh?
>>10054mods sometimes like to troll on /b/its been observed here before u.u
>>10054every now and then they like to make a fun little board "topic" sticky, they did this twice previously with half life as well.
>>10057fun times
What happened to sfw boards being on the 4channel domain? Also does this mean more risqué ads on blue boards? Seeing a lot of near nude and animated nude ads on fit lately which really does make it nsfw. Even if the OF models nipple is covered by a single finger it’s still not something I would browse in front of anyone
>>10065That got changed back months ago, though I don't remember if the rationale was ever stated. Personally I think it's easier to keep everything on the one anyway.
>>10066>though I don't remember if the rationale was ever stated/j/thread/7036#p9623
How come "Announcing Sage" defaults to a ban while "Announcing Report" is a forced warn?
>>10091see >>9309
Is board speed a concern?/vt/ is 70+% generals on any given day and the time to archive varies wildly. It's a nuisance when the catalog floods with 20 screenshots regarding twitter literalwhos, the current viewcount of a stream, or whatever tribaldrama of the day and pushes stream discussion of every other group off the board. At the time of posting, a thread takes 32 minutes to archive on /vt/ with no major news, on par with /pol/ (31m) and /v/ (27m).
>>10094>Is board speed a concern?yes, we need to go faster
>>10094I usually don't worry about it unless the threads themselves are rule breaking.
>>10096desu
>>10094That's not so much speed as it is "low padding". If they're mostly generals and they're mostly riding the thread to page 10, there's less padding space for the board to use to absorb spam.But I think adding more pages would just cause the board to spawn more generals. The chuubas will not stop growing.
How come /vg/ doesn't have a flamewar rule or template like other vidya boards? I notice a lot of generals (mainly gacha gens but applicable to all) shitposting in each other's threads every day attacking one another's games and players in bad faith. GR3 feels a little too heavy handed in most cases and OT isn't really specific enough so it left me wondering why isn't there a rule when other boards already have something similar for that kind of stuff?
>>10104As a /vg/ janny the problem (as I see it) is there are often discussions (that can turn into arguments) about whether a game belongs in a thread or not. For example a popular game that fits in a genre thread (such as /coopg/ or /crpgg/) but also has its own thread (like Helldivers 2 or Rogue Trader right now). Is discussion okay in the genre thread, or should it be kept to its own? That's a problem the users should decide on their own, IMO. Likewise some threads like /rlg/ argue over whether or not games belong there (I'm sure there are others I'm not familiar with). So while I don't think it's a janny's job to decide which games are discussed where, that means you also get some destructive posting (like the gacha games or WoW/FFXIV shitposting in each other's threads). Since they are discussing vidya still my goto has been to clear or maybe WR/BR GR3 if it is really bad. I've kind of tangentially addressed your actual concern, but I think the biggest problem is the>in bad faithconditional. You really just can't know a poster's intention, only guess at it. If you feel confident enough it's disruptive for the sake of being disruptive, a GR3 WR isn't heavy handed. If you don't, clearing is fine. An occasional shitpost won't destroy a thread--especially the big gacha and MMO threads that have hundreds of posts an hour. If they're spamming, that has its own template.
>>10106another mod told me it's fine to talk about other games if it's a natural part of the conversationif someone caustically enters a thread and starts shitting on the game and other posters it's trollingultimately use your best judgement
>>10104I asked specifically about it and was told it used to have one but it was overused so it was taken away. So basically use other templates as appropriate but don't be too overzealous, we'd have that template if they wanted us to use it.
/vm/ has a ton of generals. I don't think this is a problem, but it is against the rules. The board is essentially a mix of discussion of non general threads/server postings and general threads that are too slow to make it on /vg/.In the past it seems threads that don't clearly label themselves as generals are permitted, despite being effectively one. However, there are a few threads that are labelled as generals AND fast enough to be on /vg/ or even already have a thread on /vg/, like Deadlock currently.Rather than just blindly kill what is currently 17 threads with thousands of replies between them right now on the board, should we open the discussion to allowing generals on /vm/? I think it has a lot of potential to go wrong, but as a janny and user of both /vg/ and /vm/ the speed at which many of the gacha games churn through threads can be quite oppressive for slower games. I could see a potential solution of being shunting them off to their own board, but the problem is that many games fall into many categories, and trying to force them onto a particular board instead of letting users chose feels bad. The worry is basically that if a video game is multiplayer and available on mobile it has many places it could be talked about, so why do they not get to choose?There may be another way to extend lifespans on /vg/ through upping the thread size or catalog size or something, but I don't know the kind of strain that would cause and haven't thought through the implications.Any other jannies/mods who pay attention to vidya boards have thoughts?
>>10207As a relatively new /vm/ janny i definitely see your point and it is worth considering.There are a lot of generals on the board and its difficult to apply the rules to them bc by the time you become aware of them they already have 100s of posts and so you dont want to just WR delete them.However, that being said just blanket allowing generals on /vm/ I think would not be the way to go, as it would allow chatrooms for very popular games to basically take over the entire board. The other solution is to selectively allow generals that are seen as 'slower' and would not work on /vg/. I don't like this either though because it involves a lot of very case-by-case and a little too subjective moderation - a game that might be considered 'allowed' by one janny may not be to another.Really overall I think the best option is still to keep generals disallowed, and just be more strict about it. Though I don't think this means general discussions about a game are banned - just backlinking etc. I feel at the moment jannies are discouraged somewhat from taking action on generals out of fear for being too 'heavyhanded', and as such mods should either come out to say basically "no don't worry about generals on /vm/ it isnt a big deal" or "feel confident about cracking down on generals on /vm/". The current limbo of not being too sure what to do about it is what is causing the issues I think.
>>10207I don't use /vm/ but I am a janitor of another /v/spawn, the whole debacle with generals is something I've asked repeatedly but mods always just told me to get rid of the ones using templates, backlinking, "edition", etc. The threads that are functionally generals in my board don't get much crap or rulebreaking except for the people mad at the fact that they exist, I've asked several different mods to take a look at them and all of them just said "it's probably fine". So I guess the only thing I can tell you is to contact a mod to take a look at the troublesome threads and judge if they need to be moved to /vg/ or otherwise. What's important to the moderation as far as I'm aware is to keep these threads from becoming chatrooms for offtopic crap and erp. If it doesn't reach that level it might be fine, but dunno, ask a purple.
>>10209Another issue with generals on /vm/ is that since its such a slow board there are sometimes generals with template, edition, backlinking etc. that have been up for several months and so if you ask a mod to archive/warn it they often just say "eh its been up for months already it doesnt matter" even though its technically still rulebreaking.
>>10207The problem with /vm/ is that unlike the other /v/ spin offs the janitors never got around to curtailing generals so most of the board is generals as opposed to maybe 1 or 2 threads because they are too big to WR. The generals rule is a bureaucratic pretext, however the boards were made to allow for discussion of these topics without threads being bumped off every other minute because the Blue Archive general needs to rebake for the 5th time in the past 6 hours. So I don't think that repealing the rule is worthwhile since it would have considerable repercussions on boards like /vmg/ where all the gacha generals could migrate to and then we'd just have /vmgg/. Making an exception for /vm/ would simply make no sense.Like >>10209 said mods only care about templates, threads calling themselves generals, "edition" and people linking pastebin style stuff. They don't actually care if a thread is effectively a general. What I would say is that /vm/ should 100% comply by the rules and it could easily be made so if a mod would simply go through the catalog and archive the rule breaking threads so that /vm/ janitors can warn OPs when they're remade. Janitors at this point can't actually enforce the rules because it would take months to fully stop every single general from being made simply because threads stay alive for several months at a time.
>>10214>it could easily be made so if a mod would simply go through the catalog and archive the rule breaking threadsI have asked for this before and been denied basically.
Is there no effective way to stop Andy sixx log posting? Word filter the words to incoherent symbols?
>>10216Why would you want to stop it?
>>10216absolutely slidding
BUT I DELETED ALL THE APOSTROPHES
>>10219iToddler BLOWN THE FUCK OUT
>>10219brooooo charge your phone.... it's at 18#$% bro
>>10221Turns out you have to disable "smart punctuation" in Apple settings. Much better.
>>10226>4chan forces you to punctuate like a dumbassApple sisters...
This is more of a curiosity than anything, but how come /vg/ doesn't have thread IDs? It's one of the faster boards, and arguably one of the least anonymous boards as so many generals are treated like chatrooms with thread personalities, etc. Out of all the boards that don't have thread IDs that I'd expect it to have, it would be /vg/. Sure, changing your ID is trivially easy, but that's an argument against thread IDs in general, not thread IDs on one specific board - and it is a bit more of a hassle to change your ID now that there's the 15 minute rule. Or is it precisely because of the board's chatroom like nature that it doesn't have thread IDs, as it would lead to more drama and people analyzing other poster's posting patterns?
>>10250the devil advocate in me says that thread ID's with 750 post threads would be a drastic altering of the board for unknown gain. You have generals that take days to reach bump limit and you spoil some of that anonymous magic when you start seeing that same ID every morning or at lunchtime
>>10250>>10251Yeah I'd definitely rather not
>>10250anonymous website
if a thread is moved into /int/ does it automatically add the country flags? it would be kinda interesting to move an off topic debate about current international events off a board its not supposed to be on and into /int/ to show country of origin for the posters.. Im sure there are ways to spoof the origin country, but I doubt they'd be used much off of the original board.
>>10307Moved thread will just have ''unknown'' flag added to old posts, any new one will have flag appear.
>>10308ah, ok thx
Is there an up to date list of post timers on individual boards?What are the limitations regarding deleting your own posts as a regular user? How soon after posting can you delete one, and for how long can you delete them, if there even is a limit? Is it board specific or global?
>>10366https://a.4cdn.org/boards.jsoncooldowns are listed here, pass users can post twice as fastnormal users can delete after 1 minute, but not after 30some boards don't allow OPs to delete their own threads
>>10367Cool, thanks.
Not sure if this is the right place to ask this, but apparently there's a strange filter where any thread that has the full title for Konosuba gets "eaten" if you try to create it. Like it will say "Post successful!", but then afterwards it just shows the front page for /a/ and the thread isn't made. The Salaryman anime from this season has a similar issue, which makes it seem that the problematic text is "Sekai_ni" (remove the underscore, since even making a post with that phrase without the underscore seems to result in "eating").Does anyone here why the filter exists, and if it will ever be removed? I've seen anons bringing it up or discussing it.
>>10412there's a site spammer that goes by the template "femanons add me on discord: [some username] especially if you are into anime,vidya,etc" and around mid-Feb the username was sekai_nin and sekai_nim (without underscore since the filter seems active here too). I don't have access to the wordfilter, but that's my guess.
Speaking of wordfilters, couldn't one be implemented for bikinischizo? I imagine just having a wordfilter that would block any post that mentions both "Kishida" and "bikini" would go a long way. Of course, it would stop legitimate posts, but those are rare enough that it probably wouldn't be a problem.
>>10414I don't know "Kishida" but the bikini poster has been in a number of different threads (so different characters) on /vg/ so I don't think it'd be that simple.
>>10415https://desuarchive.org/a/search/text/kishida%20bikinihttps://desuarchive.org/a/search/text/ldp%20bikinihttps://desuarchive.org/a/search/text/solo%20leveling%20bikiniHere are some of his "highlights".
>>10414>a wordfilter that would block any post that mentions both "Kishida" and "bikini" would go a long way.just BR him, filters are shit against actual people, you would also be hampering the entire userbase over one guy, the bikini evader posts in multiple boards too
>>10417Normally I'd just suggest that, but he's such a problem and reports often take so long to be acted upon (up to several hours, even on busy boards like /a/), that it might just be more efficient to have a filter. If the femanons guy could get a filter, I can't see why bikinischizo can't considering he's an even bigger problem. Besides, yes I know it may inconvenience a few users, but really outside of other anons talking about his hatred for Kishida, the combination of "Kishida" and "bikini" is unlikely to naturally occur anyway.
