Would you want to browse a blue R9K? Without >Roasties >Fembots

would lack so much content, what else does r9k even offer?

100%
I guess this would be /bant/?

>>39288814
That's a good thing. More of a cultural void to fill anew, out of this shitty reddit wreckage. A true gentleman's /b/

Banning women would be pretty fucked up desu. Fembots are an integral part of /r9k/. The rest of that shit can go though.

>>39288792
No, absolutely not.
If you want this go elsewhere

>>39288875
>Banning women would be pretty fucked up desu. Fembots are an integral part of /r9k/. The rest of that shit can go though.
Are you retarded?
Women are the only thing on that list which needs to be banned

>>39288875
>>39288906

How is the staff going to get away with banning females.
As if that's 1) enforcable and 2) not some bullshit drama-sponge shit that will make the staff not want to touch it with a 10 foot pole.

>>39288792
Yea absolutely.
If a seperate board were made or if r9k got new rules i would be 100 percent on board.
No pun intended.

>>39288930
No shit, it won't happen, neither will any of the other things so it's a moot point

but it could be enforced pretty easily, someone says they are female, ban

>>39288930
A woman who does not outwardly state that she is a woman is not a problem. A person who makes a point of claiming to be female is an attention whore and can easily be identified for a ban.

>>39289057
>>39289111
So you think women can be robots.

>>39288930
Yeah, that'd be controversial as fuck.
Plus, how would the mods know? An automatic ban for claiming fembot-status doesn't cut it.

>>39288792
>implying they wouldn't all be around after blueboarding r9k

>>39289150
>So you think women can be robots.
...no? Where did I say that?
I will explicitly say it now - women cannot be robots.

I simply suggested a method in which women could be effectively banned from /r9k/. Although you can't really ban all women, making sure they can't visibly post is good enough. Any user who claims to be a woman or anything which being a woman entails should be banned. Any post which is addressed to women should be banned.

>>39288792
I know I made some post like this a while back, but here's what needs to go.

> wagie/neet bait threads (ban that poster)
> hug your sister (ban that poster)
> anything dealing traps, trannies or feminization
> circumcision or dick pics. Medical issues should be spoiled
> on that related note, anything dealing with genitals, bare female breasts, or bare asses is prohibited from an unspoiled OP pic
> ballbusting thread (ban that poster)
> racebait thread (including "block your path")
> anything with that ugly porn star with the black dudes (can overlap with the above)
> tomokoposting (ban that poster)
> BRAAAP posts
> any post that starts with "fembot here"
> /lgbt/ reject threads
> /pol/ reject threads

>>39289239
>Any user who claims to be a woman or anything which being a woman entails should be banned

Maybe we could go for a ban on "Fembot here"

If a post is well written and insightful, and being a woman is meaningful to the post, people should, in that case be allowed to state their identity

>>39289350
>> BRAAAP posts

What is a BRAAP?