How do we save /v/ from the cancer that is e-celebs and the Redditors

>>383375934
We don't. Let it all burn, you can't stop new users coming into this pile of shit

Ideally with solid moderation that understood the rules clearly, and also with good, perfectly written rules that leave no ambiguity like "chan culture" bullshit.
But in reality we have a bunch of ponyfag mods that ban you for we wuz posting but not for posting twitter screencaps

File: YOU_ONLY_HAD_TO_LISTENnoa.webm (392KB, 800x480px) Image search: [Google]

392KB, 800x480px

>>383375934
WE FUCKING RANGEBAN THEM ALL

File: 1492165751113.jpg (35KB, 500x499px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 500x499px

Okay fuckos, I want a serious fucking answer.
How come:
/mu/
/tv/
/co/
/cgl/
/k/
/ck/
/g/
/diy/
/p/
/o/
are allowed to talk about e-celebs but it is absolutely NOT allowed on /v/? Is there a reason why online personalities closely linked to video games should be outlawed on a board about video games?

>>383377353
You can't handle it, simply.

>>383377353
E ecelebs have nothing to do with video games. Every discussion about them has nothing to do with video games. They contribute nothing to video games other than leeching off the industry like parasites. So, why the fuck would anyone want to discuss parasites, let alone what would they discuss? Drama. Only drama. And drama isn't video games. So this is why this board should not allow it.

>>383377353

Video games as an entertainment used to be about *doing* stuff. Not passively looking at others do or talk about stuff. Not even in small doses - remember that there was a time when the most second hand data you'd get about a game was reading reviews, or talking it out to acquaintances.
I can see how to people with an old school bent that change could be jarring.

I guess that's what you get from transitioning an enthusiast market into a mass market. Fist games designed as spectacles. Then games becoming second -hand spectacles as a logical conclusion.

>>383378984
>enter thread about a vidya related e-celeb
>people discussing the points e-celeb made and discussing vidya in general until some autist screams "REEEEEE E-CELEBS GET OFF MY BOARD!"

>>383379282
>Video games as an entertainment used to be about *doing* stuff.
you know you can basically say the same thing for the other boards I mentioned right? stop making pitiful excuses and off yourself, I'm not even some guy who avidly watches vidya related e-celebs, I just want you spergs to stop crying over something that isn't even a problem.

>>383379456

Some of them ( /tv certainly not), but then they have undergone that transition a long time ago. I mean, when you talk about music to most people nowadays, they think of passive consumption first, not playing themselves.

Report them, don't reply to them, make your own threads, bump threads that are on topic l. It's not that hard. You people just can't see past their bullshit and have to reply for whatever reason, even when you know they're clearly shitposting.