Meta thread

>>32630902
Dude, a gets/dubs thread is very different from a story-telling thread that happens to use dubs as the mechanism for guiding the story. I don't see how those threads break the rules in any way.

>>32630902
How exactly are they breaking the rules? I don't go into those threads, but they seem popular, AND Pokemon-related. And like you said, they have been around for quite some time. Is it because they aren't Pokemon discussion?

If that's the case we have shit like this too
>>32618221
>>32628717
>>32627121
>>32626203

>>32630902
you're probably a newfag but porn on /vp/ was truly the golden age of this board. it really sucks it isn't allowed anymore, as neopokemon gets a shit ton of good porn. oh well

>>32630991

As a legit oldfag whose been here since the start, I couldn't disagree more. When you tolerate porn, there's no way to keep it to one thread. It ruins the whole board. And as shitty as /vp/ is now, it's far more usable than when the board was filled with porn that everybody had to see whether they wanted to or not.

There are plenty of places on the internet to find porn. You don't need it to be here also.

>>32630956
Hey you leave the gay kiss thread alone!
It's already hard enough to find gay male related stuff here without counting Lillie+Chan

>>32630902
The VPMD thread is basically just a quest thread. I don't see anything wrong with it. Hell, OC should be celebrated, it's a rare treat nowadays.

I got banned once for doing one of those /vp/ plays x Pokémon game and what happened were decided by gets. I have never made a get thread since. I don't know why they ban or not ban. What's the criteria?

>>32632255
>What's the criteria?
Flip a coin.

>>32632273
Whoa..... it's just like rng in Pokemon.... bravo mods...

>>32631119
How about you fuck off to /y/?

>>32630902
Hello!
Non staff pre sticky Anon here to give you some insight.
As you are aware, dubs/gets thread are strictly prohibited given the recent public ban/thread lock a few days back. But what exactly is a dubs/gets thread?

Simply put, its a thread solely meant to fill and flood for the sake of filling and flooding. It's rather bothersome and not looked highly upon on comfy boards such as /vp/. However, dubs/gets are a part of the greater 4chan culture, therefore you can bend this rule a little bit by providing content that uses dubs/gets/odds/evens and such as a mechanic. In the old days, these were CYOA's or Choose Your Own Adventures that used the user base to create the story. This sort of thing nowadays is rare because of the creation of /qst/ a board specifically for CYOA's and with a designated roll feature to make the old system of gets obsolete.

So, a tl;dr for >>32630337 and >>32630342 is that there seems to be an accord to the bending of the rules, as per 4chan culture would allow.

Making Porn threads should be punishable by ban

>>32632580
>>32630956
As per >>32618221 this is vanilla tier normality, just because you don't like it doesn't mean its against the rules.
As per >>32628717 this is typical 4chan normality, just because you don't like it doesn't mean its against the rules.
As per >>32627121 memes are always welcomed on all boards of 4chan, and are encouraged to continue spreading. This is but a sign of a fertile land, our memes being the fruit of our lands.
As per >>32626203 Lewd, but not breaking the rules. If the thread goes into BRAAAAAP or straight up porn, then the people posting BRAP or Straight Up Porn would have their files deleted and subsequently banned.

As per your own thread, Meta threads exist specifically to talk about how the board can be improved, complaints about staff (legitimate ones outside of "Mods are roody toody patooties") and general whatnot.

It is NOT a place where you highlight everything you dislike on /vp/ and then blame the mods for allowing these things to exist. Essentially, your thread is an advanced form of "MOOOODS DELETE THESE THREADS." which is a form of unacceptable shitposting behavior. Keep metaposting specifically about metaposting, don't make it a "MODS I DON'T LIKE THING DELETE IT" thread, if the trend continues to do so, might I interest Anons engaging in this practice to visit >>>/qa/ because that is the common trend there, and you will be in similar company.

If you don't like something, ignore and hide it. If something pops up repeatedly you don't like, add it to a filter. If someone starts a thread with an image of a Sylveon getting rammed in the ass by a Weezing, then you report the thread, if the thread is still up in 24 hours, THEN you can post in a metathread saying "Why haven't the mods deleted this thread with the Sylveon getting assrammed by a Weezing?"

Hope its all been helpful mates.

Cheers.

Can starter war crap and anything related to that wolf youtuber be banned/removed?

>>32632600
Obviously.
>>32632255
That's currently outside of my realm of vision, since I can only assume what the staff thinks, and not what they actually think. Playthroughs without dubs are okay, OC threads that rely on the get mechanism is a gray area that is mostly obsolete due to /qst/. If we are to believe the trend, then Playthroughs using the dubs mechanics are not acceptable, given that the public ban recently was specifically that category. This may or may not have something to do with "Twitch Plays Pokemon" but again, that is outside of my realm of vision.
>>32632607
gen/console wars is mostly a /v/ thing, it depends on how bad it gets. If it falls to "GOODA IS FEMALE ONLY" tier, then the trend will shift to no longer have starter wars. Lurkers are noticing a beginning of this trend currently with Baracat and Owlposters, which may lead to a decision in the future. As per youtubers, I have no personal opinion one way or another, it is something that is beyond me. Let it fall to the trend cycle, if it becomes toxic or pushed too hard, then it'll be eventually cut. If it is deliberate advertisement, it'll be cut. If its some random jagoff playing Pocketo Monsters, then its just another thread for discussion I suppose.

I'll say the same thing I said before. A poison doesn't kill when diluted. I don't understand why we deserve a board after all. The Pokemon franchise revolves around three things: video games, TCG, and anime. Killing the board and spreading the discussion where it belongs will also kill most of the shitposting because people won't have a place to find an excuse to shitpost.
Video games go to >>>/v/ and >>>/vg/
TCG goes to >>>/tg/
Anime goes to >>>/a/
Pokegirl and fetish threads go to >>>/e/, >>>/y/, and >>>/trash/

>>32632928
Also, Hiro said maintaining multiple boards is quite problematic so it's a win-win for the website

>>32632928
obviously you weren't around for the times before /vp/, /v/ was 50% pokemon, and 90% when new games were revealed
/vp/ existing is best for everyone

>>32632937
that's why keeps shitting out completely pointless boards like /bant/

delete /vp/ and give ten extra pages to /qa/

>>32632928
/vp/ is a containment board, they're deliberately trying to avoid what you're saying

>>32633336
>>32633375
>both posts "checking" that get
>only one gets deleted
Maybe the flip a coin thing is real

On a side note, I think the board would improve with the following
>fucking off topic
There is some faggot(s) that try to force a shitty non Pokémon anime in /padt/ resulting in people living and making even more anime threads
>warn/ban lewd on sight
Pokégirl/boy threads are OK but there is always the one who keeps spamming nearly porn pictures. We have several different boards for that shit.

We need janitors with actual balls. Right now, 70% of the entire board is just shitposting

>>32633333
For something to be considered a containment board the topic has to be banned elsewhere. You can still make Pokémon threads on /a/ or /v/ and they generally stay up.

>>32630956
"Break the rules" means "I dont like it" on /vp/. The threads you linked dont break the rules either. I dont get what's so hard about "pokemon related board".

>>32632255
I got banned twice for not liking the anime.

>>32632605
Improving the board is easy, have actual unbiased mods and enforce the use of generals when they exist. Its not hard.

>>32632928
Pokemon also has manga and merchandise you fucking ash worshipper.
And the point of /vp/ is to concentrate all pokemon discussion on any front.
If anything those boards quality will be improved if the actually make /vp/ as it s supposed to.

>>32633971
>Pokemon also has manga and merchandise you fucking ash worshipper.
Nice personal attack faggot. You failed because I don't even watch anime. Now give me a favor and kill yourself, you worthless internet being

>>32633990
>pokemom has no manga and merch because I dont watch the anime
Ok

ban fucking starter wars, "say something nice to her/him!" "rate my wife" threads need to get banned too

>>32633997
Okay you're retarded.

>>32633997
Manga goes to /a/ as well as anime.
Merch goes to /toy/ or respective buyfag threads depending on quality.

Honestly manga and merch threads are so scarce that they barely make a difference.

>>32634005
also "what did they mean by this" and "furfag fridays" threads

>>32634008
>doesnt know shit about the pokemon franchise
>is part of the fanbase problem
>calls anyone else retards

>>32634027
please don't reply to me ever again.

>>32634015
He should have mentioned in the post.
Regardless, the point of /vp/ is to concentrate pokemon discussion. /vp/, filled with pokemon fans, is probbly the only board that doesnt get this.

>>32633997
>implying anybody cares about manga and merch

>>32634034
>being this mad

Look, I can make compromises when it comes to shitposting threads, because despite the rules of this site being all for quality posting, it doesn't seem like mods or even users want to back that up.

But as for all the lewd shit, that needs to stop. You can talk about characters fine and dandy and post their designs/artwork, but posting young girls doing suggestive things or being down to their undergarments (but hey no nipples or pussy shown so safe amirite?!) is totally unsafe for work, which is the point of this board. You either get rid of that shit or make this a NSFW board and allow it, because teetering on the line with lewd shit isn't safe for work at all. And that goes for Pokephile threads too.

If you're going to declare it SFW, actually make it SFW instead of allowing everything under the sun so long as it doesn't directly show tits, pussy, and dick.

>>32634027
it was you who started being offensive. I am just returning the favor
But your autism level might be too high to notice that

>>32634039
>they arent part of the franchise because no one cares about them

>>32634043
>Look, I can make compromises when it comes to shitposting threads
No. shitposting threads deserve no compromises. They deserve a ban.

>>32634048
Well, you're promoting one of the biggest problems of the pokemon fanbase so I was allowed to be offensive. If you're so sensitive there's plenty of places you can act retarded and not be called out on it.

>>32634043
>its ok to harm the franchise
>its ok to promote misinformation
>it is ok to shitpost constantly
>but people feeling sexually attracted to girls!!! No way! That's where we draw the line.
Its this logic what is wrong with /vp/

>>32632255
A "roll thread" is one whose entire purpose is nothing but rolls. If somebody made a "Pokewaifu roulette" thread for instance, that would be a roll thread. There's nothing wrong with the thread you made.

>>32634065
>I was allowed to be offensive
Wrong. See Global Rule 3

Why did they Ban pheromosa to ubers?
She was quiver dancing.

>>32634054
>>32634065
The fact of the matter is, lewd shit can get /vp/ users in trouble and discourage coming on the board altogether, while shitposting is more ingrained in every board to become rooted in the site culture itself, so asking that to stop is less plausible than asking for a board that claims to be SFW to actually be SFW. Put it in perspective, especially given the difference in size of what's being asked of the mods.

>>32634087
>shitposting is more ingrained in every board to become rooted in the site culture itself
And THIS is the real problem.

>>32634080
I didnt break it though.

>>32634087
How can you get in trouble? If you dont like those threads ignore them and move on.

>board actually be sfw
Do you know whay sfw means?

Also, what's being asked of the mods is to actually do the bare minimum. You're asking them to atttack things you dont specifically like which would make them even more biased.

>>32634087
Following your reasoning, rapes should stop beingillegal in Sweden. Because th
ey also "rooted into culture"

>>32634115
>How can you get in trouble? If you dont like those threads ignore them and move on.
See, you're not actually visualizing it. If you're scrolling through the catalog and something lewd shows up and someone's around, that looks terrible on you. Do you know what SFW means? No one's going to say anything about some Japanese cartoon monster that isn't in jest but once they see some perverted shit you're risking getting written up.

>>32634132
Following your reasoning, your post should be banned.

>>32634158
I generally agree with your point that lewd stuff shouldn't be allowed here. It isn't necessary, and there are other places for that.

But I'm not sure I buy your rationale that it should be banned to protect users so they can browse /vp/ in public or at work of whatever. I mean, let's remember, this is 4chan. There's going to be embarrassing shit whether the NSFW ban is enforced or not. It could be the case that the board's been clean and family-friendly for a year, and I'd still think you're an idiot for going on it in a place where your boss or whoever could see.

(Again, I totally agree with you on what should be done. Just not really on why.)

>>32634158
If that's the price to permanently stop all shitposting, I'd pay it.

>>32634005
Don't forget "X starters are the ugliest/worst" threads. All they do is bait gen wars.

>>32634206
>I mean, let's remember, this is 4chan. There's going to be embarrassing shit whether the NSFW ban is enforced or not. It could be the case that the board's been clean and family-friendly for a year, and I'd still think you're an idiot for going on it in a place where your boss or whoever could see.
That's like the horse leading you to water. 4chan has its infamy because of the NSFW boards. Some blue boards are already perfectly safe (or do enough or see so little activity) to be on. Like I wouldn't mind being found on /diy/ anytime of the day. The lingo can remain consistent and joke threads can pop up here and there but at least there's some well-defined outlining of what goes where, i.e. lewd shit goes on NSFW/lewd boards.

>>32634158
>>How can you get in trouble? If you dont like those threads ignore them and move on.
>See, you're not actually visualizing it. If you're scrolling through the catalog and something lewd shows up and someone's around, that looks terrible on you. Do you know what SFW means? No one's going to say anything about some Japanese cartoon monster that isn't in jest but once they see some perverted shit you're risking getting written up.
And people have to change their tastes because you're stupid enough to browse 4chan around people who would have an issue?
That's your problem, not the board's. Not to mention lewdposting can happen in pretty much every board about media.

>>32634263
How are you still missing the point? It's the site itself that claims these boards to be SAFE FOR WORK, which is what this thread is allowed to talk about -- the shortcomings of the site's self-management.

What you're doing is complaining about a girl getting raped on some street at night that she had it coming for going out so late despite the mayor saying that said streets would have cops on them. I really don't see why you can't process that the site claims one thing but allows another. It IS my problem at the time being because everyone knows the mods act capriciously but what I'm putting forth is that the mods actually do something to stand by the site's rules. Did you forget you're in a meta thread?

File: 1373399625910.png (314KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

314KB, 900x900px

>>32632928
>delete /vp/, posts on /vp/
>>32632937
>problematic. Please return to where you came from because you are not a regular.
>>32633318
go back to /qa/ and stay there.
>>32633333
Quints of truth.
>>32633597
Thank you for bringing that to attention.
>>32633643
plz no bully staff
>>32633737
>There isn't a global rule about Pokemon therefore the board for Pokemon isn't strictly for Pokemon.
>>32633971
You should get to know the rules of the website and this board.
http://www.4chan.org/rules
If you feel you are being targeted unfairly with bans and deletions, please go to either the 4chan IRC or the /vp/ IRC. That being said, using that method in the incorrect manner will result in a very quick and long ban, so please don't abuse the IRC or waste the time of the people there.
>>32634005
starter wars technically fall under vp4, however the negative trend hasn't been established quite yet.
>>32634018
>not liking foxes and doggos
>>32634043
Safe for America work is different than Safe for Nippon work. Since this is an Ugandan Underwater Basket Weaving BBS, the culture leans toward the Nippon side.
>>32634086
Fast Roach 2 Fast.
>>32634099
How do plants go? They need water, love, sunshine, but they also do need shit. Too much of one will kill a garden, and as such there must be a balance between these four things. Shit is just a part of 4chan culture, but we mustn't drown in it, nor should we overheat the garden with too much moderators sun. By giving a garden too much love, the other gardens will get jealous and wither or attack. By giving the garden too much freedom water, you lose control of the garden, which goes everywhere. 4chan is an orchid, the boards within it seperated gardens. It is up to the posters of each garden to decide who they want to be, weeds, crops, farmers, insects, birds, etc. The weed shouldn't complain when the farmer pulls on it, for that is the role between farmer and weed.

>>32634043
>>32634087
>>32635139
>unironically defending shitposting
Am I being baited right now?

>>32635197
No you and the others who want it to go away are naive newfags who think it actually will. Shitposting is the 4chan vernacular for making jokes and banter and is how memes start -- it's a slippery slope to 'go after' shitposting that will create a shitstorm and conflict of interests.

>>32635212
>Shitposting is the 4chan vernacular for making jokes and banter
Too bad most of them are forced and completely unfunny. If you want to laugh at random shit, 9gag is a perfect website for you.
Global rule 6 for fuck's sake, why is moderation on this board basically nonexistent?

>>32635226
Where the fuck do you think a huge portion of 9gag's content trickled down from?

>>32630902
I guess you could argue /vpmd/ should be relegated to >>>/qst/ but it's better than most threads on /vp/ and we need more good threads

>>32635212
Yes, I'm sure QUALITY posts like 6 starterwar threads a day, "Diancie is crying" threads and Masuda photo threads are the essence of a thriving community.

>>32634277
>dat shit analogy
Let me improve it. What's happening is that the girl didnt get raped and you're complaining that even then, someone gazed at her with lust. That is what's happening.

Which is appropiate I guess since you seem to have issues with people feeling sexual attraction.

>>32635139
>you should get to know the rules
Whay rules says I have to worship ash? Please point that one out.

File: Sina cute.png (663KB, 800x1000px) Image search: [Google]

663KB, 800x1000px

>>32635264
You can be upset about threads being spammed/forced by a given IP(s) within a given timespan and I'd be all for putting a stop to that, but to put an end to joke threads as a whole is not going to happen anytime soon, which is why I'm not going to bother vying for that.

>>32635274
No, yours would be a poor analogy considering the line is actually crossed with lewdposting instead of there being some overreaction to a minor thing. You wouldn't dare browse /vp/ at work because getting caught with an image of a little girl in a bra can get you fired. Shit like pic related is fine since there's obviously no sexual charge to it but you've gotta be blind if you don't see a problem with little girls on a bed posed, beckoning, or in undergarments (or ahegao/cropped porn).

>>32635345
>No, yours would be a poor analogy
To be fair, I had to work with the shit you gave me.

>considering the line is actually crossed with lewdposting
It isn't.

>instead of there being some overreaction to a minor thing.
Like how you're doing?

>You wouldn't dare browse /vp/ at work because getting caught with an image of a little girl in a bra can get you fired.
You mean like I do? Not only that, but, somehow, i'm not seeing a pic like that. My trick is to not go to those threads. Hope it helps.

>>32635377
>To be fair, I had to work with the shit you gave me.
No you didn't, smartass. You could've made a different analogy altogether.

>You mean like I do? Not only that, but, somehow, i'm not seeing a pic like that. My trick is to not go to those threads. Hope it helps.
1. What job could that possibly be?
2. Whoa that trick is genius but shit wait darn there's something called a catalog.

>>32635430
>No you didn't, smartass. You could've made a different analogy altogether.
Meh, if a direct explanation doesnt work and neither does your own analogy, you're too retarded to even try. Its also something way too simple: you're complaining about a rule that is respected but because people post shit you don't like you think its not.


>2. Whoa that trick is genius
Well, I mean, you didnt know it, so you cant say "duh".

>but shit wait darn there's something called a catalog.
You mean the one that shows thumbnails?
Also, i'm not providing personal info, but what kind of job is totally ok with you wasting time discussing pokemon on the safe environment for 4 year olds you seem to want anyways?

Also, here's another trick: dont use 4chan with a guy watching behind you. Hope it helps.

>>32635470
>Meh, if a direct explanation doesnt work and neither does your own analogy, you're too retarded to even try. Its also something way too simple: you're complaining about a rule that is respected but because people post shit you don't like you think its not.
>your analogy was bad but mine was too so that explains why you're dumb
>it's way too simple but I just can't explain it well enough
really makes me think
>you're complaining about a rule that is respected but because people post shit you don't like you think its not
And what is that shit I don't like and why don't I like it? It's not for no reason unless you want me to repeat myself yet again. No shit people focus on the bad stuff when they're talking about how to improve a site.

Yes the one that shows thumbnails that are easily discernible to anyone with unhindered vision. What kind of site claims to be worksafe in certain areas but then allows perverted shit in those areas?

No shit, I don't, but it's like I'm telling you /vp/ claims to be the number 4 but is actually an 8. I'm complaining it's not really a 4 which is a valid complaint and you're mocking the complaint since hey at least it's still under a 10 and oh wait, why would you trust an even number site in the first place?

>>32635551
>it's way too simple but I just can't explain it well enough
When did.I say I cant explain it? I can, I did. You're the retard.
>And what is that shit I don't like and why don't I like it?
The shit you dont like is, as you said, lewdposting, if you cant follow your own ideas then stop posting. As to why, that's literally what i'm asking you. Biut the only "problem" you're mentioning about it stems from you being an idiot rather than anything wrong with it.


> It's not for no reason unless you want me to repeat myself yet again. No shit people focus on the bad stuff when they're talking about how to improve a site.
The "reason" is that you're an idiot that doesnt know how to browse. Which is not a valid reason. Therefore its for no reason. Unless you can provide one that makes sense. You can? Do so.

>Yes the one that shows thumbnails that are easily discernible to anyone with unhindered vision. What kind of site claims to be worksafe in certain areas but then allows perverted shit in those areas?
Again, learn what sfw means. Something being perverted doesnt mean its nsfw.


>No shit, I don't, but it's like I'm telling you /vp/ claims to be the number 4 but is actually an 8. I'm complaining it's not really a 4 which is a valid complaint and you're mocking the complaint since hey at least it's still under a 10 and oh wait, why would you trust an even number site in the first place?
Its not a valid complaint because /vp/ claims to be something and it IS which is my point. Not what you're saying.

>>32635139
Are you roleplaying as a janitor or are you unironically this much of a suck up?

>>32635622
Wrong thread. I'm retarded.

>>32635580
Skipping the failures in argument where you scurry off to calling me dumb,

Nice job skipping "well enough".

>The shit you dont like is, as you said, lewdposting, if you cant follow your own ideas then stop posting. As to why, that's literally what i'm asking you.
Because it's literally NSFW.

>Unless you can provide one that makes sense. You can? Do so.
>Again, learn what sfw means. Something being perverted doesnt mean its nsfw.
>Its not a valid complaint because /vp/ claims to be something and it IS which is my point. Not what you're saying.
Of course if you post a funny joke image where the subject may involve some level of perversion, that's not inappropriate/NSFW, but how are you still not putting into perspective that being at work with an image of a girl in her bra is unsafe for work? Your only counter'arguments' involve calling me dumb, saying not to use the site, and that your job miraculously happens to not mind whatever you come across. No shit I can stay off the site, but the claim to be SFW is invalidated if I have to in order to keep my job. How are you really not processing this at this point?

File: 1373146680910.jpg (78KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 1000x1000px

>>32635197
>not unironically enjoying [s4s] and /b/
spotted the no taste friendo.

>>32635274
Wow you took that out of context lad. What I mean is you should arm yourself as a poster against wrongs taken against you by possibly biased staff members. That is why you should learn about the rules, and the culture of the board of which you post on. It's also why I gave you the option of going to the IRC, because if you know you are within your rights as a poster and didnu nuffin, then you should bring it up. However, that is a dual edged sword, because if you got banned for being a legitimate asshat instead of saying "I don't like thing." you'll be called out on it and subsquently laughed at. So, are your claims of "I dindu nuffin" legitimate or did you post something that would probably get banned? Keep in mind, mods and janitors have full view of your banned posts, so lying wouldn't work on them.

>>32635595
I've always stated and will continue to state so in these meta threads across 4chan. I am not a member of the staff, nor have I ever been. I'm just an ancientfag who is involved with many things and knows the trends of the boards, and of the people who post and moderate them.

My opinions are no better than any other random Anon, and they hold no real working weight, for they are just assumption based on trends. They just happen to be more accurate because they are based on ten years of experience.

>>32635212
That would be fine if /vp/'s jokes were actually fucking funny. Pointless starterwars, several hundred posts pointing out a spelling mistake, that >KLK>DBZ>Simpsons>StevenUniverse shit, none of the /vp/ """jokes""" are funny, they're fucking stupid. Of course, lets not forget the fact that the latter two has people constantly saying 'include me in the screencap'. If you're that fucking desperate for attention from /r/4chan, fucking go there, and STAY there, you pathetic wastes of space.

>>32635648
>Skipping the failures in argument where you scurry off to calling me dumb,
Me not wanting to overcomplicate things with an analogy is not a failure in argument. Just like everyone wont change their habits because of your tastes, not everyone will argue the same way you, huh, argue.

>Because it's literally NSFW.
It isnt.

>Of course if you post a funny joke image where the subject may involve some level of perversion, that's not inappropriate/NSFW, but how are you still not putting into perspective that being at work with an image of a girl in her bra is unsafe for work?
Sfw means no nudity. Not literally "your coworkers wont mind". Have you learned of the term yesterday? Take the pic you said was ok, you think normies will think "oh, this guy is a fully normal person" if they see that?

>Your only counter'arguments' involve calling me dumb
To be fair, I barely need to argue since you arent presenting valid points.

>saying not to use the site
You're free to use the site. So are other people. But the rest wont change because you arent confortable with what they do which is why i'm saying you might be better off elsewhere. I'm jot forcing anything, you are.

>and that your job miraculously happens to not mind whatever you come across.
They mind, but you wont go around shoving the fact I browse /vp/ oj everyone's faces so I have no issue. The trick is not being an idiot.

>No shit I can stay off the site, but the claim to be SFW is invalidated if I have to in order to keep my job. How are you really not processing this at this point?
Refer to above newfag.

>>32635691
>Wow you took that out of context lad. What I mean is you should arm yourself as a poster against wrongs taken against you by possibly biased staff members.
Except I was respecting the rules and, if anything, the first people who should stick to the rules are the mods. You're blaming me fr shit other people did wrong.

>That is why you should learn about the rules, and the culture of the board of which you post on.
Didnt know respecting the hivemind was a rule.

>t's also why I gave you the option of going to the IRC, because if you know you are within your rights as a poster and didnu nuffin, then you should bring it up.
I did though.

However, that is a dual edged sword, because if you got banned for being a legitimate asshat instead of saying "I don't like thing." you'll be called out on it and subsquently laughed at. So, are your claims of "I dindu nuffin" legitimate or did you post something that would probably get banned? Keep in mind, mods and janitors have full view of your banned posts, so lying wouldn't work on them.
If being an asshat was banneable then 99% of /vp/ should be out, and attitude shouldnt be an issue as long as it doesnt break the rules.
And I didnt lie as, as you said, its pointless.

>>32635701
>Me not wanting to overcomplicate things with an analogy is not a failure in argument. Just like everyone wont change their habits because of your tastes, not everyone will argue the same way you, huh, argue.
You misread (telling). Calling someone an idiot is the failure in argument, doesn't add anything to the conversation to help your point, literally a waste of text and highlights you can't stick to the points of discussion.

>It isnt.
>Sfw means no nudity. Not literally "your coworkers wont mind". Have you learned of the term yesterday? Take the pic you said was ok, you think normies will think "oh, this guy is a fully normal person" if they see that?
Your interpretation of that is as loose as the mods' upholding of the rules. Case in point, post gore here and you'll see your definition is severely lacking.

>You're free to use the site. So are other people. But the rest wont change because you arent confortable with what they do which is why i'm saying you might be better off elsewhere. I'm jot forcing anything, you are.
>They mind, but you wont go around shoving the fact I browse /vp/ oj everyone's faces so I have no issue. The trick is not being an idiot.
Oh yeah I'm free to use the SFW sites at work but wait no then I'm a retard for doing that why would I risk that when I could get caught with Lana showing camel toe, i.e. don't use it when I could get in trouble despite the disclaimer it's SFW

File: 1483073431174.png (33KB, 171x114px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 171x114px

>>32635725
Do you have a valid claim? Do you exactly remember what you wrote or what image you uploaded?

Keep in mind, the rules are a solid foundation and cultural rules are more so a grey area that can be interpretated in different ways. When posters write "Lurk more" this isn't just bitterness, but rather a shortened version of "Learn the ways of the board so that you don't get fucked by acting against the culture."

Here's an example; I could start a thread with a picture of Snivy and say "I wonder what Snivy's tail smells like, haha. Wouldn't that be funny if someone drew that? Just for laughs."

This doesn't really break any global or vp rules, as it indeed a topic about Pokemon, and wondering what Snivy's tail would smell like (haha). However, due to the cultural trend of /vp/ the thread would most likely be deleted because it is an emulation of the Yoshi egg meme (haha) from /v/. Engaging in cross board culture is often frowned upon, but depending on the staff of the board, can be forgiven since its that grey area of culture rules. That is why you should lurk and see what is acceptable and not.

Another example would be posting an image of Vulpix stretching and saying "I want to cum inside of Vulpix."

Due to the nature of this gray area, it can be questionable at times, but in most cases of "Why did I get banned?" appeals usually goes to the defense of the deletor and not the poster because its considered a defense of the staff to act in their best judgement with these grey cultural area rules.

If you believe this is truly not the case, use the IRC, or just lurk more.

>>32635139
>Safe for America work is different than Safe for Nippon work. Since this is an Ugandan Underwater Basket Weaving BBS, the culture leans toward the Nippon side.

I guess that explains why the bara threads get deleted. Well, that and furry bara bullshit

>>32635764
>You misread (telling). Calling someone an idiot is the failure in argument, doesn't add anything to the conversation to help your point, literally a waste of text and highlights you can't stick to the points of discussion.
>(telling)
You screwed your own logic there. Also calling you an idiot shouldnt be an issie if I also tell what its wrong with what you're saying which I did.

>Your interpretation of that is as loose as the mods' upholding of the rules. Case in point, post gore here and you'll see your definition is severely lacking.
Its not an interpretation, its the actual definition and the reason you dont see porn here. Its about the only rule the mods give a shit about. Gore isnt sfw so I dont know how it challenges it in any way unless you're dense as fuck and think I meant not nudity as the only not allowed thing and jot the one related to our argument.

>Oh yeah I'm free to use the SFW sites at work but wait no then I'm a retard for doing that why would I risk that when I could get caught with Lana showing camel toe, i.e. don't use it when I could get in trouble despite the disclaimer it's SFW
Again, you seem to think sfw means totally socially acceptable. Learn what it means newfag.

And yes, if you're idiotic enough to use 4chan, sfw or nsfw, at a place you can be seen its your problem, not everyone else's. Just dont enter and use /vp/ at home if its so hard.

>>32635777
>grey area cultural rules
Rules shouldn't be a gray area. You're literally saying biased mods are ok.

File: 1399145875029.gif (529KB, 255x135px) Image search: [Google]

529KB, 255x135px

>>32635849
I think I need to explain the basics again.

Foundation rules are found here
http://www.4chan.org/rules

Culture rules are discovered by lurking boards.
An example of a culture rule here at /vp/ is
"No Playthroughs using the get mechanism"
Another culture rule is "Don't slugpost."
These areas are grey because it depends on their current trend whether they gravitate towards being deletable or not.

Think of it like this, a stone at the bottom of the pond pulls on things on the surface. Things that fall too close to the stone are deleted. This stone is the Foundation Rules. Things obviously that break Foundation Rules are deleted quickly, things that sit on the surface or near the surface are those grey areas, therefore the trend of those things within those areas adds or removes weight to them. Slug posting used to be considered acceptable, however once its trend became negative, it got weighed down to the point where it sank and got swallowed by the stone.
However, there are judgement calls to be made, and sometimes there are mistakes. Keep in mind, the staff are human too so there is the possibility of bias and wrong doing. That is why I am educating you and giving you your defenses against those who go against their duty.

Now, what is a biased staff member?
Acting accordingly to the treshold of deletion and trend sink theory, this is not bias. The defense in this case is usually 98% toward the deletor and not the poster as its an "In the best judgement of the deletor." Ergo, this is not bias. You may feel gypped, although its just up to you on your end to learn more about board culture so you don't get to that point where someone has to make a judgement call.

A biased mod/janitor is like a mod who follows and deletes your posts site wide after a board ban because they don't like you, or a janitor who has bias towards a certain Pokemon, and deletes your post because you say "You're Pokemon is shit." Hope its been helpful!

>>32635830
It's less an issue for me and more so an observation that you lack confidence in your own arguments considering you feel the need to spout insults in conjunction with them.

>Its not an interpretation, its the actual definition and the reason you dont see porn here. Its about the only rule the mods give a shit about. Gore isnt sfw so I dont know how it challenges it in any way unless you're dense as fuck and think I meant not nudity as the only not allowed thing and jot the one related to our argument.
How do you actually type this out and ignore how full of shit you sound?
>its the actual definition
>oh wait but I forgot to include non-nudity-related things like gore also count, thanks for reminding me
And you actually twist it to suggest I'm the dense one when you've been the one relegating the definition to nudity instead of inappropriateness the whole time.

>Again, you seem to think sfw means totally socially acceptable. Learn what it means newfag.
No, stop projecting extremes because you can't argue against a clearly defined middle ground of not showing underdressed girls or sexually provocative material.

>And yes, if you're idiotic enough to use 4chan, sfw or nsfw, at a place you can be seen its your problem, not everyone else's. Just dont enter and use /vp/ at home if its so hard.
So you do stand by the idea that it's NSFW. Good.

>>32635941
So, you can't have opinions of your own and a hivemind mentality should be enforced and you think this is good? Why discuss things if we're alll supposed to agree?

>Ergo, this is not bias. You may feel gypped, although its just up to you on your end to learn more about board culture so you don't get to that point where someone has to make a judgement call.
bias towards the majority is bias.

Also, as you can see in this thread (and, if you're such and oldfag, on /vp/ in general) I'm not the only one who isnt happy with the mods, therefore the general idea is that the mods are bad, yet you're disagreeing with it. By your own logic, you should be banned.

>>32635946
>>32635946
>It's less an issue for me and more so an observation that you lack confidence in your own arguments considering you feel the need to spout insults in conjunction with them.
If that makes you feel good about yourself go ahead. But again, insults aren't bad as long as the points are addressed. Not to mention part of your point is you being an idiot.

>How do you actually type this out and ignore how full of shit you sound?
Calling someone full of shit is the failure in argument, doesn't add anything to the conversation to help your point, literally a waste of text and highlights you can't stick to the points of discussion.

>And you actually twist it to suggest I'm the dense one when you've been the one relegating the definition to nudity instead of inappropriateness the whole time.
Anon, no nudity=sfw, which is why non nudity pics are allowed and posted. If you want sfw to mean what you want in your head go ahead but the point of the term is already agreed upon and used.

>No, stop projecting extremes because you can't argue against a clearly defined middle ground of not showing underdressed girls or sexually provocative material.
>clearly defined
>doesnt define it

and sexually provocative material!=nsfw
you see sexually provocative material in newspapers

>So you do stand by the idea that it's NSFW. Good.
Not really, learn to read. I even bothered to clarify that's, within that statement, its irrelevant whether the board is sfw and nsfw. But sure, I'm the one projecting.

>>32636206
>Calling someone full of shit is the failure in argument, doesn't add anything to the conversation to help your point, literally a waste of text and highlights you can't stick to the points of discussion.
Your smug parroting doesn't work here since it actually does add to the conversation in acknowledging I'm aware you're being deceitful.

>Anon, no nudity=sfw, which is why non nudity pics are allowed and posted. If you want sfw to mean what you want in your head go ahead but the point of the term is already agreed upon and used.
No nudity is SFW, correct, because nudity is considered not safe for work. Wow, it's almost like all you have to do is literally spell out the term instead of suggesting it means something specific and then backpedal when the idea of gore having nothing to do with nudity is introduced. You're the one wanting it to mean strictly no nudity yet you're remarkably failing to see that.

>>clearly defined
>>doesnt define it
Are you blind?
>not showing underdressed girls or sexually provocative material

>and sexually provocative material!=nsfw
you see sexually provocative material in newspapers
The worst thing you could see that isn't related to fashion or perfume advertising would probably be mention of a gentleman's club, which doesn't show anything.

>Not really, learn to read. I even bothered to clarify that's, within that statement, its irrelevant whether the board is sfw and nsfw. But sure, I'm the one projecting.
I read it just fine. You'd be idiotic to use it at a place you can be seen, e.g. work. So it's NSFW.

>>32636194
yare yare daze. You are just here to argue and not learn aren't you?

Of course individual thought is allowed in the sea of culture, but acting directly against it is foolish and as such leads to people like yourselves who ask "Why was I banned?" It's not about thinking the same, its about accepting a level of standard that are stated (Foundation) and generally accepted board practices (Cultural). Your opinions, no matter how terrible they are, are always welcome unless they go against Foundation rules (Posting Porn) or cultural rules (Playthrough with Gets). Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they are rulebreakers, likewise; just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they are biased against you.

Also >bias towards the majority is bias.
Please see Generally Acceptable Board Practices.

I'm not in disagreement or agreement with you about moderation; I only state the trends and how they are interpreted. You are getting upset at me because I provide you an image of what the staff is most likely to do. Your anger is at them, not me mate. I am providing you with honesty without care to your individual pride, and I am giving you the opportunity to see as I do; yet you wish to argue rather than learn.

4chan staff are neither good or bad, however they are human just like the rest of us. Going back to my farm allegory, 4chan is an orchid that needs its four parts in balance in its field. Sun (Staff) Water(Freedom) Shit(4chan attitude/culture) and Love (People who actually care or lurk the board for a long time).

You cannot have one over the other, or you risk the death of the board. To celebrate that means you don't live in the board. To recommend its death is to be from another board or site altogether.

Try to find your zen in your garden and understand all the parties at play, don't see certain parts as "Good" or "Bad" but rather individuals playing their roles to keep a garden of memes healthy and growing.

>>32636381
>Your smug parroting doesn't work here since it actually does add to the conversation in acknowledging I'm aware you're being deceitful.
Yet you do the same shit. You demand me not insulting while doing so yourself.

>No nudity is SFW
That's literally my point. Thanks for agreeing.

>You're the one wanting it to mean strictly no nudity
But,at least when applied to sex, it is what it means, as you have said yourself.

>not showing underdressed girls or sexually provocative material
Define "underdressed", define "sexually provocative". A lingerie catalog has both and is not considered NSFW. You didn't define the limit.

>The worst thing you could see that isn't related to fashion or perfume advertising would probably be mention of a gentleman's club, which doesn't show anything.
You mean no nudity?

>I read it just fine.
Quote when I said non nudity content is NSFW.

>You'd be idiotic to use it at a place you can be seen, e.g. work. So it's NSFW.
If you knew how to read you'd have read the multiple times I said what NSFW is and that isn't it.

>>32636405
>Of course individual thought is allowed in the sea of culture
You're saying its not and shouldn't be.

> but acting directly against it is foolish
So its wrong?

Fucking decide before saying I am the one here to just argue.

>It's not about thinking the same, its about accepting a level of standard that are stated (Foundation) and generally accepted board practices (Cultural). Your opinions, no matter how terrible they are, are always welcome unless they go against Foundation rules (Posting Porn) or cultural rules (Playthrough with Gets).
My opinion didn't go against any of that.

>Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they are rulebreakers, likewise; just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they are biased against you.
Literally what I'm saying.

>Please see Generally Acceptable Board Practices.
You do know the concept of bias exist outside and predates 4chan don't you?

>I'm not in disagreement or agreement with you about moderation
You are in disagreement. Otherwise you wouldn't be arguing with me.

The rest of your post is hippie bullshit that makes me regret taking a part of it seriously. I wont reply to you anymore if you don't start to make a point.

>>32636599
>Yet you do the same shit. You demand me not insulting while doing so yourself.
Calling me stupid or an idiot or a retard doesn't change anything because I already know you disagree with what I say and think it's nonsensical -- you become redundant. Calling you full of shit is new and specific to your recent posts because your attempt to define terms is fragile and deceitful.

>That's literally my point. Thanks for agreeing.
I'm sure if a spider met an octopus they'd rejoice over how much they have in common what with them having 8 legs.

>But,at least when applied to sex, it is what it means, as you have said yourself.
It is what it means all the time, safe for work.

>Define "underdressed", define "sexually provocative". A lingerie catalog has both and is not considered NSFW. You didn't define the limit.
Says whom? A guy looking at a lingerie catalog at work can definitely get into trouble. The limit would be 1 layer of clothing past undergarments, with no ahegao, no outlining of private body parts, no perspectives positioned through the legs or butt, and no bed shots. It would be in the mods' hands to decide over bikini pics or beach pics, on a case by case basis if necessary.

>You mean no nudity?
No lewdness at all. Those gentleman's club pics at worst show just woman's face staring or a shot of high heels.

>Quote when I said non nudity content is NSFW.
>If you knew how to read you'd have read the multiple times I said what NSFW is and that isn't it.
Your definition is unreliable because you clearly think SFW is defined as no nudity when I've already proved it extends beyond that.

>>32636783
>Calling me stupid or an idiot or a retard doesn't change anything because I already know you disagree with what I say and think it's nonsensical -- you become redundant. Calling you full of shit is new and specific to your recent posts because your attempt to define terms is fragile and deceitful.
>Only I can insult you, not me

>I'm sure if a spider met an octopus they'd rejoice over how much they have in common what with them having 8 legs.
pointless analogy.

>It is what it means all the time, safe for work.
Literally what I'm saying.

>Says whom? A guy looking at a lingerie catalog at work can definitely get into trouble.
Depends on the workspace. For example, the people making the catalogs wont get into much trouble for seeing the product. Moot remark.

>The limit would be 1 layer of clothing past undergarments, with no ahegao, no outlining of private body parts, no perspectives positioned through the legs or butt, and no bed shots.
At least you're trying. Now you have to convince the rest of /vp/ and the rest of the Internet of your definition. Although there's the issue of bikini pics to which you claim...

>It would be in the mods' hands to decide over bikini pics or beach pics, on a case by case basis if necessary.
So, not a limit here? You have to define something anon.

>Those gentleman's club pics at worst show just woman's face staring or a shot of high heels.
Which are lewd and outright sexual for some people. not to mention heels can be worn without socks which violates your personal definition of SFW.

>Your definition is unreliable because you clearly think SFW is defined as no nudity
Its how the entire internet, including /vp/, defines it. Its not "my" definition at all.

>when I've already proved it extends beyond that.
You only mentioned gore which is nsfw for entirely different and unrelated reasons. If nothing else, you're the one that has to prove no-nudity to be nsfw after saying no nudity is nsfw. Good luck with that.

File: Shepe.png (64KB, 405x484px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 405x484px

>>32636630
>getting banned on /vp/ for posting images of Pokemon. Maybe on other boards, but not here mate. Unless you have specific evidence that it is specifically avatarfagging which if you do I know who you are and where you come from then I suggest we should just go back to enjoying metaposting on /vp/ the Pokemon board where images of Pokemon are allowed and not suspicious whatsoever.
>>32636623
I think you are here just to vent and not really discuss. That's okay. I don't agree with a large part of your opinions, but that's okay too.

>>32636829
>>Only I can insult you, not me
Weren't you the one saying it wasn't an issue so long as it's besides other points?

>Depends on the workspace. For example, the people making the catalogs wont get into much trouble for seeing the product. Moot remark.
Not moot at all because you might as well say anything can be SFW given the porn industry has a workspace necessarily involving nudity.

>At least you're trying. Now you have to convince the rest of /vp/ and the rest of the Internet of your definition. Although there's the issue of bikini pics to which you claim...
I'm glad we see eye to eye.

>So, not a limit here? You have to define something anon.
I did. Beach pics call for underdressing which is why mods can decide if they're harmless or some intentional exploitation and be more relaxed if they're clearly the former.

>Which are lewd and outright sexual for some people. not to mention heels can be worn without socks which violates your personal definition of SFW.
The fact that you had to tighten the scope to "some people" and that we're talking about the newspapers means it's watered down enough to be safe for the general public.

>Its how the entire internet, including /vp/, defines it. Its not "my" definition at all.
From Wikipedia:
>Not suitable/safe for work or NSFW is an Internet slang or shorthand tag used in e-mail, videos, and on interactive discussion areas (such as Internet forums, blogs, or community websites) to mark URLs or hyperlinks which contain nudity, intense sexuality, profanity or disturbing content, which the viewer may not wish to be seen accessing in a public or formal setting such as in a workplace or school.
From Urban Dictionary:
>Not Safe For Work. Used to describe Internet content generally inappropriate for the typical workplace, i.e., would not be acceptable in the presence of your boss and colleagues (as opposed to SFW, Safe For Work).
Not your definition my ass.

>>32636939
>Weren't you the one saying it wasn't an issue so long as it's besides other points?
To me it isn't. But you claim it shouldn't happen yet do so. The mere fact that you're insulting isn't the problem is the fact that you're doing so while saying no one should do it.

>Not moot at all because you might as well say anything can be SFW given the porn industry has a workspace necessarily involving nudity.
Yeah, its almost what its actually safe to see at work varies from place to place so the concept of sfw on the internet isn't necesarilly correlated to what's actually safe to watch at work. We don't work on the same areas but we have to have a clear limit for all of us and we do.Thanks for proving me right.

>I did. Beach pics call for underdressing which is why mods can decide if they're harmless or some intentional exploitation and be more relaxed if they're clearly the former.
"what mods say" is subjective and can vary. But lets assume you're right for the sake of the conclusions below.

>The fact that you had to tighten the scope to "some people" and that we're talking about the newspapers means it's watered down enough to be safe for the general public.
I didn't claim those are nsfw though. I'm claiming they should be going by YOUR definition.

>wikipedia
>urban dctionary
those two sources are known to be wrong in many cases, specially UD.

regardless, the very fact that the board is considered SFW, people do agree on what it means and (mostly) post accordingly, which matches "my" definition and doesn't match your definition, as proven by the fact we're arguing and you're contesting the idea people here have of SFW means its clearly not "my" definition. It'd be if I tried to twist what is considered SFW which I don't and is the point of your argument.

>>32636939
>>32637001

This has been going for too long, and you aren't really making a point at all and even outright saying Im right. So for a few conclusions.

-If you're going to claim insults are a waste of time, don't insult on the very same discussion.
-You have a personal definition of SFW, which is not the one hte majority has proven by the fact you're contesting it. The fact that you, after a but of a struggle, managed to define some limits is good....but we're not really arguing what should and shouldnt be SFW, just whether /vp/ is SFW and you literally mentioned no nudity is and no nudity is what you have(except a few times where nudity IS posted but its deleted because that's the only thing mods care about).

>>32637052
>posting anthro in general should be a permabannable offense.

Aren't all Pokemon anthropomorphic by definition? They all carry human-like qualities to them, even if they're not bipedal.

File: 423-40923-49243.gif (656KB, 500x600px) Image search: [Google]

656KB, 500x600px

>>32637036
Cough.
>>32632580
>>32632605
>>32632654
>>32635139
>>32635691
>>32635777
>>32635941
>>32636405
>>32636881
Are me. 4/9 of the images are of a single Pokemon, I must say that isn't specific proof, also posting things made by porn artists that isn't porn isn't an issue. If that was the case, most OC images wouldn't be issued. Like I said, provide definitive proof that I am avatarfagging with the Sylveon images which if you do, I know exactly why and how you think that then can I suggest to going back to metaposting on /vp/?

>>32637001
>To me it isn't. But you claim it shouldn't happen yet do so. The mere fact that you're insulting isn't the problem is the fact that you're doing so while saying no one should do it.
I explained why you doing it was a waste of time already while what I said was woven into my argument. Getting upset over being called 'full of shit' because it perhaps has a swear word in it or equates you to excrement isn't all you can get out of it since you might as well reword it to say 'you're being dishonest'. Calling someone an idiot, stupid, retard, etc in succession repeats the same song and dance without being able to parse anything new from it.

>Yeah, its almost what its actually safe to see at work varies from place to place so the concept of sfw on the internet isn't necesarilly correlated to what's actually safe to watch at work. We don't work on the same areas but we have to have a clear limit for all of us and we do.Thanks for proving me right.
No no no, the honor's all mine, thanks for proving me right, since it has to be literally safe for that work.

>I didn't claim those are nsfw though. I'm claiming they should be going by YOUR definition.
They're not, especially since I gave a provision that undergarments can be permitted granted the mods deem them harmless, i.e. permitting innocuous lingerie marketing.

>those two sources are known to be wrong in many cases, specially UD.
Yeah so then again you're full of shit in your hyperbolic insistence that the entire internet was on your side.

>>32637009
You put up such a huge fight just to allow lewd shit. Makes one question your intentions. We have NSFW boards that permit that shit.

File: 1387094083841.jpg (613KB, 562x750px) Image search: [Google]

613KB, 562x750px

>>32637140
>>32637151
This won't nuke the thread you know. You are only getting yourself banned here.

Did someone pay money for this comic? I can't imagine buying something that looks like this, because the artstyle is atrocious.

You know what? I don't care about any of this. I just wish they'd ban people who use multiple sets of quotation marks around a word or phrase. What the hell is the point of that? One set provides the same amount of emphasis.

>>32637238
its a /pol/ meme

>>32637252
Is it? Well that explains why it's so goddamn stupid.

>>32630902
I'm telling ya nigger, we need to become a red board, half of the posts here are porn and lewd fanfics anyways.

File: 1453919821016.jpg (71KB, 445x333px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 445x333px

>>32637388
Neck yourself. We stay blue and there's nothing fags like you can do about it.

>>32637388
>I'm a newfag

It was red before, and it was nothing but detrimental to the board as a whole.

>>32634015
>Manga goes to /a/ as well as anime.
>Merch goes to /toy/
not when it's pokemon related, the whole point of this board is to keep EVERYTHING pokemon out of other boards. all game related threads could be posted on /v/, but they shouldn't

>>32631119
>actually enjoying faggot trash
I hope you enjoy your one way ticket to hell after you die.

To arms fellow metaposters!
We are being raided by /pol/
Smash those report, sage and hide buttons!

>>32639239
stop avatarfagging, thats against the rules

File: Jolteon (69).jpg (35KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 600x600px

>>32639247
If you are the same fellow from before, then weren't you banned earlier for being the same IP as the Tailsposter before? Don't tell me that you resort to mobile posting to get around bans!

Also to keep faggotry aside during a raid I have done so and replaced it with another doggo.

>>32632928
>>32632937
>Best way to solve problem of /vp/ is to delete it. Doesn't realize the hell they are asking for.
Do you even study 4chan history anon? Doing somthing that stupid would actually defeat the purpose of /vp/'s existence. Do you realize the crap storm each new pokemon generation would bring to each of those boards each time they would be announced? How would you like it for each time a new gen is announced, all of those boards were unuseable? Leave and never return.

>>32640131

>Do you realize the crap storm each new pokemon generation would bring to each of those boards each time they would be announced?

Pokemon TCG and the ashnime get their own contained generals here. Why can't they have their own generals in /a/ and /tg/? Same for the porn. There's MULTIPLE porn boards on this site for furfags and degenerates to post their shit.

You're also forgetting /vg/ was created after /vp/. Pokemon generals could go there instead of being spammed everywhere on /v/. Or they could allow one board at on /v/ for Pokemon like other boards do with popular content.

95% of the time there's no actual discussion on this board anyway.

>>32640205
>Acts like a troll by not reading main point of previous post.
It doesn't matter how you split it up anon. Any board with any related material would be swamped. /vp/'s existence is a correct one. Better for one board to be swamped then 5.

File: IMG_4096.jpg (136KB, 1125x1854px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 1125x1854px

>>32630902
This spot is very important

>>32632654
>As per youtubers, I have no personal opinion one way or another, it is something that is beyond me.
It's people that hate a specific e-celeb flooding the board with constant threads about how much of a faggot he is. That shit was not tolerated back when it was that Tamashii bitch, and it shouldn't be tolerated now.

>>32630902
I feel like the only reason /vp/ exists at this point is because its existence warrants it. It was needed at the time, and now it exists because it's become too iconic to just get deleted.

I'd say that RP threads should be banished to /trash/, but it's not really a suitable environment for otherwise SFW content. Quest threads should maybe be banished to /qst/ but even that's debatable since it's taking away higher quality discussion from a containment board that depends on its userbase to generate content between major official releases.

>>32637388
This shouldn't happen. Partially because /vp/ thrives on being a (generally) SFW board, partially because /trash/ exists now if you want to post furry porn. And if you want to post not-furry porn, /h/ and /e/ have always been there for you.

>>32640815
This shit should be covered under GR3 but it technically isn't. This is the Pokemon board, not the "shit on Pokemon youtubers who do things you don't like" board.

It's a very /v/ problem for people to start talking about tertiary topics and trying to pass it off as on-topic discussion because they want validation and it's "technically" on topic.

Threads like "what content creators do you guys watch/follow" are okay because they're more broad and actually provide room for discussion beyond a binary opinion on a specific person.

/vp/ just needs to be purged in all honestly, and then just be temporary postable during announcements of mainline games and open until 3 months after their release, then closed again until the next mainline games.

All disucssion between those times can go in /trash/, because this is basically a sfw /trash/ anywho.

>>32640864
>Threads like "what content creators do you guys watch/follow" are okay

I disagree, I'd like to see those banned. They're always the same thread. What people watch doesn't change in the four hours between redundant threads, and they're tangentially Pokémon-related at best. I really don't see what they add to the board. I'd maybe allow one YouTube/Streaming General, and treat anything beyond that as spam.

>>32640963
Fair enough. I don't participate in them so I'm not quite sure how high quality the discussion is, but I figured it's at least a better environment than threads dedicated to shitting on a single person.

And I considered just saying to ban tertiary threads like that but they do need somewhere to go to prevent leakage.

>>32640910
Deleting /vp/ would mean posting on /a/, /e/, /h/, /d/, /v/, and /vr/ and perhaps even /vg/ for obvious reasons.

>>32640963
Just make a /shit/ board for all E-celeb discussion.

>>32641081
Strongly agree, but I think the chances are basically zero. Best we can hope for is a General thread for "what Youtubers do you like" discussion and deletion of "let's make fun of this specific Youtuber for the third time today" threads.

>>32641013
That's why I said that all discussions when /vp/ isn't open go to /trash/

>>32641163
But why /trash/ when only a minority is a Poképhile?

>>32641171
same reason why everything else is in trash. Pokemon can't have a good discussion anywhere for the amount of bait and trolls it attracts. We can barely discuss it on its natural board.

>>32641203
>everything else
Only furfags and bronies go there.

File: 1495993750855.png (26KB, 664x495px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 664x495px

>>32641171

>>32641225
And Loud House and Hunger Games and ERPfags and other shitty threads. Also you're implying that at least half of /vp/ aren't furfags.

File: 1383426251816.jpg (49KB, 504x644px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 504x644px

Well this is curious, I wonder if that person stopped by and made an example of the sinking trend theory.

>>32640840
It exists as a contaiment board and does a great job anon. If you are looking for boards to delete, find another as if this containment fails and you delete /vp/, then you will find the very good reason why it should exist.