Board 8 > Belle Delphine topics moderated as censor bypassing

(+) Yeah! (+)

XIII_rocks posted...

Offense was explained

Nope. It never explained what I censor bypassed nor explained what was considered a porn site in said censor bypassing. You are just being purposely obtuse to defend your homies.

Refusal to admit you are wrong when you are wrong is probably a very good moderator trait.

---

Corrik, this is really sad. You need to stop.

---

HanOfTheNekos posted...

Corrik, this is really sad. You need to stop.

i mean, you could say the same to xic.

takes two to tango.

---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

i mean, you could say the same to xic.

takes two to tango.

No. I WILL say the same to you. I WILL say the same to Wang.

You're all looking for a debate to be had when XIII has been incredibly clear. It's the most unintelligent case of shooting the messenger I have seen on this board in a long time. And you are in the thick of it, Lasa!

---

HanOfTheNekos posted...

You're all looking for a debate to be had when XIII has been incredibly clear. It's the most unintelligent case of shooting the messenger I have seen on this board in a long time. And you are in the thick of it, Lasa!

again, it always annoys me when people approach things in a "lawful neutral" way. i always call corrik out when he does this and now that xic is doing it, i'm calling him out.

yes, on a technical level the moderation was fair, but the rule corrik broke is fucking dumb so why spend hundreds of posts defending the moderation? xic could have used this topic to just say "uh yeah, it's kinda bullshit that this rule exists and it really needs to be changed." would have been a cool opportunity for him to show that even though he's a mod now, he doesn't necessarily always side with the admins. instead, he keeps hammering the point home that technically, the moderation was "completely fair." that's lame.

---

I mean I think we're at an impasse where I say "the mod told you what you did wrong and you didn't read it" and Corrik says "NO THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN" so nothing else needs to be said
---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

xic could have used this topic to just say "uh yeah, it's kinda bullshit that this rule exists and it really needs to be changed."

XIII isn't arguing that the rule should exist. He is merely explaining it. Corrik has already admitted to missing the part where the moderation was explained to him.

It's not XIII's job to be a crusader against 'unfair' rules, and it's inane for you to be gunning for him because he's not.

---

HanOfTheNekos posted...

It's not XIII's job to be a crusader against 'unfair' rules, and it's inane for you to be gunning for him because he's not.

this is a rather obtuse and unreasonable response to my post. when the fuck did i say that it's xic's "job" to criticize unfair rules or that he's a "crusader"? all i said is that it would have been cool for him to use this topic to speak out against a bullshit rule and that i'm disappointed that he's not doing this at all, preferring to spend hunderds of posts telling corrik how "completely fair" his moderation was.

---

HanOfTheNekos posted...

No. I WILL say the same to you. I WILL say the same to Wang.

You're all looking for a debate to be had when XIII has been incredibly clear. It's the most unintelligent case of shooting the messenger I have seen on this board in a long time. And you are in the thick of it, Lasa!

He is clear what the company line is. Doesn't mean the company line is correct and the spokesperson ain't spewing some bullshit to justify it.

I didn't see you all saying Sarah Huckabee Sanders or whatever was just a messenger and she was being clear what Trump's stances were, and we shouldn't shoot the messenger. Lol.

He is absolutely wrong. If they had been clear and not mistakenly grouped the moderation, it would have been solved then. After they explained it, they continued to mod old posts continually until they could warn me. It's case closed. He can say all day you should have been able to piece it together, but nobody should have to piece together their moderations that were mistakenly even labeled to figure out their intent. End of story. Moderator could have been clear. They weren't. Third moderation says the first specifically mentioned it. The first didn't.

Very poorly done and at the very least I demand an at least 15 word sincere apology for the troubles I had to not be able to cry about walmarts bullshit xbox series x order system last night while I was drunk.

I think that's the least I should be entitled to in reparations!

---

Fair, next, etc.

Also the rule is not bullshit.

It is not in GFAQs interest to allow such content.

As I said prior, we are a 13+ website, not an 18+ website

Mr Lasastryke posted...

yes, on a technical level the moderation was fair, but the rule corrik broke is fucking dumb so why spend hundreds of posts defending the moderation? xic could have used this topic to just say "uh yeah, it's kinda bullshit that this rule exists and it really needs to be changed." would have been a cool opportunity for him to show that even though he's a mod now, he doesn't necessarily always side with the admins. instead, he keeps hammering on the point that technically, the moderation was "completely fair." that's lame.

Yeah I've only said about a dozen times there should be an auto-flag on the word at least?

I'm not going to pretend to care about whether a word should be allowed because honestly as a regular user I don't really care? It makes no difference to me.

If you are going to make this about "be disingenuous about the extent to which you care about posting porn site names" vs "be forever castigated as a blind mod homer" then I choose the latter. I'm not going to manufacture a position just to satisfy you. We aren't talking about police brutality here.
---

Leafeon13N posted...

Fair, next, etc.

Also the rule is not bullshit.

It is not in GFAQs interest to allow such content.

As I said prior, we are a 13+ website, not an 18+ website

It's not a porn site and all porn content you need to sign up for site and traverse a pay wall for.

Grow up if someone mentioning something that makes you three steps from a titty gives you an aneurysm.

---

Leafeon13N posted...

Also the rule is not bullshit.

It is not in GFAQs interest to allow such content.

As I said prior, we are a 13+ website, not an 18+ website

ok so why are twitter and youtube and reddit and etc. allowed

---

There is literally highly suggestive content advertised on the front page(images that are beyond what is allowed on gfaqs).

Mr Lasastryke posted...

ok so why are twitter and youtube and reddit and etc. allowed

Because the content to porn ratio is lower and you are unlikely to find porn just clicking around.

Also if you post a link or direct to porn on those sites you will be modded harshly here.

my friends have an account on that site for their pet hamster

that being said, it's definitely 80% porn site so yeah. the board has rules. I certainly don't agree with them all but I try to not throw tantrums also.

---

Corrik7 posted...

Grow up if someone mentioning something that makes you three steps from a titty gives you an aneurysm.

That is literally the point. Not everyone on GFAQs is grown up.

Like, I'm a 30 year old dude, if I had total autonomy I'd allow all of the names of these sites because to me personally I don't care about porn names being posted

Does that mean I think the rule is "dumb"? ...Not...really? Because of what red said. I don't have like a legal or corporate responsibility or anything. I understand why it's in place. Doesn't mean I want it, nor does it mean I'm vehemently against it
---

You're all terrible

I blame pun for getting jimmies rustled to begin with

But everyone just call it a day

---

XIII_rocks posted...

Like, I'm a 30 year old dude, if I had total autonomy I'd allow all of the names of these sites because to me personally I don't care about porn names being posted

Does that mean I think the rule is "dumb"? ...Not...really? Because of what red said. I don't have like a legal or corporate responsibility or anything. I understand why it's in place. Doesn't mean I want it, nor does it mean I'm vehemently against it

Except if this was true they would have them filtered like swear words or autoflagged. I don't buy the its for the kids angle at all. Because if it were, the popular "porn sites" would not be able to be said.

---

Fastbreak posted...

You're all terrible

I blame pun for getting jimmies rustled to begin with

But everyone just call it a day

It's not his fault. I insulted gamestop once. I brought his wrath upon myself!

---

Can we go back to talk about boobs

---

Nanis23 posted...

Can we go back to talk about boobs

We are. Red and XIII are the boobs.

Hahaha.

---

I saw them, they sure are good boobs

---

I am excited for you, poka!

---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

this is a rather obtuse and unreasonable response to my post. when the fuck did i say that it's xic's "job" to criticize unfair rules or that he's a "crusader"?

"all i said is that it would have been cool for him to use this topic to speak out against a bullshit rule and that i'm disappointed that he's not doing this at all"


---

Not to mention, as he has said, he has said he disagrees.

You're trying to continue an argument that doesn't really exist because you like to argue.

---

HanOfTheNekos posted...

"all i said is that it would have been cool for him to use this topic to speak out against a bullshit rule and that i'm disappointed that he's not doing this at all"

yes, that's what i said. where in that line are the words "job" and "crusader"?

HanOfTheNekos posted...

Not to mention, as he has said, he has said he disagrees.

eventually, yes. and i do think that's commendable.

would have been better if he'd said this from the outset instead of just saying "the moderation was completely fair!" over and over again, though.

---

The moderation in the way it was explained by corrik and the back and forth with the mod team *was* fair. Its something that totally could have been given a pass or turned the other cheek on though and no one would have blinked an eye.

Corrik is now upset that it seems to only be enforced on him.

XIII I thought has been pretty cool through all this and just saying how things are and trying to shed what light he can.

Instigating to instigate on this of all things is pretty pathetic


---

Fastbreak posted...

Corrik is now upset that it seems to only be enforced on him.

Sorta. I am pointing out the first moderation which was wrongly moderated as censor bypassing didn't explain well enough specifically what I did wrong so I could avoid it in the future. That when the second one did, I adhered to it. But then they went and continually moderated older messages than the 2nd moderation to put me on warn!

I also am pointing out that no one could have known that was a moderation based on what you normally see around the website and the TOS.

---

Right, I get that

But also get over it now because you made your point and repeating it doesn't get you anywhere else

---

Fastbreak posted...

Corrik is now upset that it seems to only be enforced on him.

the SEP post mentioning the site that corrik was referring to got deleted, actually. good that the mods do seem to be enforcing the rule consistently, even if i disagree with the rule.

funny how a wang post mentioning a literal porn site in this topic still remains up, though >_>; edit: actually, TWO wang posts mentioning a literal porn site.

---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

the SEP post mentioning the site that corrik was referring to got deleted, actually. good that the mods do seem to be enforcing the rule consistently, even if i disagree with the rule.

funny how a wang post mentioning a literal porn site in this topic still remains up, though >_>;

There is multiple posts in this topic that should be moderated that were done purposely infront of a moderator to troll and were not touched. Then they wonder why people think it is okay when they see someone doing something supposedly against the TOS literally in a topic with a moderator.

Fastbreak posted...

Right, I get that

But also get over it now because you made your point and repeating it doesn't get you anywhere else

C'mon, bruh. All they gotta do is kneel before Zod, and I will relent. I am sitting alone on Thanksgiving and have literally nothing much better to do anyways.

---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

the SEP post mentioning the site that corrik was referring to got deleted, actually. good that the mods do seem to be enforcing the rule consistently, even if i disagree with the rule.

funny how a wang post mentioning a literal porn site in this topic still remains up, though >_>; edit: actually, TWO wang posts mentioning a literal porn site.

Dawg, they were just deleting the evidence of why I woulda have felt it was okay to post. It wasn't done in fairness of the rule!

---

Corrik7 posted...

There is multiple posts in this topic that should be moderated that were done purposely infront of a moderator to troll and were not touched. Then they wonder why people think it is okay when they see someone doing something supposedly against the TOS literally in a topic with a moderator.

C'mon, bruh. All they gotta do is kneel before Zod, and I will relent. I am sitting alone on Thanksgiving and have literally nothing much better to do anyways.

Happy turkey day buddy

---

Fastbreak posted...

Happy turkey day buddy

<3


---

Corrik7 posted...

Like, I don't even know what is moddable as that?

Is Patreon? Is Backpages? Is Craigslist Activity Partners? Is Ashley Madison? Like, what falls under this?

I don't even know where that line falls.

I cant remember who said it, but theres a quote from some Supreme Court judge about determining obscenity thats like I know it when I see it I feel like you must be intentionally obtuse if you dont see the difference between OF and Patreon.

Patreon may have sexual content, but its not the overwhelming majority of what people use the site for. The top creators on Patreon are podcasts and YouTubers, the top creators on OF are scantily clad or naked women.
---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

would have been better if he'd said this from the outset instead of just saying "the moderation was completely fair!" over and over again, though.

Again, you are asking him to champion the cause of fighting against unjust rules.

He came in to explain the moderation. A question was asked and he answered it. You are asking him to do MORE because you want an excuse to get riled up.

---

To bounce off of that - yes, I am the same, taking your excuse to have an argument as an excuse to argue myself.

Anyway, I don't really have much more to say. This topic sucks and is now about trains

---

MoogleKupo141 posted...

I cant remember who said it, but theres a quote from some Supreme Court judge about determining obscenity thats like I know it when I see it I feel like you must be intentionally obtuse if you dont see the difference between OF and Patreon.

Patreon may have sexual content, but its not the overwhelming majority of what people use the site for. The top creators on Patreon are podcasts and YouTubers, the top creators on OF are scantily clad or naked women.

I don't see ******** as a porn site.

---

HanOfTheNekos posted...

To bounce off of that - yes, I am the same, taking your excuse to have an argument as an excuse to argue myself.

Anyway, I don't really have much more to say. This topic sucks and is now about trains

All aboard mother fucker



---

HanOfTheNekos posted...

You are asking him to do MORE because you want an excuse to get riled up.

could you stop baselessly accusing me of being disingenuous? it's pretty insulting.

all i said is that i'm disappointed that he's not doing more to openly fight against an unjust rule as a mod. yes, obviously that's not what he wants to do here but that doesn't mean i can't have an opinion on his posts. i'm allowed to think his posts here are disappointing, just like you're allowed to think his posts are great.

if anything, it seems like YOU'RE the one looking for a fight (which you're admitting in your next post, so...). you're being belligerent to me just because i dare to have an opinion.

---

HanOfTheNekos posted...

You are asking him to do MORE because you want an excuse to get riled up.

Mr Lasastryke posted...

all i said is that i'm disappointed that he's not doing more

---

yes. and that's genuinely how i feel. i'm not pretending to feel like this because "i want an excuse to get riled up."

---

No one said you were pretending, bro

---

sure sounds like it.

you're making it sound as if i'm thinking "hmm, what's something i could get riled up about today? oh wait, here's xic not doing much to fight against an unjust rule! that's a good one!" that's fucking ridiculous.

spoilers: i don't actually enjoy getting riled up and it's probably not good for my mental health.

---

I once got modded for a near 2 week old archived post. Mods here are a joke.

---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

sure sounds like it.

you're making it sound as if i'm thinking "hmm, what's something i could get riled up about today? oh wait, here's xic not doing much to fight against an unjust rule! that's a good one!" that's fucking ridiculous.

spoilers: i don't actually enjoy getting riled up and it's probably not good for my mental health.

If you didn't enjoy it so much, you wouldn't pursue it like you are in this topic :V

---

HanOfTheNekos posted...

If you didn't enjoy it so much, you wouldn't pursue it like you are in this topic :V

"if you didn't like being an alcoholic so much, you would stop drinking alcohol!"

hate it to break it to you but it's not that simple.

---

Did you just equate yourself posting and arguing in this topic with the mental addiction of being an alcoholic?

Happy Thanksgiving Lara, maybe take a walk

---