"""people""" will defend this rule
You are currently reading a thread in /qa/ - Question & Answer
We respect your right to privacy. You can choose not to allow some types of cookies. Your cookie preferences will apply across our website.
"""people""" will defend this rule
What did he mean by this?
>>429557
If you don't like it, go somewhere else.
We dont want to listen to you piss and moan because someone likes something you dont.
Sycophants, power abusers and other human waste will defend and cowardly hide behind that rule.
>>429557
>"""people"""
Figures. Shitters hate anything that makes it harder for them to shitpost.
Having endless meta arguments and derails is less desirable to most users than not having endless meta arguments and derails.
>>429557
I would, yes.
Any thread that amounts to "I JUST GOT BANNED FOR POSTING THIS EXACT THING, SO I'LL DO IT AGAIN AND SAY I WAS BANNED FOR IT" is not productive and since it went once, posting it again is a surefire way to go again. The rule is just clinching what would already be "against the rules" without that rule existing at all.
>mfw this thread
>>429557
>make 4chan a shithole
>make remarking on how much of a shithole 4chan is bannable
10/10
8gag, please
>>429788
>le eightgags boogeyman XD
>>429808
don't even try to pretend you're not
>>429557
Survivors are a dying breed OP
I don't usually venture outside my "home bases" on /tv/: Le Eternal Doctor Who General, Letterboxed General, and Blacked Threads. Thanks mods for making it safe for me to glance at the catalog for .05 seconds every few weeks!
>>429601
Mods made wew lad?
wew lad