There are too many examples of tripfags ruining everything, and people love to whine about it.
Do you think there are legitimate uses for a tripcode?
The situation in e.g. /fit/ is dubious, and many good use cases I never see in action.
>>456071
/pol/ and /r9k/ and I think maybe /int/ too used to have these weird 'Parliament' threads where everyone took a secure trip and played Model UN with each other. They even elected representatives and a grand speaker or something and voted on what issues to bring to the mods.
Not saying this is a legit usage of tripfaggotry, but just that it's out there being used in this way right now for better or worse.
>>456071
Stuff like OC creaters.
But of course, that's not a tripfag.
A tripfag is someone who uses a trip when it's unnecessary, so there are no cases of acceptable tripfags.
>>456071
>he doesn't like tripfriends
>>456156
I'll give you that a lack of accountability is an issue with the site, but it isn't an issue with the posters.
>>456156
I understand it's a quinten comic, but there's zero accountability with trips since you can just as easily drop one when convenient. Honestly, unnecessary trips should be a violation of the "no avatars or signatures" rule.
>>456186
>lets ban people for using a feature we intentionally put in
>>456071
>There are too many examples of tripfags ruining everything
They don't, though.
>>456220
What do you think the justification for banning for avatars or signatures would fall under? We allow images and text but not images and text that attach an identity, so the same should go for names where names are unneeded.
>>456309
From the feedback page
>An avatar is a repetitive image or set of images that a user persistently attaches to their posts in an effort to uniquely identify themselves. Typically avatar users will have a folder full of images of a particular animated character with different poses and facial expressions, and they will choose images from this folder as a way of emoting their posts. In effect, they are attempting to post as if they were speaking as the character. If you are persistently attaching unrelated images of a particular character to your posts in an effort to uniquely identify yourself and roleplay as a character, then you are avataring.
>This immediately lowers the level of discourse, and derails the thread to be about the avatar user instead of about the topic of discussion. This form of attention-whoring is not welcome on 4chan. If you absolutely must be uniquely identified, you can make use of the name field.
>If you absolutely must be uniquely identified, you can make use of the name field.
You can't ban people for tripfagging if it's supposed to solve avatarfagging.
>>456309
>What do you think the justification for banning for avatars or signatures would fall under?
There is no justification for it, like half the rules. This is the nature of moderated boards; inane rules accumulate over time. All this has happened before, and it will all happen again.
>>456156
Quentin was a beautiful existence and I miss that stupid faggot every day.
>>456313
I see the rule, but in the end it really doesn't give a very good reason for why avatarfagging should be bannable while using a trip shouldn't be.
>>456071
Tripfags would have no power to ruin threads if it weren't for crybaby anons who can't handle people who are different from them.
The only difference between a tripfag and an anon is that you can filter tripfags. Every time you see a tripfag you don't like, thank them for being a tripfag and not an anon, and add them to your filter list. 4chan has filters and blacklists built in to the inline extension so that you don't have to deal with seeing triggering content like tripfags.
At any rate, Questfag OPs are one perfect example of a tripfag who has every right to be one.
>>456326
using a tripcode is the only acceptable way to consistently identify yourself on 4chan.
>>456313
This is why trips are included, but does not justify the use of trips in cases such as ones in the OP. /daily/ on /mu/ is a good example of how and why to trip, Brett or punky brewster are examples of frivolous and needless trips that should banned.
>>456317
Stupid trips and stupid anons responding to trips about their trips and not the board topic lowering the level of discourse isn't a good enough reason for you?
>>456326
pretending to be a character is really obnoxious
using a character as a puppet is also really obnoxious
>>456340
>Stupid trips and stupid anons responding to trips about their trips and not the board topic lowering the level of discourse isn't a good enough reason for you?
That is preemptive moderation, and it is a bad thing.
>>456347
It's already done for signatures, avatars, trolling, and pretty much everything rules 8 and 3 cover. It would quell a lot of the stupid "anon v. trips" garbage the plagues every thread and the concern that generals turn into chatrooms with that same mentality. Don't see how this could be detrimental if you include "backseat modding" as a ban reason as well.
>>456071
The new tripfags are cancer attention whores.
>>456348
>Don't see how this could be detrimental
All moderation is detrimental because it deletes content. Moderation is at best the lesser evil.
>>456357
Sounds like you have a problem with moderation and not my purposed policy specifically. Are you one of the anons I responded to earlier?
>>456362
Everyone has a problem with moderation. Only the naive believe it is not their problem.
>>456356
You must be new here if you think there was ever a time when tripfags weren't cancer.
Or, you know, really really old, but I doubt that.
>>456418
How did you possibly say "everyone" and then in the next sentence list an example of people who don't have a problem with moderation? Are you conscious? Does cognitive dissonance happen in you?
>>456425
Pay more attention. If drinking poison kills you, not believing drinking poison will kill you does not make it not a problem to drink poison.
>>456427
so how long is it gonna take for the patient to die
>>456427
That implies that moderation is like poison which has yet to be demonstrated. You can have your banal statements about authority, but if you actively post in what is effectively a poison cloud, you're a bigger retard than anyone who puts up with 4chan's policies.
>>456435
But to summarize, banning people for "improper" use of tripcodes deletes content (an actual problem) to fix speculative problems.
>>456427
Metaphor doesn't hold. I could have an immunity to the poison, bro.
>>456446
Deleting content prevents you from seeing the content. No one is immune from that.
>>456440
Poison doesn't remove content. And that would also imply that all content is good content. I could just as easily analogize moderation as an Ipecac prescribed to a body too retarded to know what's good for its longevity.
>>456454
Good and bad are value judgements. The problem is that you are not allowed to decide what content you want to look at. Instead the decision is made by a moderator who believes she is acting in your interest but often will not be.
>>456457
Since mods are the body of the site, they have the right to determine the value of content and its impact on the site. Also, by putting up content you are also making a judgment in value as to your own post.
>>456461
Certainly it is within their rights. But that does not make it good for the users.
>>456452
And that has nothing to do with poison. Thank you for agreeing with me. Pathetic metaphor, anon. Try harder next time.
>>456457
>Good and bad are value judgements.
Yes. I agree completely.
>The problem is that you are not allowed to decide what content you want to look at. Instead the decision is made by a moderator who believes she is acting in your interest but often will not be.
Did you know that other websites exist?
>>456467
>But that does not make it good for the users
So? If I disagree with how the moderation handles moderation, I leave the site. All websites operate with this in mind and 4chan is no different.
>>456467
It is if you're a user who agrees with the mods.
This might blow your mind but did you know that you and I are having a disagreement? And we're both on 4chan? That means that not everybody on 4chan feels the same way. Given that not everybody on 4chan feels the same way, do you think it might be possible, however unlikely, that some users might be against the moderators' decisions and others might be in favor of them? Because that's the way it is! That's what happens on 4chan!
I hope that clears up any confusions or misunderstands we might have had.
>>456468
It is like poison because it is a problem.
>>456475
Not if you're immune to it.
>>456476
Disagreeing with me is like poison, I don't like it.
>>456471
>Did you know that other websites exist?
Unless the person also posted the deleted content to another website which you read, that does not help. And that alternatives to 4chan exist is hardly relevant to judging whether a policy is good or bad for 4chan.
>>456476
It is like a poison you are not immune to.
>>456488
Doesn't exist. I'm a poison type.
>>456485
That doesn't explain how moderation harms users or have that's even applicable to any website with a substantial userbase. Please do not respond to me unless it has relevancy, thank you.
>>456483
Okay. Let's work this out. Prima, Secunda, and Tertia. Alright?
Imagine Prima likes anime. Secunda hates anime, and Tertia is neutral to anime but hates it when Prima and Secunda fight. Savvy? Okay.
Now, imagine that Prima posts anime on Secunda's home board, /co/! Secunda hates anime so Secunda gets really mad at Prima. Prima argues that this is an anime website and they can place anime wherever they want. Tertia, who didn't mind the anime post, gets upset because now Prima and Secunda are fighting.
All three users are now upset.
- Prima is upset because they feel unjustly chastized for an action that they didn't feel was wrong.
- Secunda is upset because Prima is disobeying the rules and will not take responsibility for the offense.
- Tertia is upset because Prima and Secunda are fighting, and Tertia doesn't care whether or not anime gets posted but hates it when Prima and Secunda fight.
Now, you're the mod. You have several approaches you can take!
A. You could punish Prima. This makes sense because there is a rule against posting anime on /co/. This would make Prima angry, Secunda happy, and Tertia would be happy that they're not fighting anymore.
B. You could take no action. This would not upset anybody, but it wouldn't make them happy either, and all three are already upset.
C. You could punish Secunda. There is technically a global rule that says not to flam people, and Secunda responded quite rudely to Prima and could have been more polite. This would make Prima happy, upset Secunda a LOT because the rules aren't being enforced, and Tertia would be happy that the fighting is over.
D. You could punish Tertia for making the problem worse by complaining about the fighting. This would upset Tertia. Prima and Secunda wouldn't care.
As you can see, each of these approaches has different outcomes. Are you saying that B is the best course of action? Please explain why or why not.
>>456493
Users =/= content and value judgments are used by every user choosing to make a post here so those are hardly detrimental. I'd argue that heavy moderation is beneficial since the sites with the heaviest moderation have the largest and/or sought after userbases. See what.cd, demonoid, SA, reddit, youtube, facebook, etc. Do you actually have any reasoning for saying these things or do you just like to post cliches about authority every where you go?
>>456494
No, I am saying moderation always harms the users, and is a bad decision unless it's used to prevent a greater harm. You seem to agree with that.
>>456500
No no. Please answer. A, B, C, or D.
Or if you'd like, please introduce a new option, E for other. If it makes sense I'll accept that answer too!
>>456501
Where's the option for drinking the poison?
>>456502
That would be E for other.
You'll find, however, that drinking poison is ancillary and translates out to "B. Do nothing"
Do you believe that doing nothing, not influencing the situation, and leaving all three users to fight it out amongst themselves is the best approach? Please explain why, if so.
>>456127
This. I used to write disgusting stories on /co/ but with no new material there's no reason to use my old name. If I ever write new stuff I'll go right back to it though.
>>456506
Okay, Tertia. Settle down. We'll stop fighting soon enough.
>>456509
Unless they use a tripcode, right?
>>456501
>No no. Please answer. A, B, C, or D.
You cannot compel anyone to answer your posts the way you like, let's get that out of the way first.
>>456422
I was here since 2010 so I'm not old at all, but at least those tripfagging faggots stay on their containment threads and don't tripfag outside of it.
>>456511
Even if they use a tripcode, it is true. I would advise people not to use tripcodes cross-thread since there is little benefit to them.
>>456515
Whelp. It would appear that we're at an impasse. I'm sorry that simple logic puzzles are too difficult for you, Anon, but I suppose I already knew that about you.
I claim victory. Thank you for playing!
>>456509
>Content is good or bad on its own without regard to who posted it.
Wanting unnecessary tripping to be a bannable offense isn't implying the contrary. If 4chan mods had more eloquent moderation tools like something that blanks trips, that'd be great.
I use a tripcode whenever I start a thread I intend to extensively participate in.
I also use yours truly's trip to fuck with annoying fags on /r9k/
>>456494
A better solution is to not delete misplaced anime threads, but move them to /a/. Also, moderation should not be thought of as punishment.
>>456494
I ban all three for being pissbabies, and you because fuck you.
>>456524
Man if only there were something that could do that...
Too bad it's impossible.
>>456537
I'm sure there's an extension that does forced anon, but that isn't universal and all I'll get is a bunch of anon's namedropping some tripfag I can't even see. I'd really rather not start that game of whack-a-mole and would rather see needless tripping banned altogether since it violates the same spirit that avatarfagging and signing posts violates.
>>456541
Oh is that all? Then you should just stay on the boards that disable tripcodes! /s4s/, /b/, and /trash/!
>>456544
[s4s] has trips, and they don't really bother me it just seems so inconstant to not ban pointless trips when they band avatars and sigs for the same reason.
>>456550
No it doesn't. Go try. s4s can handle a single "Test" shitpost.
They have a name field but no trips. Which actually makes me sad because I have this really sexy one that I wanted to use there but it was stripped out.
>>456552
Damn, has this always been around? Could've sworn there were some popular [s4s] trips.
>>456555
Trips were definitely enabled while the upvote downvote stuff was enabled, but then I took a long break after they turned off the silly CSS, and when I came back the trips were all gone.
>>456494
>This makes sense because there is a rule against posting anime on /co/.
There isn't any sort of rule and anime is globally approved. Secunda is the one in the wrong here, because there is nothing wrong with posting anime images.
>>456559
I should have clarified. This is a hypothetical 4chan where /co/ has a rule that says that all posts should pertain to comics or cartoons. Sorry.
>>456562
Even then, anime would still be allowed because the website has a natural double standard when it comes to anime. It's allowed to be posted on every board, even if that board only permits certain types of images.
>>456566
Woah. I didn't realize that! No physical object can exceed the speed of light and Anime is always allowed on all boards are just two things that are true in every universe, huh?
>>456567
It is true for 4chan. It's how a forum works, matey. Anime was what the site was founded for, it has historical prevalence and still does. It is allowed on all boards by default. It is the natural double standard of forums. Saying it isn't allowed is like going to a runescape forum and then saying you can't talk or post anything related at all to runescape in the offtopic sub-forums. That's not how forums work.
>>456571
Thanks for teaching me this fundamental law of physics that is always true in every universe, and in every hypothetical scenario!
Would you happen to have a source for this? I'd love to read more!
>>456572
The hypothetical 4chan you used for your example is shit, retard. If you wanted to make your point, you should of used something fucking better.
>>456576
Oh, weird. See, when you replied to my post, I thought you were replying with something relevant.
>>456580
Your existence isn't relevant, you shitstain.
>>456586
Is the autocorrect on your phone acting up or did you really meant to tell me that I'm relevant? Because that's very kind of you if you did.
>>456593
I'm sorry, but I'm not a retarded cancer phone poster like you. Please do not project onto me.
>>456597
But I'm not a phone poster. You're the one projecting onto me, phone poster.
>>456598
You are the one projecting as you are the first one to claim I was the one phone posting, phone poster.
>>456605
No you are the one who is projecting as you are the first person to accuse somebody of projecting, which means that you are projecting your tendency to project, projector.
>>456607
Don't try fucking getting smart and longposty with me, projecting phone-kun.
>>456613
The reason you don't want me to get smart with you is because you can't HANDLE smart people, projecting phone posting tumblr using reddit posting fark digging gaiachantwitbooker!
>>456617
>boogiman posting
>>456619
>who are you quoting?
