anime cp is still cp

post the image in question

Nice ban evasion, by the way. I'm SO SURE they'll consider lifting the ban now.

>>100898
Archive Post:
http://archive.foolz.us/a/thread/70198760/#q70200162

http://archive.foolz.us/a/thread/70198760/#q70200162 there is the archive. I guess you could look at it as an "in jest" ban, since it can easily be thought of as an in jest post.

>>100914
I would have taken it as a joke had it not been a permaban. I'm not sure if my ISP uses a dynamic IP and using proxies is annoying.

>>100925
Oh I read it as a two day ban by mistake. A permanent ban is pretty unacceptable, what do you want to bet it's some chick who is moderating with two little monkeys swinging from her exposed breasts?

>>100925
>permabanned for that

That's fucking bullshit. It wasn't even a proper loli image, just a young anime character.

If you broke the rules, you get banned. However, if you suspect that it is just abuse of power, contact a higher up mod.

Posting on 4chan is a privilege, not a right faggot.

Deal with it.

>>100984
So....... that means you can get oermabanned without breaking the rules just because a mod disagrees with you?

Have you got onto the IRC and asked about this shit?

>>100984
What's that got to do with it? Shitty mods are allowed run rampant, while boards like /sp/ and /mu/ fucking die with off topic shitposting and actual peado dumps?

>>100993
Welcome to 4chan, faggot.

>>100993

Precisely.

>>100983
What rule?
>>101002
Well I mean this might be true if there weren't disputing measures and this thread to comment on moderation. This isn't brawl hall, stop trying to act like you've found the ultimate hardcore experience of the internet.

>>100993
It's true anywhere, but here, more unusual to the fact it's moot, a dozen mods, and a few hundred janitors against 20 million regulars.

Also, as another poster said, it is a privilege so no matter what you do, it's still m00t's site.

>>100941
>letting females be mods
should start a thread for that

anyway, agree at this being an uncalled for use of mod powers

>>101002
>Bro check out this 4chan website! It's so fucking leet, they ban people for nothing!

File: 1345091225978.jpg-(24 KB, 230x238, 1328156013087.jpg)

>>100912
Apparently you can get banned for thought crime now. OP you probably had the bad luck of arguing with the mod posting as anonymous.

>Can Mods ban who ever they want?
Yes. Read the rules.

>>101016
I have to go actually so I'll just follow up on my own post. This is a bait. Being a pedophile isn't a violation of law, he wasn't discussing something like grooming or discussing actually breaking the law. He was simply asking what was unfortunate about the condition.

Certainly you may disagree with the post but it's not a bannable offense.

>>101025
Again this is the same shitty argument from the BBS days. If posting here was such a privilege then there would be registration and a waiting list. All this "THIS IS LIKE MY HOUSE" bullshit falls apart when everyone points out that the door is open and a bum is pissing in the corner. Moot has no fucking right to expect better of us until he runs the site better. At best we'll post in the right boards and not post illegal shit but anything beyond that is not something he deserves.

We had this issue earlier this year.
Get fucked lolimod.
No one on /a/ likes you.

>>101066
Lolimod's the person who endorsed Naruto, it seems.

>>100887
Most likely you posted some pedoshit earlier and this mod banned you later by seeing the same IP address doing similar crap. And btw, there is at least one drawn image of a child having sex in that thread, and that, outside of /b/, is a bannable offense. And the bunch of misogynist imbeciles in this threads right now actually make me wonder if somehow /b/ started to leak into /q/.

Grow up, kids. And you, OP, have evade a permaban. Good luck with that.

>>101083
Go back to /soc/ you damn whale. 2D loli != 3DPD CP.

>>101083
>You got banned, you probably deserved it
>You're all probably from /b/ anyway and also you're dumb


Op, get onto the IRC already. Find out what's the hip hap. Could just be a lone mod.

posts like this
>>101098
make me wonder how is it possible that /a/ houses people worse than /r9k/?

>>101108
the future of 4chan everyone

Why hasn't this bitch femanazi landwhale of a mod been sacked yet?

No. THe idiot of OP just outright implied being a pedophile. One things saying i liek loli and other thing incondoning pedos.

> Some people are legit pedophiles unfortunately.
> unfortunately

>What's unfortunate about recognizing ultimate beauty and grace?

See this? Essentially means "What is unfortunate about being a pedophile?"

Maybe if you stopped being such a fucking weirdo, OP, people might tolerate you a bit more than you're used to.

>>101124
Yes, what's wrong with it?

It's not against the rules to be a pedophile.

>>101122
She probably has moot's cock in her mouth as we speak.

>>101132
>hey loser y u so weird for??! XDD

Where the fuck do you think you are?

>>101136
Call it an unspoken rule.

People simply don't like your kind.

In a thread yesterday I believe, a mod said, "We will not ban people for their opinions," when speaking of white supremacy on /pol/. Now, I don't agree with pedophilia in the least bit, but what was said sounds like an opinion which is not illegal to have and being banned for it goes against the aforementioned statement.

>>101122
There is no female mod. None of the mods were moot's friends before becoming mods. NO mod had been allowed to give his girlfriend mod powers.

I hope moot banned you himself, just to stick that fucking rusty spoon in your faggot heart a little deeper, OP.

>>101132
>>101124
Everybody acts like that on /a/. The only way you could take offense from that on /a/ is if you don't know anything about /a/ at all, which this bitch mod clearly doesn't.

>>101145
Yeah, you're right, my bad. We're all pedos here.

>>101147
I had to sit here for a few seconds just to be in awe at your stupidity. Where do you think you are? Some moralfag central?

>>101149
Being a pedophile isn't illegal, fucking real 3d lolis is. Learn the difference folks.

>>101158
You really need to have your "posting outside of /b/" privileges revoked.

>>101124
>What's unfortunate about being a lion?

He didn't say "I love watching children being raped". He didn't even imply any sexual connotations.

Regardless, people being banned for fucking thoughtcrimes is total bullshit. I post on a busy anonymous imageboard exactly to avoid this kind of faggotry that's rampant on actual forums.

>>101159
4chan is private property. moot and his mods can ban whoever the fuck he wants. legality has very little to do with it.

>>101158

>Uses the word moralfag seriously

AHAHAHAH, OH MY GOD.

What of entire college campuses being IP banned?

Some fucker at my very small school in Vermont ruined it for everyone as I was graduating back in 2010, but I imagine it must still suck for them - considering someone (according to the ban we all saw) posted CP.

>>101170
You're on a website made by a 15 year old who enjoyed lolicon and made jokes about it which ran for over 8 years. Having an opinion regarding someone's sexual preference does not make me from /b/.

Besides, have you seen /b/? It's full of underage idiots.

>>101180
What else do you call an uptight person who refuses to think logically and only thinks about "BUT THAT'S WRONG"?

>>101189
Liking little girls is wrong and you should feel bad. Deal with it.

LOL OMG MORALFAG WHITE NITE HURHRUHRUHRUHRUHRHRUHRUHRUHRUHRUHRUHRUHRURUH ANONYMOOS IS LEJUN

>>101189
Liking lolis when you're 15 is far less disgusting, and far more understandable, then liking them when you're 26.

You should feel bad.

>>101199
That's exactly what they said about homosexuals a couple of decades ago. It's a matter of sexuality. Do you go on /d/ to say "What you fap to is wrong"?

File: 1345093124636.png-(4 KB, 397x72, thank you based mods.png)

>>101149
Probably different mods.

I agree people who post CP should be banned, but unless OP posted CP, this is worrying shit.

Banned for the wrong opinion. On 4chan.

>>101206
>>101199
Who are you to determine what others should like or dont like, JESUS FUCKING CHRIST your power tripping kind always disgust me!

>>101206
I don't know, my definition of loli is strictly 2D. Unless you were talking about that, then you're just uptight.

>>101212
Clearly this is the place to debate the age of consent. What do you think, moot?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!??!!?!?

>>101230
What does age of consent have to do with liking something? Do you shit on monstergirl threads as well because it's wrong?

File: 1345093359034.jpg-(169 KB, 798x598, money$$.jpg)

even if you are banned by accident the mods just ignore or deny your appeal.

>>101237
>What does age of consent have to do with liking something


aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand here's why no one likes you.

Being willfully obstinate is not cute. I hope you get banned for life and you realize you've been wasting your life on 4chan and go out and get some MAD GAINZ and finally get a girlfriend and get married and have a daughter and some guy on the internet tries to fuck her.

File: 1345093509326.png-(40 KB, 324x246, 1323825903150.png)

>>101256
I think it's time you get your "posting outside of /b/" privileges revoked.

>>101264
Don't be mad you got worked, homie.

>>101256
>They disagree with me, they must be wrong!

>>101256
It's you that doesn't understand anything really.
The way pedophiles are portrayed in mass media makes regular people assume that pedophile = child rapist. You are one of them.

Oh I like this cup. I don't know why, but I have a cup fetish. I'm fapping to pictures of cups. Therefore I will brutally rape every and any cups I can find in a 500 mile radius.

>>101230
>>101237
>mfw when Argie law of consent is 13 years old.

Also, when speeaking of pedophiles, more specifically lolis, we are refering to fucking children, not teens.

And yes, ut's an unspoken rule in the term its's a moral rule: You break it, everyone hates you. PERHAPS, if you are lucky you'll have a lawful neutral mod and they'll not ban you.

>>100912
Sounds like the mod is abusing their power. You were being pretty annoying in your tone, but it's still a completely disproportionate response. An hour ban from the board is really the most that could possibly warrant, and even then it goes against established /a/ culture.

>>101256
We've got quite the case of the pot calling the kettle black here. By the way, spamming the same letter many times is not cute. Try to write like an adult.

I think it's more about the text. You're basically supporting pedophilia, I'm not surprised you were banned.

>>101256
Who cares what you feel. A permanent ban is rarely justified, much less for an annoying post. I don't want to one day see a permaban page that read "posting inane trolling garbage" (which is what he posted) and end up with my appeal being denied, just because the mod was in a foul mood.

>>101286
No, we are not referring to fucking children, we are referring to people who are attracted to children. Some go too far and fuck them, some repress it, some just fap to CP to stave it off. The end.

>>101256
Holy shit, this guy. Fucking hilarious.

>>101285
If you are attracted to little girls, there is something wrong with you. And it is MORALLY wrong to act on that.

moot and his mods can ban whoever they want for whatever reason. If you're being a cunt advocating fucking little kids--whether you post pics or not--you're probably going to get banned. Deal with it.

> White Supremacists are okay
> Pedophiles be damned

I love you people. >>101302

>>101317
Please tell me why. I really hate getting involved in these topics but please, in a logical manner tell me why liking children is wrong other than the fact that many people don't like people who do.

Remember, logically not BUT BUT IT'S WRONG.

>>101256

please go find the "normalfag" thread, read it, and take a break from 4chan so you can think about you're unwillingness to ignore people you don't like i.e. calming down

>>101317
Also, he posted a picture of winter clothed Illyasviel von Einzburn with a joking statement. Yes that's clearly advocating child rapists.

File: 1345093999416.png-(126 KB, 925x476, 1345093730158.png)

>>>/co/39839362

Did this guy seriously get banned for reporting trolling threads? Is the mods seriously this new if he takes naruto seriously?

>>101279

>replying to the wrong people
>not understanding how IDs work

File: 1345094038059.jpg-(57 KB, 330x261, whiteknight.jpg)

>>101317
Guess now it is time to prepare for the thoughtcrime era.

>>100976
It's possible that you got caught in the crossfire of the bans of lolispam that has been in every shitposters' thread in /a/ recently.

examples in this thread:
>>>/a/70210766

That being said, I note that the IP address that you're using is one associated with a block of VPNs hosted by Savvis. If this is the case, then you've pretty much violated two more rules - ban evasion, and proxies.

>>101002
Thats mods abusing their power
more over that's the type of attitude that is found on /b/

/a/ still has rules and regulations. a mod just can't ban someone for doing nothing wrong, Granted that this could work both ways, I.e naruto shit

for some reason, the system is thinking my posts are spam. awesome.

ITT Kimmo Alm

>>101369
Not enough rage spam to be him.

>>101356
The IP I was using at the time of being banned was my regular home IP.

>>101307
I was swearing. Sorry you misinterpreted
>>101317
im gonna be pedant on this one: MORALLY from for anglosaxons. To hispanic the "morally wrong" line goes some years back (albeit not many) and to other culture like the Afghans, having your own harem of little boys is a perfectly normal things to you, and they are /expected/ to do the same when they grow up.
Also the Arabs have a thing about little boys too, but ranging more on the mid to late-late teens. And it's more related to filling the need to have sex than anything else. (Because silly muslims can't touch their women)
THere's also the Ancient greeks, the suspected romans (Marcus Aurelius's (Not sure if it's the correct name) "little fishes") and the japanese homosexual adult to child/teen relationships.
Curiously all those examples were for boys, not girls.

>>100750

in this thread 3 other /a/nons posted their banned screens, me being one of them

this has to be a mistake

File: 1345094322951.gif-(990 KB, 433x344, 1335078670592.gif)

>>101339
>/a/ gets butthurt his board is shit
>tries to bring his bullshit to /co/
>gets told

Stay on /a/ faggots. I don't want to see you bringing your bullshit to other boards.

>>101339
Probably not - he's likely one of the shitposters.

I've reported probably close to 30 times today alone (and I hope saying this isn't against the rules), and haven't had any problems. That being said, I have tried my hardest to not post in threads that I've reported.

>>101376
Hey you, notice how that other guy never responded to any of our posts?

>>101347
Well I guess? I mean it's not even as if you can tell if he was joking or not. Why not just straight up ban all imagery of underage girls? No KON, no Tohou, etc. I mean it will keep this an upstanding pedophile-free community. That's ultimately what we want right? A nice website where young parents can complain about the various dangers facing their children.
>>101356
>>101374
They mean you're using a proxy now and evading a ban now. So much like all bureaucracy since your reasonable plea to correct an injustice you suffered doesn't follow the right protocol you're guilty of something else.

>>101367

>not understanding minimum wait time between posts

a-ashley is that you, please stay on /soc/

>Sigh...
Lolicon/shotacon outside of /b/ are against the rules of the freaking site.
Also, the legal status of both in most Western countries is an extremely complicated issue. Canada, for example, has forbidden it, iirc. Hell, someone has gone to jail recently there for cartoons of Lisa and Bart Simpson having sex, iirc, because the judge decided that "although they are not actually real people, they are real enough". Retarded? Yeah. But still, it's the law. "Dura lex, sed lex".
As for the legality of it in U.S., it's even more complicated, since it may be legal on some states and CP in others. And that would still depend on judges, jury, public opinion, etc.
And I'd like to see you try to explain lolicon and its difference to paedophilia to an 80 year old Evangelical or Mormon judge and a similar jury.
Anyway, these are NOT the issues here: the real issue is that you CANNOT post lolicon/shotacon outside of /b/. Like it or not, that's the rule. Once again, "dura lex, sed lex".
What could be discussed here is if what OP posted is lolicon or not, because /a/ will NOT tolerate lolicon/shotacon in general, so that's not even a question.
But OP has clearly fucked up by evading his ban and throwing shit at the mods, so that's now out of the question.
Finally, I'd love to see anyone here explain to me where did they get the idea that this ban was issued by a woman, outside the usual misogynist BS I'd expect from /b/, not /q/.

Yeah, I think that's pretty much it.

>>101400
haha holy shit is that what you tell yourself as you blow your load to it? God you're a fucking idiot. Maybe if the mods weren't all self loathing closet pedophiles who only jack off to 300 year old godesses and 2,000 year old vampires, we wouldn't have such a problem.

>>101222
Isn;t the whole point of the "anon" thing so that people can post whatever they damn well please without fear of persecution? (legalities withholding)

>>101414
Read his post, godddamnit
http://archive.foolz.us/a/thread/70198760/#q70200162

And tell me that deserved a -permanent- ban.

Loli/shota is in the grey area, moot decided he didn't want to risk it especially since advertisers don't want to risk it. End of fucking story. It's probably the same shit for guro as well.

Nice ban evade there, OP.

Anyways, I laughed at your ban. Yeah it sounds like abusing power, but you did seem like a pedo.

Not that it matters anyway. Because what you said wasn't ban worthy and so on.

This is a pointless circlejerk if I ever saw one.

>>101414
>As for the legality of it in U.S., it's even more complicated, since it may be legal on some states and CP in others.
Wrong it's legal in some and obscene in others. Obscene is no where near as severe as CP and it actually applies to pretty much all pornography that isn't considered artistic.

>>101414
PERFECT! Now, let's ban all and any form of art including anime, comics, TV shows (oh heavens, these are the worst) with any depiction of any children whatsoever! Hurray!

Read the post.

>>101426
Haha you got banned for that? Lmao you're a faggot anyways.

>>101398
Who?
The pedo? Probably cherrypicking.

>>101432
He was referring back to another post where a mod specifically said they wouldn't ban based on a white supremacist belief.

>>101445
>implying I'm OP

learn to ID.

Lolifags and Narutofags should share a board.

>>101400
So what? Masturbating to pictures isn't rape. End of story.

I don't understand how people like you think you have the right to tell people they can't perform an action that hurts no one.

>>101414
Did you even read the thread before you post? I didn't post nsfw stuff.

>>101432
That quote was actually an accident.

File: 1345095027187.jpg-(133 KB, 381x505, SCAM.jpg)

Then 4chan must get height requirement, all short men are either pedos or traps, but not all pedos are short men.

I get you OP, If I were God Tomboys would be worse than pedoshit.

>>101456
they do, it's called /a/!

>>101467
>I don't understand how people like you think you have the right to tell people they can't perform an action that hurts no one.
Don't get caught in the trap of making this a lolicon posting argument. They're trying to derail because they have no fucking defense.

>>101414
>or loli/shota pornography.
The rule forbids pornography only. Learn to read. Your understanding of the law is as poor as your understanding of 4chan's rules, too.

>>101435
It is CP in some states, though I can't really recall which right now. Regardless, you'd still get jailtime, get raped in jail (because the kind officers would make sure they didn't forget to mention to other inmates you were arrested for CP, without mentioning it was fictional), and be registered in that Sex Offender Database.
>>101439
>>101426
Once again, that is not the issue here: the issue is if lolicon/shotacon and pro-paedo things are allowed outside of /b/ or not, not on /b/ or IRL. That discussion is MUCH longer and more complex. And I also think a permaban is too much, but I'm not sure what's the criteria the mods use when it comes to dealing with not-explicitly-CP paedothings outside of /b/. Maybe that's also a question here.

>>101489
oh wow do you think she actually thought that all pictures of clothed underage anime girls were forbidden outside of /b/?

How fucking stupid can you be?

>>101506
Well, yes because he 1) didn't read before posting and 2) his understanding of the rules is very limited.

>>101504
No, YOU don't understand. You posted a very long post about how lolicon/shotacon is banned outside /b/ and shit, but you never bothered to look at why OP was banned.

>>101504
>Once again, that is not the issue here: the issue is if lolicon/shotacon and pro-paedo things are allowed outside of /b/ or not, not on /b/ or IRL. That discussion is MUCH longer and more complex. And I also think a permaban is too much, but I'm not sure what's the criteria the mods use when it comes to dealing with not-explicitly-CP paedothings outside of /b/. Maybe that's also a question here.
I can't believe this. Are you talking about the content of his post or the picture? If it's the image, then by your logic here the majority of 404 and "You have been banned" are themselves bannable offenses since they feature Yotsuba. If you're talking about the content shit then I guess people really have to watch what they say! I wonder if I'm allowed to call an anime character cute in your world?

If op, is banned for this shit, then the /cel/ section of /tv/ needs to be banned as well.

>>101506
The post explicitly said
>Lolicon/shotacon outside of /b/ are against the rules of the freaking site

Learn to read, moron.

>>101504
No, it isn't. You're lying again.

>>101581
Go fucking look at op's post.
>>100912

File: 1345096487703.jpg-(23 KB, 339x460, 0aa[1].jpg)

>>101581
Lolicon and shotacon in my mind have always referred to things that are erotic. Complex implied sexualization, at least to me. Maybe the issue with this forum is all of you trying to one up one another over trivial shit.

>>101616
Lolicon and shotacon are, respectively, nude 2d underage girls, and nude 2d underage boys. Implied has nothing to do with them.

>>101581
>fully clothed girl with barely suggestive comment

Should probably e-mail Moot OP.

>>100887
>>100912
Are they trying to start another shitstorm?

File: 1345097262673.jpg-(47 KB, 581x600, iori6.jpg)

>>101647
er I mean in my reading of the word. The usage of complex implied sexualization in etymological sense. There's nothing implied about lolicon or shotacon itself.

All the same this moderator probably should be pulled aside and have some basic concepts of this website explained to him. If that mod refuses to accept the basic and simple culture around this site then they shouldn't be a mod anymore.

I thought most of this stuff was pretty easy to pick up, but given that we have two people in this thread who think non-erotic art can be called lolicon shows me that it's not. Maybe someone could produce a series of youtubes to show to 4chan moderators or something like that, since it seems like a few of them have never used the site before coming a moderator.

>>101603
That's not pornography. Did you link the wrong post?

>>101616
Lolicon as a general term can cover discussion (which is what the ban in question involved) but lolicon pornography must be pornographic.

You are a subhuman piece of shit, that's what it is.

You deserve to be wiped off the face of the planet, let alone banned.

File: 1345097872791.png-(47 KB, 223x154, iori3.png)

>>101726
Are you really going to devolve this into some semantics fight because you can't follow replies?

You called me a moron for not understanding that a poster was using lolicon to refer to clothed art, a poster misinterpreted that and thought you were saying the OP posted lolicon (which I guess based on your loose definition of it he did), ergo their reply.

As far as lolicon as a term in "posting lolicon" meaning discussion, I don't even know what to say. The old lolicon board sure wasn't full clothed cute girl dumps and discussion, that's for sure. Turning this into some semantics argument about stuff that wasn't even posted or part of the issue at hand is pointless.

>>101736
Aren't there moderators who read this forum? Shouldn't this kind of poster be banned from it?

>>101749

No. Voicing my opinion is not a bannable offence.

Being a pedophile is.

>>101755
I don't see that in the rules.

>>101755
>being a pedophile is
No, it isn't ya durn idjit. Having opinions=/=banworthy offenses. Shitposting, however, is.

>>101755
Sounds like SA.

>>101317
>If you are attracted to little girls, there is something wrong with you. And it is MORALLY wrong to act on that.
You're full of shit, 200 years ago it was legal.

>>101763

Oi, there ain't no rules about get threads on any boards but /mlp/ but posting dubs guy still constitutes a 5 day ban

>>101769

That's a shit argument, loads of stuff was illegal/legal hundreds of years ago

Society changes

I bet you're one of those people who thinks fat chicks are beautiful

File: 1345098229855.jpg-(780 KB, 1100x1150, iori14.jpg)

>>101755
>Constructive criticism only. Shitposting, trolling, flooding, and ban evasion will not be tolerated.
>>101767
Yeah I wonder if the mod is too.

>>101774
> no rules about get threads on any boards but /mlp/ but posting dubs guy still constitutes a 5 day ban
shitposting is a bannable offense

>>101775

Alrighty then, enjoy being a degenerate scumbag.

Are you ever going to tell your wife that you're attracted to prepubescent girls?

>>101774
>That's a shit argument, loads of stuff was illegal/legal hundreds of years ago
Since life expectancy was less than 30, people had to fuck children to keep the human race alive.
Being attracted to adults is an unhealthy disease.

>>101784
marriage is for chumps

>>101782
Just report it and move on, also it's pretty obvious that 23arZQW+ is just his foil.

>>101789

Actually, in the 1800's in Britain, a man usually lived up to 45-50 if he survived past birth. Females even longer.

That's why stories like A Tale of Two Cities picture lovers as young adults, in their early 20's.

400 years ago, during Shakespeare's time it was the norm. But back then acting was considered lower than prostitution and now actors are extremely high paid celebrities, which really shows the dramatic cultural shift that the west has undergone in the past half century.

>>101802

Yes, because everyone on 4chan is a pedo and everyone who disagrees is just a samefagging immature loser, right?

>>101811
Do you know what a foil is? He means you two are opposites, basically.

>>101818
I think he's already proved he's a bigot, ergo, likely unintelligent. Not surprising that he needs the concept of a foil explained.

>>101818

Whoops

Sorry, I lack a full understanding of the english language (I'm Yuropoor)

File: 1345098886970.jpg-(335 KB, 800x1126, iori5.jpg)

>>101811
Whether he's unintentionally or intentionally giving you ammo to derail the thread isn't the point. People should report him too for enabling your off topic rhetoric.

>>101824

I'm not a bigot, I just believe that pedophilia is a harmful mental illness that, like homosexuality, is brought upon by various environmental factors especially in childhood

>>101827
No problem, even if I disagree with your opinions, it's nice to have your facts straight with semantics and stuff, you know.

>>101811
You missed the entire point, if sex child never happened the human race would have gone extinct and banning child sex just started in the last 200 years. How can you rationalize attraction towards pounds of make-up and hair dye?

>>101833

>>101784
Making decisively hurtful comments based on a (sexual) preference
>>101755
Ignoring rules that don't favor your side of the argument
>>101827
Claiming ignorance as a way of damage control

These are all things the common bigot is known to do. Perhaps similarities don't indicate a label, but I'm inclined to think otherwise.

>>101853

Child sex is like religion: it was essential at one point as a principle of humanity but is now a cancer that does nothing but hinder progress

>make-up and hair dye

I don't give a fuck about that, but I enjoy ass or tits, as most men are programmed to do, and I don't understand why you think that that is a recent development that is unnatural

>>101867

There are so many things wrong with that post, I can probably elaborate but seeing your post style you'll probably just dismiss it as "bigotry".

How's being a liberal treating you?

>>101853
Don't make fun of him for his sexuality anon, I mean he was just born that way. Doesn't mean he's any less wrong about everything else, though. Because he's just really wrong.

>>101878
>being a liberal
My political beliefs are simple. Don't tell me how to live my life, I'll do the same, and let's both keep the government out of our pockets. Simple, no? I noticed you're using ad hominem instead of attempting an argument against me, which means you're either woefully terrible at arguing, or I'm hitting a tad close to home. Pick one, or attempt to fight back.

>>101878
>Child sex is like religion: it was essential at one point as a principle of humanity but is now a cancer that does nothing but hinder progress
That makes no sense.

>I don't give a fuck about that, but I enjoy ass or tits, as most men are programmed to do, and I don't understand why you think that that is a recent development that is unnatural
Kids can have ass and tits are for breast feeding.

>>101749
So rules lawyering is perfectly fine when you agree with it, but it's devolving into some semantics fight when you don't?

Somebody claimed that something was against the rules when it wasn't, and I showed that it wasn't. The rules are not "semantics" that you can ignore at your convenience.

Discussing lolicon obviously falls under the category of lolicon. Discussing anime falls under "anime and manga". The subject at hand has nothing to do with /l/. Try to pay attention to what's going on.

>>101878
>you think that that is a recent development that is unnatural
The point is you wouldn't be able to stomach an adult woman without the smoke and mirrors.

>>101899
yeah I'll pay attention to the thread getting turned into something no one would touch with a ten foot pole because everyone is happily responding to a troll.

>>101890

You're using ad hominem as well, calling me a "bigot".

If you want an argument, please give me a central point to refute. I will attempt to do this to the best of my knowledge despite having to go to work in 10 minutes

>>101892

That's your sexuality then, I can't debate with you what you are attracted to

>>101902

Sometimes. I for one have not been molded into being mindlessly attracted into an impossible, unrealistic media figure, but I can't say the same for all.

>>101906

I AM NOT A TROLL, JUST A CONCERNED CITIZEN

Good for them. Now if only we could get rid of the Yuru Yuri threads.

Old enough to bleed, old enough to breed. Young enough for her parents to find out and press charges against you.

>>101910
>That's your sexuality then, I can't debate with you what you are attracted to
Religion is not entirely bad though, so you're contradicting yourself.

>Sometimes. I for one have not been molded into being mindlessly attracted into an impossible, unrealistic media figure, but I can't say the same for all.
So you're attracted to gray hair haired women with wrinkles?

File: 1345100436032.gif-(84 KB, 730x1198, Rules_of_the_internet.gif)

>Can Mods ban who ever they want?
>Rule 09. of pic related
>Footnote to Rule 1. of /b/ on the 4chan rules page
Yes they fucking can.

>Loli mod
>still browsing /a/
You lied too us, Moot. Honestly, even if SFW loli deserved a ban, a permanent ban is simply unacceptable. But he didn't even deserve a ban.

>>101910
I was not making an argument about you, or trying to discredit your argument at hand. I was conversing with a separate person about you. Big difference.

My "central argument" is that being a "pedophile" (I quote because many people aren't intimately familiar with the term) is not black and white, 100% wrong, all the time, every time. You seem to think it is.

>>101929
>all of 4chan is /b/
Go away /b/, no one likes you.

All this talk of "mods can ban whoever they want, so stop complaining" is a gigantic double-edged sword that normalfags are using in this thread to justify a ban on something they don't like.

However, just remember that this rule applies to you. I'm sure some of you have attempted to appeal your ban before. Others, I am sure you have come on /q/ asking for rule changes, new policies, or have debated on the future of 4chan.

The problem is, with your stupid attitude of "mods should be able to do whatever", you must also realize that you are at risk for being banned for no reason. Also, if you still have that attitude, then asking for new rules/changes to 4chan is also useless.

tl;dr you're all biting yourselves in the ass, but use an excuse to justify OP's ban because *you personally* did not like the content of the post.

>>101927

Religion is sort of not useful anymore

And for the record, not pedophile =/= attraction to grannies

I am attracted to girls in my own age zone, maybe a bit older/younger. (I am 23)

>>101936

It isn't. However, it really shouldn't be accepted on 4chan, legally if not morally. Do you notice how most pedos/homos generally grew up in fucked up circumstances? It's an environmental disorder that can possess severe negative consequences, and that's why I am against it's promotion and acceptance

>>101929
>rules of the internet
>browsing /b/
>2012

>17. Remember: The use of 4chan is a privilege, not a right. The 4chan staff reserves the right to revoke access and remove content without notice.

And also remember: Moot and the mods HATE pedophiles.

>>101936

Sorry guy, gotta go

For the record I enjoyed this thread

>>101966
see
>>101946

That's an extremely cancerous stance to hold.

>>101950
>And for the record, not pedophile =/= attraction to grannies
A women's hair turns gray in their 20's.

>Religion is sort of not useful anymore
1. charity work
2. abstinence before marriage
3. brings the community together
4. cultural heritage
Those are just some of the positives off the top of my head.

>>101979
You fucks should really stop arguing this topic, just because it never gets anywhere and is not relevant to the thread.

>>101946

His website, his rules. Deal with it. It's how the real world works.

>>101950
>it really shouldn't be accepted on 4chan
>using "homos"
>lumping in homosexuals with pedophiliacs in a negative way

I'm sorely tempted to not even dignify this with a response, but I will because I believe that allowing ignorance is as bad as spreading it.

One, homosexuality has recently gained ground as a genetic mutation, which means that heterosexuality is also of the same type. It's not unreasonable to assume that pedophilia is also in this category. Do you really think they can just throw out an ad in the paper for test subjects though? No, people like you with your relentless persecutions would never see that day.

Now on to the "acceptance" bit. This is 4chan. This site was founded on the principles of standing up for what you believe in under the mask of anonymity for the purpose of avoiding persecution. I've met people from all walks of life. Murderers, teachers, pedophiles, homosexuals, ephebephiles, garage workers, pornographic actors. We come together under the same flag so that we may speak freely, and spread our beliefs. To exclude one group would lead to fascist censorship.

I realize that by now you've left, but may I say, I enjoyed this too.

>>101966
>And also remember: Moot and the mods HATE pedophiles.
To the point where they'll permanently ban blatant joke posts that are non-graphic? It isn't like they banned a guy for detailing the time he ejaculated all over his little cousin's face for two days, they banned a guy for saying "pedos strong xD", permanently. 4chan gets thousands of these posts a day.

>>101984
>His website, his rules. Deal with it. It's how the real world works.

No. In the real world, you find problems and you fix them. You don't just lay down and deal with it.

The problem is, if this ever happened to you, guaranteed you'd either try to appeal the ban, be pissed off about it, come to /q/ to whine, etc.

You should not hold a position based on the fact that it's convenient to your interests at the time.

>>101994
Yeah, that is how the real world works. When the person in power is biased, everyone risks their wrath just by stating an opinion. The difference is, pedophiles are more often than not on the wrong side of the bias. And that is how the real world works, if you're in the minority, you will be discriminated against. Get used to it.

>>102002
To be fair, 4chan has also worked on the principle of "Bitch loud enough and things will change."

>>101994

Now if you were talking about something that is public then I would agree with you.

But the fact is that this is a private website owned by a person. It's like a home... You wouldn't go into someones home and tell them how to run things.

>>102002
So why the fuck are you even on /q/?

It's clear that you don't want any change to the site at all and feel that it's perfectly justified that mods abuse their position.

Since you're most evidently unfamiliar with the situation, here's how it is right now:

-Lolicon is part of 4chan's history
-Moot has a history of trying to do the right thing for his users. Why do you think the ban appeal feature even exists?
-Moot fired a mod earlier in the year for deleting lolicon from /a/.

Again, you only hold this opinion because it fits your current view.

>>101950
>Do you notice how most pedos/homos generally grew up in fucked up circumstances? It's an environmental disorder that can possess severe negative consequences, and that's why I am against it's promotion and acceptance
>>101987
>One, homosexuality has recently gained ground as a genetic mutation, which means that heterosexuality is also of the same type. It's not unreasonable to assume that pedophilia is also in this category.

So all your ancestors 200 years ago to the dawn of time were mentally ill/ genetically mutated. That sounds like a crock of shit to me.

>>101977
>>101946
what?

It's not a stance. It's literally a rule. Hell, it's not even a rule: every site on the planet reserves the right to ban people/revoke access for no reason at all.

You're saying "but then they can ban YOU for any reason!!!!" but the thing is:

I'm not a fucking pedophile. I'm not an autistic freak who spends all day on 4chan, thinking of ways to piss off the mods and "almost" break rules.

Thus, they have almost no reason to ever permaban me. I mean, they can if they want, but then why would I care to go on a site led by irrational people?

--

And regarding new rules/changes, I don't see how that applies to mods being able to freely act. /q/ and MOOTCHAT and other things are made as a two-way street: the users want to make the boards better and the mods want the saner portions of the users to be happy. So, it's incredibly misguided to think that
>"mods can do whatever they want!!!"
implies
>"mods won't listen to anyone!!!"

(although, to be fair, they don't have to listen to anyone on /q/, either)

I know you guys like feeling like you have power, but until you can hack your way into the mod panel, you're just a powerless user.

Deal with it.

>>102019
No, I'm not saying they're mutated, I'm using that in the sense that my science teacher taught me. There is no "baseline" in genetics, therefore, everything is a mutation. Hair color, eye color, etc. I'm saying that if homosexuals are beginning to be thought of as a genetic (type? I want to say condition, but that sounds insensitive) who's to say that pedophiles can't help themselves? Although, that, too, is insensitive. I'm saying that being a pedophile may not be a personal choice, is all.

I told you letting feminazi,social justice warrior,special snowflake liberals was a mistake.

Naruto:the CLAPPING ADVENTURE is a gateway anime of the worst kind. It's a bad series, a clusterfuck of story and characterization that isn't very well done by any aspect, but which attempts to compensate for its weaknesses by adding in excessive shipping faggotry and DARKNESS. The normal anon can see this as the shit it is, and may enjoy it, hate it or be indifferent to it, but all the while recognizing that the series itself, regardless of their opinion, is plain bad.

However, these very aspects that try to smear over the shit of its core make it a breeding ground for aspie, unsociable underageb& faggots who engage in every kind of faggotry both online and in the real world. The superpowered characters all trying their hardest to look cool, the jutsus, peculiar, colorful clothes, the whole ninja faggotry and everything about the Naruto world fuels their escapist fantasies, while the pity-party character backgrounds, emphasis on revenge, and overall preachiness of the series make it fit just right with the mary-sueish drives of your average preteen and his sense of unwarranted self-importance towards the world. Exactly the kind of shit that makes little kiddies and underageb& retards eat this shit right the fuck up.

Naruto:the CLAPPING ADVENTURE is basically THE series to attract the most hated anime fanbase known to /a/, which is why, regardless of individual opinions, it is the responsibility of every anon to troll the fuck out of this show and everyone who likes it, and ensure that no Naruto:the CLAPPING ADVENTURE threads ever encourage the newfriends to show their faces here.

>>102017
I want to see changes to the site, not to the sites administration. There's absolutely nothing unusual about the way this site is run. There's a small group with absolute power (moot) people under him (mods) and people under them (janitors) Those with power are given the right to do as they please within reason. As it stands, I've seen nothing "out of" reason. In this thread at least. The mod banning people for reporting Naruspam seems a tad excessive, though.

>>102042
Where can I see the CLAPPING ADVENTURE? Is it an OVA or a movie?

>>102024
>It's not a stance. It's literally a rule. Hell, it's not even a rule: every site on the planet reserves the right to ban people/revoke access for no reason at all.
Okay. That still doesn't make it right. I really don't care whether or not it is a rule or isn't. The fact is, Moot makes a conscious effort to make this website the best he possibly can for us, the users. It's evident that he cares about these problems. As already mentioned earlier, Moot already fired a mod for deleting loli posts on /a/, so it's clear that not only does this banning go against the principles of most users, it also goes against Moots own principles on record.

>I'm not a fucking pedophile. I'm not an autistic freak who spends all day on 4chan, thinking of ways to piss off the mods and "almost" break rules.
Which is a straw man representation of OP. OP was banned without reason and I'm sure you're aware of that. He posted nothing against the rules, and even if he was a pedophile, that isn't a correct reason to ban him. Posts like that appear all over the website on many boards but are never banned.


But clearly, the last and most important thing to note here is that we should strive to make 4chan the best place we can possibly have it, where we can allow the website to live up to its' founding ideals and the ideals of its' founder. That is to say, a place where anybody can express any opinion and get away with it. Where people can post almost anything because they should have the freedom to speak their minds.

You've already revealed your bias (which is to say, you're holding this POV because you personally don't like pedophiles) so why even bother arguing further?

the knee jerk reaction to pedophilia is crazy, often times there are threats of violence or people trying to incite murder. I don't support pedophilia, but I don't support murder and mob justice mentality either. if they can't control the knee jerk reaction for one situation, it will soon spread to others (think lynching blacks in america's past) depending on the current moral views of society. That is why we have courts, that is why we have laws, so that people don't rule by their feels which often change from time to time

>>102044
>I want to see change
Why don't you leave if you can't handle 4chan(even in todays FB lite version).You fuckers with your PC are just astonishing.Do you see yourselfs as some heroes."Hurr i reported the lolicon durr".Fucking liberals your days are over.

Naruto:the CLAPPING ADVENTURE is a gateway anime of the worst kind. It's a bad series, a clusterfuck of story and characterization that isn't very well done by any aspect, but which attempts to compensate for its weaknesses by adding in excessive shipping faggotry and DARKNESS. The normal anon can see this as the shit it is, and may enjoy it, hate it or be indifferent to it, but all the while recognizing that the series itself, regardless of their opinion, is plain bad.

However, these very aspects that try to smear over the shit of its core make it a breeding ground for aspie, unsociable underageb& faggots who engage in every kind of faggotry both online and in the real world. The superpowered characters all trying their hardest to look cool, the jutsus, peculiar, colorful clothes, the whole ninja faggotry and everything about the Naruto world fuels their escapist fantasies, while the pity-party character backgrounds, emphasis on revenge, and overall preachiness of the series make it fit just right with the mary-sueish drives of your average preteen and his sense of unwarranted self-importance towards the world. Exactly the kind of shit that makes little kiddies and underageb& retards eat this shit right the fuck up.

Naruto:the CLAPPING ADVENTURE is basically THE series to attract the most hated anime fanbase known to /a/, which is why, regardless of individual opinions, it is the responsibility of every anon to troll the fuck out of this show and everyone who likes it, and ensure that no Naruto:the CLAPPING ADVENTURE threads ever encourage the newfriends to show their faces here.

moot ## Admin
08/16/12(Thu)03:36
No.102060

moot ## Admin 08/16/12(Thu)03:36 No.102060

This was an improper ban and I lifted it.

For future reference, lolikon is banned outside of /b/, and mods can use discretion to delete/ban for things not in the rules.

See:

2. Do not post the following outside of /b/: Trolls, flames, racism, off-topic replies, uncalled for catchphrases, macro image replies, indecipherable text (example: "lol u tk him 2da bar|?"), anthropomorphic ("furry"), grotesque ("guro"), or loli/shota pornography.

17. Remember: The use of 4chan is a privilege, not a right. The 4chan staff reserves the right to revoke access and remove content without notice.

Both rules have been on the books for over 7 years.

I will have something to announce soon, but we're doing a major overhaul of bans that should lead to them being more consistent (and lenient). They can also be submitted way faster and should make both the moderators and janitors (janitors can submit ban requests for reported posts, which are currently horribly inefficient) a gajillion times more efficient.