is this rule an inside joke?
>>414>jokeNo, it's fucking retarded.
>>414>>489I concur, I see no reason to ban discussion of a single actress when threads about her aren't even of primary concern on /tv/. I thought perhaps moderators would like to ban sexualised discussion of minors instead, perhaps.
No, /tv/ drooled over jailbait actors and it became a real fucking problem.Still is.
>>572So the rule helped a bunch?
>>572ok but i don't get how annasophia robb is singled out as the nexus of evil.
Why are threads that genuinely discuss children's programming frequently deleted on what would appear to be the spurious notion that we're just spamming pictures of actresses we like?Also why doesn't moot ever reply to my emails :'(
>>585It dates back to when /tv/ used to have no waifu spam. ASR was the first, and moot decided to ban ASR to quell it.>>779Also, if >>>/tv/24943927 404s too soon, janitor should be banned.
>>789>It dates back to when /tv/ used to have no waifu spam. ASR was the first, and Opinion invalid. Do you even /tv/? Have you ever heard of Mileyspammer? Were you even around before the captcha? Get the fuck out and shut the fuck up.
>>816Before captcha, you are simply wrong, captcha is goodThose threads should not be deleted, they discuss actresses and tv shows.
>>837No they don't, they are places where adults fixate on children as objects, with the pretense of having an interest in them based on their acting ability, or the media they've had a part in creating.
>>837>waaaa waaaa why wont they let me share my pedophiliachildren shouldn't be posted on 4chan, period.>inb4 absurd reply about how i am supposedly advocated banning anyone that ever posts a picture of a child evergo fuck yourself, sperg.
>>789ASR was far from the first. Miley/KBell/Glau.
>>866So EVEY post needs to be deleted because of this? So you want /tv/ to cater to you? It is a TV show and shold be allowed, regardless of your personal beliefs
>>890it is not a tv showa thread about some womans feet has nothing to fucking do with her film or tv career, and thus has nothing to do with television and film
>trusting mootles with /tv/
>>918Though the rules clearly state content should pertain to actors and actresses.Just because you do not like what the content of said actors is should be deleted? Really? Where is the line?
>>918Rules state that content should pertain to television shows, films, actors and actresses ectWhere does it state that discussion is limited to discussing their filmography and acting exclusively?
>>925What was he talking about? /celeb/?moot doesn't watch tv, so I figure he rarely visits /tv/ and doesn't understand the "culture."I'm not sure that having a whole new board just for actors and actresses would be so bad, though. It would give Kaiji and company no excuse to post their bullshit on /tv/ while also giving them somewhere to congregate.
>>943When they're legal, and the undertones of sexual interest are less creepy and illegal.
>>943it's pretty clear:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCLQO4RUgJw
>>964> no excuseKaiji is a film expert. You expect him to leave? How fucking summer are you?
>>982>post some irrelevent spam youtube video as a defensereally?You are plain wrong
>>984I never said he'd have to leave and never come back. He can talk about television and movies on /tv/ if he wants, but I don't want his waifu and child starlet bullshit polluting the board.
and you wonder why the rest of 4chan thinks /tv/ is fucking off the chain retarded
moot has already conceded that the rule is outdated and possibly unjustified.https://archive.foolz.us/tv/thread/21213722/#21217637
>>1025>spams discussion with unwanted board hate, expect your opinion is relevant
>>970 <--- just don't reply to him.
>>1037>i think she was the first in the onslaught of celeb/waifu threads, so we banned her by name at the request of some users. it's an outdated rule considering the entire board fell to those types of threads.She was banned just for being at the forefront of the celeb/waifu threadsSo you realize that means that the intention was for these threads to never reach such prominence?
>>1052Over 18 actresses threads get deleted all the time, even threads discussing teenage actresses in movies which are just as relevant.I want to discuss movies, yes sometimes there will be under 18 puritan US laws, they are relevant
>>1070I have no idea what you're asking me.
>>1122i guess i wasn't really responding to you specificallybut all the people claiming that waicu/celeb threads are ok, that post that you linked and that thread in general show that moot agrees those threads are shitty
>>1143So moots opinion of one board he doesn't frequent is valid?Board culture is significant for 4chan and should be considered.As much as you don't like it it actually does pertain to /tv/
>>1143>>1070moot was doing it at the request of a vocal minority.>at the request of some usersit's the same people who think it's wrong to watch victoria justice because her -character- is in high school even though she's like 20 something. they are VERY vocal.
>>1181im on your side of the discussion, but i do think moot has the final say on his websight.
>>1143I don't see how that thread or moot justify that opinion. moot is not a /tv/ regular and a couple of people bitching are not enough. The /cel/ issue is an invented problem because /tv/ covers a broad spectrum of topics: actors/actresses, film, and television. For example, my primary concern is film, so I get annoyed when the front page is cluttered with T.V. shit (this is also why I just stopped using the front page all together).
>>1181>So moots opinion of one board he doesn't frequent is valid?It's valid in the sense that he created the website the board is part of and pays for (and has been paying for) all the servers and should have a say in what happens on those servers and what he sees on his website.I am part of the group that believe (most) of the "child" starlet and waifu threads are shit and would prefer them gone.
>>1263There is no "child" being posted, If there was I would agree with you. These "waifuists" post teenage and adult age actresses.Young actresses are a part of film, deal with it. If the discussioon turns vulgar than yes, delete.The problem is overzealous janitors
>>1263do you think their shit because they focus only on the actress and not her work or because you feel uncomfortable about the age issue? what is it you don't like about those threads?
No jailbait threads any longer.
>>1263I fucking love moot for running this websiteIv'e supported all of what hes done but he doesnt know two shits about /tv/I love moot but he doesnt know /tv/
>>1293I understand young actresses are a part of television and film, and if people want to discuss their acting abilities, then I say go right ahead.>>1295The former. I feel if you're going to make a thread about an actor or actress, it should pertain mostly to their work in the industry, not so much their personal lives or looks.
>>1314/tv/ doesn't have "jailbait" threads in the way /b/ used to have. the word "jailbait" is rare on /tv/. it's such a vulgur word. please take it elsewhere.
>>1366images of bella thorne at the beach with her friends are jailbaitface the facts m8
>>1369depends on the country, "mate."
All the rules might as well be a joke.Self-determination through personal accountability is the only real rule. Undoubtedly /tv/ turned to shit in a wave of celebrity worship but it's up to /tv/ to turn it back again not the moderation team. Unlikely it'll ever happen since most of the board thinks Glauber Rocha is a type of a coffee. There's no justice. Just us.
>>1356/tv/ shouldn't cater to YOUR views, It's not YOUR board.It's for discussion of actors and actresses, look at the rules!You won't change the board's culture, get over yourself.
>>1356so you would also object to threads about Jack Nichelson's looks?
>>1415Absolutely, unless it was a thread about how his looks suit him for certain roles.>>1414I don't see how your first point is relevant? I'm just stating my opinions, just like you.I just think there should be a better definition of "discussion."The rules also state no discussion of ASR. Do you agree with that rule, too?
>>1447Are you an autist honesty? Anyone who knows /tv/ should get that "joke"You are a minority neckbeard who can't take a joke considering your earlier post it's not surprising. Your opinion isn't /tv/s opinion dipshit.Discussion is up to the posters, god damn, seriously?
>>1519Again, I never claimed my opinion was shared by everyone else. I explicitly stated it was just my opinion.I don't think "discussion" about whose feet or nose is better should be on /tv/. Do you?
>>1550Are they actors and actresses?Does it pertain to a film they were in?Acting style?Your witch hunt is laughable.
>>>/tv/24947107can the mods delete thisbtw
>>1566>>>/IRC/
>>1576I can't into IRC.It was just bugging me, won't happen again <3
>>1566And so is the problem, rogue janitors with bias, moot will definitely see these deletions
>>1579you know there is a report button right?
>>1564I don't think there are many instances where an actor's foot or nose is pivotal to the presentation.I think all discussion about actors and actresses on /tv/ should pertain to their performances.
>>1550if all the noses belong to actresses, actors, directors, animated characters, etc., then yes it's valid discussion.if someone started a "Post the biggest celeb chins!" thread, would you object?
>>1589Reported it half an hour ago :3He's already remade it.
>>1603proving you are an autist who thinks in absolutes.. >my way or nothing at allIt's sad as fuck really, hope you get better
>>1607if it's bugging you, why not hide it?
>>1603Well too fucking bad. Content should pertain doesn't mean only discuss their performances.
>>1606>if all the noses belong to actresses, actors, directors, animated characters, etc., then yes it's valid discussion.As they stand now, I do agree that threads like that would not be against the rules, but I don't think they constitute meaningful discussion.>if someone started a "Post the biggest celeb chins!" thread, would you object?Yes.
GET RID OF /TV/ MODS OR CREATE /CEL/THIS IS GETTING RETARDED
>>1632>/cel/But we have that already.
>>1632all mods are global.
>>1644I don't think janitors are.
>>1671they aren'tbut you said get rid of /tv/ mods, which is impossible because all mods are global.
>>1671moot has said this multiple times. ALL of them are global.
>>1696 Well then they must really love /tv/./cel/ is needed, there's enough demand for it.
>>1696>>1691so much faggotrymoot and ginger are the the only global mods leftall the rest are janitors like posterparent/ paulson/mushroom
>>1724>there's enough demand for it.Oh, boy, here we go.(I'm in favor, too)
>>1732I have no reason to believe you.https://archive.foolz.us/search/text/global/capcode/admin/order/desc/
>>1791This is a /tv/ board discussion on 4chan, not as a wholeAre you trolling/stupid?
>>1824They're not board specific. Naturally they're on some boards more than others, but that's not moot's doing as of now. Are you saying confirmed janitors/mods who frequent /tv/?
>>1902janitors are board specific read the faq on janitors that moot provided in his news post douch
What are your guys' opinions on these threads?>>>/tv/24947759>>>/tv/24947724>>>/tv/24947702>>>/tv/24947787>>>/tv/24947753
>>1959how do you feel about them, anon?
>>1959One or any thread should have been allowed for discussion of Bella Thorne as she is an actress who stars in a popular television show, regardless of the janitors bias.Derogatory discussion should be illegal
>>1959that tripfag is a massive faggot and child who doesn't know when to stop and is a major problem since deleting his threads just causes him to make more and more like a fucking mushroom after the rain. he's clearly a problem but that doesn't mean every single person who enjoys actress threads are like him or have the same type of personality and disregard for the rules not only pertaining to /tv/ but also global rules (flooding, spamming, ect)
>>1944I wasn't aware he already started granting janitor privileges to applicants. If that's the case, then yeah they're board specific.>>1959Ban the tripfag; stop the spam. VJ gifs is alright. Fuck off.
>>1959i see some faggot posting the same thread 4 times, and 1 genuine thread asking for gifs from a show he likes.if you don't like the scavengerx's repeat threads, report them.
>>19594 of them were posted by a shitposter who has been banned repeatedly. In fact, whose very name has been banned. It testifies to the impotence of moderators against ban evaders.
>>2004"I wasnt aware".. So why the fuck are you commenting on shit you do not know?People like you amaze me fucking retard acts like he knows anything
>>1959Scavengejerk has been permanently banned multiple times.Any time he posts, no matter what it is, he is breaking the rules.
>>2035I assumed we were talking about prior janitors/mods. All you had to do was clarify that you were referring to the new applicants; this only happened a couple days ago. But you're right -- good job, mate, you won an argument.
>>2069mate you assumed to much because it makes an ass out of you and me when you assume..Aussies I do love you but don't fucking assume pleasecheers
I'll tell you what is a ''joke'', our current janitor. Can we get his dumb ass replaced yet?
>>2120go to bed scavengejerk
>>2040>asking for gifs from a show he likesYeah, substitute the Nick show for any other show and how many opinions would change? Obviously not too many of the people in this thread, but I'm not sure.Though (I assume) most of the gifs are from the show, the thread is very scare on discussion about the show, so the question would be whether image dumps are okay on /tv/, and I don't think they should be.
>>2182>assuming again>wanting /tv/ to be his own blogFuck off forever dude
>>2182How is a gif image dump any worse than>If you owned a movie theater, what sort of food would you serve?Repost #834923852353The thread is boring, so I don't post in it. If you find waifus boring, don't post in them.
I don't know how bans are so infrequent. Momsen, Aidz, Kaiji, Scavengejxrk, Marina, Davey, Big Beast, all of them, never post about television and film.They can't ban dodge forever, if you just keep banning them eventually they'll just drop-trip forever.
>>2182if you want only tv/film discussion and no images, try this board >>>/tele/
>>2230>they can't ban dodge foreverI watched aidz get publicly banned for like 3 hours one afternoon. His name and trip have been set to be instantly banned apparently too since he's had to change it multiple times.
I'm a mod on another site. I come here to relax, occasionally participate constructively but mostly to laugh at fatfu threads, which I think are hilarious. You don't really want the excessive moderation some folks are advocating here. It'll ruin the place worse than the shitposting. You want excessive moderation, go to that fucking anonsquak site that keeps bot-bombing 4chan. Enjoy being an aspie pedo. Yeah, a few things could be cleaned up, like too many redundant threads on the same shit. But excessive moderation here would kill the place. There are plenty of carefully moderated sites on the web already. If you really wanted a better place to yack about TV and movies you'd go there. But you can't because you're a misfit and can't adapt to a civil forum. So you're here. Enjoy the cozy bed you made for yourself.
>>2230are you new?they have and continue to modify their name and trip as requiredthink of spike as the uber example, he changes his name and trip every fucking post to avoid people's filters
>>2221It's not any worse. The crab legs threads are just as bad, though I'm sure there are tons of people who would say they're part of the board culture, which is fair enough.And not only do I refrain from posting in waifu threads, but I also report most of them.
>>2252>go to that fucking anonsquak site that keeps bot-bombing 4chan.Did you just step out of a time machine from 2009?
>>2156Oh yeah he's the only one who wants that pathetic loser fired off our board.You can shoot both Infected/Janitor and Scavenge into the sun for all i care, we'll be better for it.
>>2269> there are tons of people who would say they're part of the board culturethese cunts can go fuck off to /v/
>>2244I'm okay with images. I just have an issue with image dumps.
I don't know what's going on in /tv/ but someone is spazing out deleting every thread I go into right now. Even on topic threads. Getting weird over there.
>>2269Is there a reason you feel the need to report threads you don't like, as oppose to just ignoring them? How does it harm you in any way if people are enjoying a topic you don't like?
The main problem with /tv/ is that television and cinema is a very passive medium. It doesn't require anything from you, you can't really excel at it or feel any kind of accomplishment from it. That kind of explains the lack of camaraderie on the board. Everybody has his own little patch of escapism and everybody that belittles it attacks the very dearest thing those sad sacks of shit have. That's why Lostfags get so mental when you point out to them that their shitty show is shitty. Experiences like that can scar a person. Shape them, change them. Every regular of this board had something dear to them that's been ripped apart by somebody else, be it for good reason or for no reason at all. That experience turns people hostile and they seek retribution for the slander of their favourite fantasy world. So they seek out to destroy the fantasy worlds of others out of pure and unadulterated malice.
>>2299>I just have an issue with image dumps.>ON AN IMAGE BOARD
>>2356they are annoying when they are not on topic
>>2182yeah image dumps don't belong on an image board
>>2343Thing is you sound like a trip wanting validation, which is pants on head retarded.This is an internet forum ffs.
>>2367Nobody is image dumping cars or anything ridiculous. Unless moot clarifies, VJ is on topic. End of story.
the best threads /tv/ had were the pre-captcha star trek frame threadsjust saying
>>2383>this is an internet forumNo it isn't.
>>2394maybe you didnt notice how that vj gifs thread has been active for like half an hour while a bunch of other off topic threads got deleted
>>1959he only does that because the first thread gets deleted, it's in protest
I agree that sometimes with massive image dumps at least some of the posts could be saged to keep it from bumping. Seems like a convenient courtesy I dont recall every being extended.
>>2421As has been said before, the problem is the janitor. He deletes whatever he feels like, it isn't consistent.>Janitors ARE NOT...>Interpreters: Rules are to be enforced as written. Janitors enforce site policy only and personal motives should never influence deletion. They are objective, not subjective.Some other day VJ would be deleted, which would then lead to her being spammed on 15 threads rather than being contained.
for those of you that want /cel/, just picture it for a second and realise what kind of shithole you are asking moot to createthere will be no dicussion, it will be 150 threads spammed to brim with waifu image dumps, bearing in mind there are only about 20 celeb waifus it will be the same shit over and overand also it will be a pedo hotspot, and underage waifu threads will most likely descend into jailbait and cp threads, imagine 50 kaijis in one place.../cel/ cannot happen
>>2420>dipsit autist who doesn't comprehend anything irrelevant
>>2307I don't report threads I dislike, I report threads that break the rules, and then I hide them. I feel there's nothing wrong with that, especially considering I've been reporting threads and posts for a long time and have not been banned for abusing the system.
>>2443he's like a 5 year old
>>2477but they don't break the rules>content should pertain to actors/actresses>>2481he's actually pretty reasonable, he just doesn't want his threads deleted
>>2469I dunno, it seems pretty civil to me.http://board.wikieat.org/cel/
>>1959I fucking love it and I've been posting there for awhile
>>2469>and also it will be a pedo hotspot, and underage waifu threads will most likely descend into jailbait and cp threads, imagine 50 kaijis in one place...this is a myth, i've seen more illegal material on /sp/ than /tv/, it's even indexed on foolz
>>2477Looking at our rules, you're reporting things which aren't against the rules.Either mod says that posting actresses is not allowed or you're just wrong.
>>2493NO. Don't tell them about our club house.
>>2469>for those of you that want /cel/, just picture it for a second and realise what kind of shithole you are asking moot to create>Implying he didn't already create /soc/, /vp/ and /mlp/ to filter shit
burp-kun
>>2469>there will be no dicussion, it will be 150 threads spammed to brim with waifu image dumpsJust like /s/ and a dozen other image dump boards. We need worksafe /s/, worksafe /gif/ worked out perfectly
>>2500and really theres not many if any hot actresses under the age of 12 right now. kind of a dead scene atm
>>2493its only the begining
I don't think people understand just how abandoned this board is. Nobody, seriously, nobody gives a shit about /tv/. Multiple people have tried emailing moot, he doesn't give a shit. Mods, from other boards, flat out ignore any pleas for help. Child porn slides to page 15 untouched by moderation. Nobody. Cares. This board is anarchy. As much as people complain about how terrible it is, it's being held together by nothing more than the community. So when you look at a golden board like /co/, remember, they're being propped up, /tv/ is standing alone.
>>2500Yes, this exactly. /tv/ really isn't some haven for CP. I haven't seen any at all this year, the last I can remember is last November. Granted I'm not online 24 hours a day, but things were once much worse.I've got no idea why /tv/ is labeled the pedo board. It's nothing like that. People just enjoy putting simple labels on boards.
>>2545maybe they "ignored" the pleas because nothing is wrong/tv/ is fine, I don't know what your problem is
>>2469I don't think it'd be THAT bad.I imagine there'd also be a handful of few celebrity gossip threads discussing whatever TMZ just came out with.And if they were all confined to one board, surely there wouldn't be THAT many reposts, probably not too dissimilar to /vg/ (though I admit I haven't touched /vg/ since the first week of its inception).
>>2545>Child porn slides to page 15 untouched by moderation.I'm on there 40 hours a week and I have not seen child porn in at least a year it seems. we used to get spammed daily
>>2545What the actual fuck are you talking about? CP? Everything is archived on foolz, I dare you to go on there and find me legitimate CP to prove your point.I can think of only a handful of times that has EVER happened, and considering this is 4chan, I'd say that's pretty good. Shit on /tv/ is tame for our standards.
>>2545/co/ is golden? When did I miss that shit?
>>2545>Child pornYeah, no. Child porn is rarely posted on /tv/ and when it is it is usually dealt with promptly.
this makes me moist though
>>2554>I've got no idea why /tv/ is labeled the pedo board.I think it's less about the actual CP than it is the constant threads about Nick and Disney shows and actresses.
>>2545Sorry bro but we don't even have a page 15 any more. Not sure what board you think you're on, but it ain't /tv/
Goodnight /q/ I'll start frequenting you too.
>>2554/tv/ isnt because its always the same user-base who post the underage waifus, /cel/ will have people from every board and so most likely some sick /b/tards too
i think moot and team4chan are afraid of /tv/'s collective power levelit's the only thing that makes sense
>>874fuck off liberal
>>2554>I've got no idea why /tv/ is labeled the pedo board.disney and nick stars are really huge there come on. granted theyre all 14 now but just a little while ago was the heyday.
>>2589on't forget the recent flood of Batman.
I've witnessed a number of on-topic threads on /tv/ be erased by janitors simply because they were about an actress. Most recently, off the top of my head, a thread about Rooney Mara and all the respected directors whose films she is signed on for, and a debate over rather or not her acting credibility is a fluke after her performance in Fincher's Dragon Tattoo. It was a legitimate discussion about her acting ability that got erased simply because some photos of her were posted within the thread.
>>2640and even just posting photos shouldn't warrant a deletion
>>866>they are places where adults fixate on children as objectsvery strongly disagree. we personally talk to bella's sister for example. we care very much about them and their families.
>>2621>>disney and nick stars are really huge there come on. granted theyre all 14 now but just a little while ago was the heyday. Bella is the only person from Nick/Disney posted about that is under 18.
You aren't even allowed to ask what kind of food people would serve in their cinema
>>2640Yeah, I know that feel. I had a 'who is your favourite director' thread deleted a few days ago because it had more than three pictures of the same chick in it. It wasn't even spam, just a few photos from different users. Fuck /tv/s mod he's a useless cunt.
>>2666ryan newman, alison ashely arm, etc.
>>2545>/co/>golden board>retards>intellectual property theft>shipping>girls farting>golden board
>>2666but just as an examplechloe etc there are plenty of underage actresses posted of course pedo being a catch all phrase for ephebophilia etc
>>2532It's a dam shame if you ask me.
>>2691man, I haven't seen a fart thread in a long time. it's almost saddeningthe rest of those things are present on all boards
>/tv/ janitors:>If it isn't BrBa or TDKR, it's shitposting and must will deleted>ITT:>STOP POSTING IMAGES ON MY IMAGE BOARD
>>2709>pedo being a catch all phrase for ephebophilia etcNow you're just pulling shit out of your ass.
>>2709well they can delete Chloe threads all day long, she's awful
>>2723Come now don't be ridiculous, the janitors can be overzealous but they do well in deleting the retarded tripfag circlejerks, obvious spam threads and threads that are just a thin veil for 'Post pictures of x young actress so we may discuss what we would do to her behind closed doors'
>pedophiles
>>2751She's fucking beautifulTake that ginger cunt and get the fuck outta here
>>2640Victorious threads get deleted almost immediately Actresses all 18+
>>2743huh? I'm talking about people referring to /tv/ as a pedo board. there is very little if any actual pedophilia but it is the common social catch all phrase for underage.
>>2772>implying all there is to puberty is periods>implying using the same image twice is even remotely validScience disagrees with you brah.
>>2779That thread is still up. We ran out of stuff to discuss though.
>>2779I feel like it's ridiculous to remind you of this but it's not as if the people replying to those threads legitimately want to discuss the show rather than the comings and goings of the young leads.
>>2709>>chloe etc there are plenty of underage actresses posted So that means threads discussing Rooney Mara, 27, should be deleted? Or Victoria Justice who is 19?I'm sick of the bullshit about "waifu" threads "spamming" the board, when in all actuality anytime there is a new summer blockbuster out, or it is the time of year for new episodes of a HBO/AMC show, every five minutes there is another thread about the same films/shows that could EASILY be reduced to a smaller amount of threads.THESE are the threads that are burying other "topics", that people complain about getting ignored. Just wait until Community starts up again - it's bullshit that legitimate threads discussing BOTH men and women involved in the craft of film are getting deleted but constant threads about the same goddamn thing are ignored.
>>2779Yeah because it's a fucking shit show.
>>2785>pedo threads aren't the majority>there is little pedophiliaNo, it's one of the few boards where borderline pedo threads are allowed to exist.
>>2751I've got no respect for youif your waifu is Chloe.But idg how a mod could delete an Emma Stone thread.
>>2804>tv and film threads smothering waifu, feet, 'are deleted scenes canon', 'crab legs' etc>bad thingu srs?
>>2804>So that means threads discussing Rooney Mara, 27, should be deleted?no not at all. I was just clarifying.
>>2813>Chloe waifu threads are shit and need to be deleted, chloefags disgust me>But if you delete my waifu threads you're a faggot
>>2802I feel like it's ridiculous to remind you of this, but that doesn't fucking matter>content should pertain to actors/actresses
>>2811I'm on /tv/ just for the waifus&crablegs.Why would anybody want to discuss TDK BrBa with these plebs
>>2785Too many uneducated Americans don't know the definition of pedophile resulting in many people getting mislabeled./tv/ has hebephiles and ephebophiles.
>>2825chloe is so ugly though
>>2849>Kaiji and that 'Mara' girl or whatever her name isYea that's totally not pedo.
>>2818>>tv and film threads smothering waifu, feet, 'are deleted scenes canon', 'crab legs' etcYou realize that the crab legs, deleted scenes, was it rape, my friends and i are having an extreme horror night threads are never deleted, right?
>>2811>borderline pedo threads I dont really see anything that qualifies. everybody is grown up unfortunately. although AAA has become way more beautiful than she used to be.
Some nigga deletes all my Maisie threads.Yeah Chloe is trash
>>2854acting retarded when you cant use your tripcode isnt amusing
>>2865lol no, I'm not a trip
>>2831I think that rule should be worded differently, because as it stands now feet threads are technically okay.
>>2858>>Yea that's totally not pedo.It's not - Rooney Mara is 27 and also an established actress
>>2858that has not been a regular or even infrequent thing in about a year. it is still a rare thing though almost exclusively to troll or prove a point. either way its rare to the point of non-issue again she's all grown up too
>>2870>I think that rule should be worded differentlywell it's not, so deal with it
>>2804I agree. I think it would help to only allow 3-5 threads on the same topic on the first three pages and delete the rest. Of course for this system to work more people would have to start going past the first page or use the catalogue.>CommunityThe funny thing is, that a lot of Community threads are just "Britta vs Annie" arguments and yet won't get deleted.
>>2858It's not his primary attraction.
>>2874Ariana Grande - 19Victoria Justice - 19Liz Gilliez - 19All established actresses and singers.Two of whom were also on broadway.Yet for some reason the majority refer to Victorious fans as pedos
>>2885...I am. That's why I'm posting in this thread.Are feet threads okay with you?
I fucking love that someone behind the scenes tossed it up there.I dunno if it's ever been enforced except in cases of spamming and excessive waifu thread bullshit, but that's pretty much breaking other rules.
>>2887>>a lot of Community threads are just "Britta vs Annie" arguments and yet won't get deleted.It's funny you brings this up - it raises the question "where do we draw the line?" The majority of Community threads end up Annie VS Britta. Since HBO's The Newsroom has started, the majority of its threads devolve into /pol/ Liberal VS Conservative. I think if these type of threads got deleted more often, it would motivate people to discuss the actual content of the show as opposed to irrelevant topics.
>>2902yep, I post in them all the timeI also post in what you consider "on-topic" threads all the time. If I don't like something, I hide it or just ignore it
>>2899the problem with those threads are that the show is never discussed and half the people have probably never seen them outside of gifs on 4chanto claim to be posting on topic when you're fapping over a VJ gif is an insult to /tv/
>>2899>Yet for some reason the majority refer to Victorious fans as pedosreally? guess I missed that. only complaint I see is the volume in which she's posted resulting for the fact she's insanely beautiful. and yes 100% of those pics are either from the show, awards, or promotion. we dont have to watch these shows for the plot. I dont think thats a rule yet. watching them for crotch shots is perfectly valid.
>>2926I watch it for the plot though.
>>2926even just image dumping is on topic>content should pertain to actors/actresses>it's an image board
>>2938she's actually quite generic, friend
>>2802Mostly pictures of the actresses? Yes.But there is discussion.
>>2926>the show is never discussedI think if anything this is the issue that really needs to be addressed in order to continue to pertain to television and film.If you're making a thread about an actor or actress on a tv and film board, it should relate to tv and film, not 'You will never suck on x's toes'But the problem is knowing where to draw the line.
>>2945"which orifice of your waifu would you most like to smell"it personally doesnt bother me much when its under 2 or 3 threads but generally its feels and shitposting
>>2968>content should pertain to actors/actresseshow many times must that be said?
>>2926>the problem with those threads are that the show is never discussedthat isn't true at all
>>2968mott should clarify the rules
>>2981>on a board discussing whether site rules and enforcements need to be changed>posting thatGrow up.
>>2968>>But the problem is knowing where to draw the line.But that is becoming a janitor/mod problem. They are erasing LEGITIMATE threads discussing actresses, simply because they are about an actress. There are plenty of threads that should be deleted, I agree, but not EVERY thread.
>>2968yeah, but you never will suck on Maisie Williams toes. Simple facts are stated, what's the problem?
>>2981Why just point to the rules? Just because that's what the rules say doesn't mean everyone agrees with it, as seen in this thread.
>>2963>person linking episode list on wikipedia>two offtopic posts>two posts of actual discussionTwo posts? Is that the best you could find in the entire thread? Wow, they really are terrible.
The bottom line is, waifu discussions and image posts are 95% of the time about ACTORS or ACTRESSES and technically speaking, are related to television and film. It might not be about television or film that ~you~ like, but that doesn't change the fact that it isn't fucking offtopic. It's really no different then the mindless, bottomless pit of circlejerking about whatever blockbuster is currently showing in theatres.There's no illegal activity going on, and we largely stay on topic and obey the rules. Can you really fucking ask for more out of 4chan?
>>3006why not just ignore it? there's plenty of things on /tv/ or /sp/ or wherever I go that don't interest me, but I just see it and move on. >>3015this
>>3015>we largely stay on topic
The lack of real informed movie discussion is because /tv/ is full of massive plebs who just want to discuss the latest flavour of the month show or circle jerk over Nolan. If shallow celebrity-based threads annoy you then you need to get used to it, /tv/ has the intellectual sophistication of Cosmo magazine.
STEP 1: FIRE THIS GUYSTEP 2: MAKE SURE STEP 1 WAS APPLIED CORRECTLY
>>3034actresses are on topic, stay mad
>>3015No, the difference is that in other threads people actually voice their opinions and usually use arguments to back them up while waifu threads are just picture dumps and "oh, so she hot" purely objective opinions that don't contribute in any way whatsoever.
>>3034Again, this is 4chan. I have yet to see a thread on here that doesn't end up with someone calling someone else a faggot, which while off-topic, is not exclusive to waifu or actress discussion/image posts.
So basically>There too many Victorious threads so delete them allHave you seen how many TDKR and BrBa threads are on page 0 at any one time? at least 2-3 of each.Just because YOU don't like a particular thread doesn't make it shit posting
>>3049images on an image board, truly awful
>>3049>image dumps>don't contribute in any way>ON AN IMAGE BOARD
>>3037I don't really want to be part of your petty internet vendetta, but I agree the current janitor team has to be sacked.
>>3011It's a Victorious thread, I don't see any off topic posts.
>>3059>>3063Yes, then they are just spam.Why not remove captcha and let people just spam threads with pictures of actresses? They are related since it's an image board!
>>3059stop using that shit argument, its a board intended for discusion, not image dumps
Why is a ticket stub thread not allowed on /tv/? Why are legit discussions of an actors career not allowed? Should I just not post pictures to encourage discussion?
>>3037Totally agree with this guy >>3067INFECTEDMUSHROOM has no clue how to do this job.
>>3049>No, the difference is that in other threads people actually voice their opinions and usually use arguments to back them upi don't think you've ever posted on /tv/ before
>>3087What about "Guess the movie" threads? They're basically just image dumps with no discussion.
>>3087the definition of spam is unwanted and unsolicited messagesnow, it might be spam to you, but there are a number of people who have eyes and like looking at thingsimages on an imageboard fulfills this primary function
>>3100>Was it rape?>Was it rape?>Was it rape?>Was it rape?>Was it rape?
>>3049So basically, what you're saying is that there should be a rule that all threads on /tv/ must result in some kind of intelligent and argumentative discussion? Good luck with that. It's an IMAGE BOARD, for fucks sake. It's not that serious.Just because you don't like something doesn't make it wrong, and just because you find something to be pointless doesn't mean it breaks any rule.
>>3052Victorious threads have much less discussion than TDKR and BrBa threads, from what I've seen.Though I will admit I've never actually been in any of the Nick/Disney show threads, I'm only going off what I've seen from the thread previews.So everyone else here who posts in Nick and Disney show threads, what do you guys discuss?[offtopic: mfw over 200 posts and not one mod reply]
>>3089If you want discussion then post on the text board.>>>/tele/
maybe the no ASR rule should be changed to the no JGL ruleupvote this if you agree
>>>/tv/24948563>literally one post that is to some extent on topic and is just an opinion with no argumentsThis is how waifu/actress threads actually look like.
>>3089there is at least some discussion in every actress/waifu thread. If it turns into just a dump, that's when the thread usually dies.
>>3142>If you want to discuss television and film go to another boardyou can't be that retarded
>>3122No, I don't care about that, people posting opinions are more likely to stem legit discussion, with real arguments, than posting pictures of one person.
>>3152I see plenty of people discussing Ellen Page, an actressseems on topic to me
>>3152No fun allowed.
>>3124>[offtopic: mfw over 200 posts and not one mod reply]As other people have already said: No one of the 4chan moderation team gives a fuck about /tv/ and while discussions here will certainly result in changes for other boards, I doubt that anything other than getting a few more janitors, who'll continue to interpret the rules as they see fit, will change for /tv/.
>>3158>If you want to discuss television and film and have an overly huge hatred for image dumps, go to the text only TV & Film boardYes.
>>3142that argument is just as bad
>>3152How does a thread like this existing effect your life? What is so wrong with it that it should be banned from being made?>Isn't harming anybody>Isn't off-topic>Isn't breaking any rulesSo tell me, why the fuck do you care so much about it being there?
>>3157Show me the discussion in >>3152
The problem with /tv/ is that because movies and TV are interests that have a general mass appeal, the board's audience is extremely varied, and all those different groups expect the board to be different things.
>>3185all the words accompanying the pictures
>>3180just as bad because?
>>3184>How does a thread like this existing effect your life?How do spam and offtopic threads affect your life? Do they harm you in any way? They don't? Let's allow them all! Am I right?
>>3152And she's not even hot!For shame, /tv/.
Moot I know you'll read this thread and I know you don't give a fuck about /tv/, I say just continue not caring, add more janitors to our board and it's like poking a beehive.Delete one waifu discussion thread and 3 more pop up, alongside 2 more threads complaining about shitty moderation.
>>3198Easy, they're not allowed because they're AGAINST THE RULES. Why is it so damn hard for you to understand that simple concept?
>>3211If I didn't know better I care swear you just described /a/.
>>3218but they're notread the rules, why are they so damn hard for you to understand?
>>3211Because it IS shitty moderationDespite what you want to believe, waifu threads, as long as they contain actresses, are relevant to /tv/ and therefore should not be deleted
>>3196>Her favorite color is green, clearly she has good taste.>My favorite role of hers was probably as Libby in Super, it sucked when she died. She played a crazy bitch rather well.Literally only legit discussion post in the entire thread>notevengay>She is pretty gangster.>It's alright, I'm waiting for a movie to finish downloading. I figured in the mean time I would brighten up /tv/ with Ellen Page>This is marriage material right here.>Don't care if she looks like a boy, I'd still fuck her.>That faggot doesn't look happy at all, what an ungrateful little prick.>Sometimes I have a dream, where Ellen is a boy and were best friends, and one day he gender bends into a girl it's my fetish.>Better have been the Ellen part that gave you a boner.>not sucking her dickGreat on topic discussion indeed.
>>3225I'm on your side, bro. This dude was talking about someone posting spam and off topic threads, which contrary to popular belief, is not what a waifu thread is.
>>3239it might not be great, but it's on topic
>>3218But if I include a picture of an actress in my spam it's on topic!
>>3239I think her being 'pretty gangster is on topic yo.
>>3239If you look hard enough you can find ridiculous shit like that in just about every thread on /tv/. Don't act like shitposting is confined only to waifu threads.
>>3239Couldn't be more irrelevant. There isn't a rule that all posts need to be 3 paragraphs long.
>>3251if it's about an actress it's not spam
>>3239Once again, just because it isn't something that you personally like, doesn't make it offtopic.You just provided proof that they are actually discussing her which is well within the rules of /tv/
>>3235>>3265This is a rule that i believe needs to really be changed.Perhaps 'Content should pertain to actor's and actresses' roles in television and film'I dunno, someone help me out here.
>>3259No, you can't. There are no other threads with seventy or more posts where LITERALLY ONLY SINGLE ON TOPIC POST is an opinion.
>>3239>Great on topic discussion indeed.I laughed at a few of them. good enough for me.
>>3245yeah, got it mixed upsorry
>>3251It is indeed, if there is already a thread about the actress you're spamming. Unfortunately, you probably would have to create a new thread every time you post a picture because the biased moderators and janitors think it's funny to fuck around with anyone who has a different opinion than them.
>>3269well you're wrong
>>3277The only time multiple actress threads get posted is when the janitor is in force deleting threads, and people get upset.
>>3269>Perhaps 'Content should pertain to actor's and actresses' roles in television and film'like I said for example 100% of vj pics are from the show, ceremonies, or promotion. 100% pertaining to her actress role.
>>3273There also are no other threads with 70 or more posts that actually contain mostly images, on GASP...an image board.
This is the ultimate proof that waifu people are THE cancer killing /tv/, in their opinion legit discussion are people saying that they want to fuck a person.
I like how no one has linked the 80 post Kim Kardashian post on the front pagesee, now she does nothing for me. In fact, I dislike her. But I'm not reporting the thread, I just ignore it and move on with my life
>>3300sorry but celebrity fandom has a very long and valid history in cinema not just /tv/
>1 civilized Victorious thread, people getting along, discussing the show, the actresses etc>Mod/Janitor comes along and deletes it because he feels like it>Multiple Victorious threads pop back up combating the Mod/Janitor's faggot move>THERES TOO MANY VICTORIOUS THREADS, DO SOMETHING MODS
>>3300>people shouldn't say dirty things on 4chanyou sound like a faggot
>>3269There are plenty of threads that aren't waifu threads that talk entirely about an actor/actresses personal life not about their work or performance in a particular movie/show.
>>3176I don't think they don't care about /tv/. I think it's just a really difficult situation to deal with.People complain about the waifu threads, but people also defend them, and technically they're not against the rules.But you look at the "standard waifu/actress thread" as described and linked by someone earlier:>>>/tv/24948563you see it's very light on discussion. It's not just an image dump, but you can't say it's got good discussion going on.But so many people in this thread have asserted that this is an image board, and this is 4chan; what do you really expect?So they have to draw the line between shit and 4chan. "They're one in the same!" you may cry, but I would say the difference is that the shit gets deleted.Does that mean everything that gets deleted deserves to get deleted? No, but I'm fairly certain that most of it deserves to be deleted.Either way, it'd be hard to make that distinction between what's okay and what's not when both sides fight so fervently.
>>3302Are they still having that discussion about racism?
>>3337I haven't even opened the threadI don't care about it, so I ignored itsee how that works?
>>3348I was just asking. I didn't open it either. I saw a preview where they were discussing racism. I hide and ignore thread id on't care about also.
>>3348ThisThere's even a thread hider button on the 4chan extension if it bugs you that much
>>3289And are you really saying that '>Ari and JCurdAnyone else's fantasy a 3sum with these 2 girls?'Is completely relative to their roles in the show.
>>3369yeah, that wasn't directed at you, just in generalsorry
>>3348If only more people could understand this concept of dealing with things you don't agree with, I might actually be able to chat with people about actresses I like without being treated like a criminal.
>>3348you should start sage bombing and spamming gay porn that's a much better way of dealing with threads you don't like
>>3372that's an example of trolling, which is against the rulesyou can report that post because it's against the rules
>>3372those are just headline grabbing thread titles. its all just image dumps. and now that i think of it vj pics are not 100% show related but she is still very light on paparazzi pics which i think are the only pics which could be considered not being related
>>3395that doesn't sound like trolling to meyou don't want a threesome with Ari and JC? you gay son?
>>3395>only trolls want to have threesomesI wouldn't report that post because I feel he's being honest.
>>3402What, so the only thing keeping those threads on topic is the fact that there's a lack of paparazzi pictures of her?It's not like they choose to post those pictures because they're show related, they post them to gawk over the girl in them
>>3412And Ari and JCurd are both actresses, and it is still discussion regarding them, so it is within the rules of /tv/
>>3211This is the sad truth/thread
WARNINGWARNINGWARNINGWARNINGINCOMING OVAL
>>3427>What, so the only thing keeping those threads on topic is the fact that there's a lack of paparazzi pictures of her?yes and thats even according to the earlier proposed strict revision. if it is not paparazzi then the pics are screen shots of the shows, ceremonies awarding the show, or photo ops promoting the show. the current rules allow for paparazzi pics to qualify as on topic
>>3430One post is not discussion.And even if it there were replies to the post, if you consider talking about a threesome as legitimate discussion about the actresses, I'd disagree with you.That is what needs to be specified in the rules.
>>3452thanks for the heads up
>>3037And please get rid of this faggot asap, he was an absolute shitposter for christ sakes
It was a stupid rule to begin with.
>>>/tv/24948684>inb4 "it's /tv/ related because the kids are watching tv in op's pic"
>>3491no one here is defending that kind of thread, stop using straw men
>>3491What does that have to do with ASR and waifus?
>>3474yeah the only things he ever did was spam alison brie and post about his battle station
>>3328>I don't think they don't care about /tv/.They really don't though. Remember the shooting at that Batman premiere a couple of weeks ago? While /co/ got a sticky to deal with the situation, nothing happened on /tv/ and the board was flooded with threads about it.>Either way, it'd be hard to make that distinction between what's okay and what's not when both sides fight so fervently.I agree that coming to a compromise both parties can live with will be diffcult. I personally would prefer just to limit the amount of allowed threads on the same topic.
Congrats /tv/ biggest thread on /q/
>>3474I've seen this throughout the thread and I'm curious why you guys are saying infected mushroom should lose his powers.You guys don't know what he deletes. I'm sure moot and the other mods can see what he's doing, and if they had a problem with it they'd talk to him about it.So why should he get his powers revoked?>>3513and still no mod post ;_;
>>3513Hey man, we got opinions.
>that fucking feel when threads permasage at 300 and no moderator or administrator posted to acknowledge /tv/ at all
>>3505I'm glad I'm not the only one who remembers thatInvisibro should be fired too for convincing moot to put that shithead in charge of anything
>>3529This.This thread is just going to keep getting bigger with everybody arguing until it drops off the board, then someone will make another thread and the process will repeat.No mods care about /tv/
>>3529Then we must truly be on our own and are thus forced to some how....govern ourselves.
>>3508>I agree that coming to a compromise both parties can live with will be difficultit's very easy ignore threads you don't like if you can't do that hide them. everyone got along fine when we had no moderation
>>3497Fact of the matter is Victorious threads are actually on topic according to the rules, still get deleted constantly, and threads like these run rampant on /tv/ and janitors won't touch them.
>>3555it's also very easy to post image dumps on /s/ or /hr/
>>3553Too bad this is impossible without at least 1 unbiased Janitor to clean up the obvious shit threads
mod or janitor is awake on /tv/ now
New /tv/ thread: >>192
>>3555It is. But unfortunately a lot of people don't seem to be able to do it.
>>3567When you say "unbiased", do you mean enforcing the rules exactly as they appear? Because this thread is proof that a lot of people would like to see the rule updated.
>>3579>4 oval threads and a shitty feel thread>/tv/ janitors doing their jobs
>>3565>Do not simply post images because they have large dimensions. If an image would be of interest to another board, please crosspost the image (resizing if necessary)./s/ is for softcore porn
>>3607>deleting oval threadsIs that, like, a joke or something?
>>3694In what way are they television or film related
>>3719that's a touchy subject. It's a secret.
>>3719In what way is drinking milk related to the Indy 500?It's just tradition, don't question it.
Let us talk about how the second rule should be removed.Is everyone in agreement?
>>3763I'm okay with ASR discussion being allowed so long as Bella/V.Juice discussion becomes bannable.All in agreement say aye :3
>>3774i like my idea better>>3149
>>3524>You guys don't know what he deletes.And you do?>I'm sureNo you're not.
>>3763Every ridiculous rule should be removed.
>>3524>I've seen this throughout the thread and I'm curious why you guys are saying infected mushroom should lose his powers.Simple. Because whoever is our janitor is doing a terrible job.>You guys don't know what he deletes.Everything he doesn't like regardless of the rules because he's driven by personal vendettas.>I'm sure moot and the other mods can see what he's doing, and if they had a problem with it they'd talk to him about it.I lold.
