>>552842 (OP)
>Why exactly is /lgbt/ being censored so heavily?
Because an SRS moderator is either a mod or a janny

>Banning people for not being respectful is ridiculous
It's an entire board dedicated to "muh feelins".

>If this is the first step towards a politically correct 4chan it's disappointing.
Nailed it.

>>552842 (OP)
Hey OP, you should give a presentation on violence and crime to the black panthers and see what happens.

>seriously though, it's off-topic/trolling but you probably already knew that.

i'm straight and lurk /lgbt/ to learn, and i post with my trip and i haven't gotten banned for disagreeing and arguing with trannies. question is why would argue with rapist op? if you lurk the board then you exactly what i mean, and really would argue with milky, princess and the other trannies.

~tetra

>>552844
I just hope all the boards (or NSFW boards, that seems more likely) don't slowly integrate the same no-disrespect-allowed atmosphere, because it honestly seems like the /lgbt/ janitors and community have their eyes peeled for posts they can get offended at.

>>552893
>seriously though, it's off-topic/trolling but you probably already knew that.
You don't get to demarcate posts as trolling/off-topic unless you give an explanation. Both of those examples are completely on-topic and if they're presented in an honest manner (not GAYS ARE ABOMINATIONS) they aren't trolling.

>>552903
My posts were deleted after I argued with a tripfag over why she's being unethical concealing her biological sex from her sorority sisters who she shares bathrooms and bedrooms with.

>>552917
>your entire identity is a farse
>not trolling

The mods (and I) disagree with you on that one.

>>552919
I have literally no clue what the fuck you're on about, maybe you could try to actually explain what you mean?

>>552923
OR maybe i could just watch you people cry about your well-deserved bans. Btw, I think trannies have a mental illness, but I'm not going to post that on /lgbt/ because it's against the rules. It's obvious troll bait.

File: 1366079045346.jpg-(91 KB, 447x444, 1364314347122.jpg)

91 KB JPG

>>552919

>sexuality and gender is your "entire indentity"

People like you suck. You're kind are the reaspn why /lgbt/ will never be seen as anything other than grouphug therapy session for rejects.

Captcha: the firstBJ

>>552929
I was being polite, I didn't start the discussion... is 4chan seriously censoring opinions that are unpopular now?

I don't see how this wouldn't be considered trolling. Go on /a/, being "genuinely respectful," and make a thread about how all people who watch anime are losers or that all anime is for children, and tell me if your post is deleted or not by the janitor.

/lgbt/ is for the discussion of LGBT topics, not for questioning their validity.

>>552842 (OP)
There shouldn't be a faggot board in the first place.

In the case of many other boards, they're either quarantines (mlp and soc) to keep a certain type of thread from dominating a board or they're splits of large-membership boards (v into vr and vg).

Neither of these scenarios has been the case for queers so this new board's just encouraging a gross sub-culture to flock to the site.

It's /hugbox/. No meanies allowed OP. Don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, this is 4chan after all.

>>552986
>resorting to analogies to argue a point
lmao

File: 1366084328187.jpg-(2 KB, 125x123, 1357488899350s.jpg)

2 KB JPG

>>553001
>>552994
It's most likely drawing in completely new users who've never even been on /b/, that's the worst part. They're going to get the wrong idea about the site and demand everyone stop being mean to them on the other boards as well, which with a large enough group could start the ball rolling on an even more overmoderated 4chan.

I can see this idiotic commandment of 'respectful discussion only' becoming a global rule, with /b/ kept as a legacy Anything Goes xD board for the traffic it draws...

>>552844
>>Why exactly is /lgbt/ being censored so heavily?
>Because an SRS moderator is either a mod or a janny

...Oh wow. That's ingenious, moot.

>>553012

Yeah, how stupid of me, I forgot I was on /q/ where the regular rules of logic don't apply. Silly me!

That wasn't even really an analogy: it was an explanation of how there's no more censorship as regards to "muh feelings" on /lgbt/ than there is on /a/ (or really any other board).

In all seriousness no board tolerates questioning the validity of its subject matter because, first of all, it just leads to massive butthurt and trolling; second of all, if the validity of the topic is in question, there's no reason to have the board at all; and third of all, it's assumed that everyone there is discussing on the board because they accept the topic.

I probably shouldn't be posting in a troll thread. Oh well. Continue having fun getting your posts deleted, though!

>>553012
>incorrectly attempts to point out a flawed argument
>makes no point or rebuttal himself in his own post
>how do I into logic?
You don't even begin to see the irony in your post, do you?

It's a perfectly valid point, anyway. It's a board to discuss LGBT culture and issues, not a place where the community has to defend themselves from people who think homosexuality is a mental illness. Like he said, it's not about questioning the validity of themselves, the board, or the lifestyle, it's just about discussing LBGT topics.

In any event, 90% of the people who are posting bullshit like that are trolls, anyway, and you know: GL #3.

>I should be allowed to post whatever I want on 4chan wherever I want!!
>muh culture!!

>>553012
That wasn't an analogy.
He was responding to the argument that 'respectful' personal attacks are acceptable, by using a counterexample.

>>553016
>users who've never even been on /b/
That describes most 4chan users already. Sorry about your secret club, bro.

>>553018
>That wasn't even really an analogy
You weren't comparing the /a/ situation to /lgbt/?

>>553018
>In all seriousness no board tolerates questioning the validity of its subject matter
If the questioning is sincere and not malicious, every board is okay with it.

>>553021
There was nothing to be generalised between the two situations, it was illogical.

>>553027
>He was responding to the argument that 'respectful' personal attacks are acceptable, by using a counterexample.
...known as an analogy. Jesus Christ.

>>553037
This is why I said "even" /b/; it's the shittiest part of the site and the worst example of how you should conduct yourself on other boards. My point was that every board except /lgbt/ lacks this respect mandate, so as a board that will see a lot of fresh members it isn't very good.

>>553016
>I can see this idiotic commandment of 'respectful discussion only' becoming a global rule

There's a fine line between "respectful discussion" and blatant trolling, and the examples OP provided are pretty clearly leaping over that line. To provide another "analogy", if you went to /tv/ and made a thread about how people should be outside instead of watching movies all day, that thread would get deleted. It has nothing to do with the topic of discussion, which is Television and Film. It's blatantly off-topic and an obvious attempt at trolling. Same goes for /lgbt/, if, instead of discussing lgbt topics, you talk about how homosexuality is a disease, even if your tone is 'respectful', the OP is obviously incendiary.

Boards like that have a theme, and the threads should stay on topic according to that theme. That is how those boards work. Not every board is /b/, and not every board should become /v/ because people don't understand that posting on-topic isn't equated with rule mongering fascism.

>>553040

>You weren't comparing the /a/ situation to /lgbt/?

I told you to make a thread and see what would happen, which is only an analogy in the most roundabout way (by way of your assumption that it would get deleted, incidentally). Secondly, whether or not it's an analogy actually doesn't matter because the point it makes it valid.

>If the questioning is sincere and not malicious, every board is okay with it.

If you think so, why don't you go make that thread I told you to make and see what happens?

>There was nothing to be generalised between the two situations, it was illogical.

Incorrect: what was generalized was that questioning the validity of the board's topic is not accepted or acceptable. The fact that you think it's an analogy and then say that nothing can be generalized is really indicative of your thinking, because an analogy, by definition, makes a generalization between two situations.

>My point was that every board except /lgbt/ lacks this respect mandate, so as a board that will see a lot of fresh members it isn't very good.

You can still call people on /lgbt/ all the names you want, threaten to rape their mothers, kill them, etc., but you can't challenge the board topic. Which, incidentally, is true of every board, because it's borderline meta shit and counter-productive.

/q/ sure is a fun way to kill time, by the way

>>553040
>every board except /lgbt/ lacks this respect mandate
Typical /b/tard has never read the other boards' rules.

>This board is for the discussion of foreign culture and language. Please be respectful.
>All threads are expected to be constructive in nature
>Only constructive criticism will be accepted. Rude or offensive comments will result in a ban.
>As with the art critique board, only constructive criticism will be tolerated.
>Constructive criticism only.

>>553040
>There was nothing to be generalised between the two situations, it was illogical.

If you found that to be illogical, then you don't have a clear grasp on logic. He was comparing how one can post an off-topic thread inciting negative responses between two boards. If you're not allowed to post something like that on /a/, you aren't allowed to post something like that on /lgbt/, because again, both have a central theme of discussion and the threads like you mentioned in your original post aren't in accordance with that theme. They are off-topic. When you go to /a/ to ask why people are discussing anime, and tell them that anime is stupid, you are not discussing anime. When you go to /lgbt/ and ask why people are gay and tell them that homosexuality is wrong/disease/whatever, you are not discussing LGBT culture. It's not hard to grasp.

>...known as an analogy. Jesus Christ.
Actually, a counterexample is known primarily as a counterexample. The dictionary will back me up on this.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/counterexample
>an example that refutes an assertion or claim.

Which is exactly what his did.

>>553057
>/q/ sure is a fun way to kill time, by the way
Sure is, and you just absolutely demolished every one of OP's points. I feel there is no more reason for me to stay in this thread. Your post was a pleasure to read. Have a fantastic evening.

How about this angle:
If that kind of post is not allowed anywhere except /lgbt/, what is different about /lgbt/?

File: 1366087259071.jpg-(2 KB, 125x83, 1357535924001s.jpg)

2 KB JPG

>>553054
>>553057
Discussing the mental health status of transsexuality (which is widely accepted as an illness) is not trolling.

>The fact that you think it's an analogy and then say that nothing can be generalized is really indicative of your thinking
I'm obviously disagreeing that it's a valid analogy.

Also, can you idiots not grasp that an analogy only works if I already agree on the connection between the two situations? Protip: of course I don't you morons, that's why you gave the analogy in the first place. L2logic, 10/10 if you're trolling me.

>>553072
>Actually, a counterexample is known primarily as a counterexample
Can you even read? Good lord you're slow, I was saying THAT example was an analogy. He was making a conclusion on A based on its supposed similarity to B.

>>553081

>Discussing the mental health status of transsexuality (which is widely accepted as an illness) is not trolling.

And you're not trolling right now either, right?

>Also, can you idiots not grasp that an analogy only works if I already agree on the connection between the two situations?

Yes, and your failure to grasp the connection really brings in the question of who has mental health problems here: you, or transsexuals.

>Protip: of course I don't you morons, that's why you gave the analogy in the first place. L2logic, 10/10 if you're trolling me.

Yep, I was trolling you 100% the whole time. Now excuse me as I go make sweet love to my qt 3.14 trannie gf.

>>553016
>I can see this idiotic commandment of 'respectful discussion only' becoming a global rule

Global Rule 3.

It's been there since 4chan existed.

>>553081
>Also, can you idiots not grasp that an analogy only works if I already agree on the connection between the two situations?

That's half the reason I'd give an analogy - because I know you don't agree on the connection. Then you point out what the relevant difference between the two situations is so that the discussion may continue.

Currently you say that the difference is that there are many who consider transsexuality an illness, therefore calling it an illness is not trolling.
Then I'd have to ask: if the consensus opinion among everyday people is that anime is for manchildren (and I would not be surprised if this were already the case), then would that make it OK to start an "anime is for manchildren prove me wrong" thread on /a/?

You can't respectfully go to /k/ to post pro-gun control threads

You can't respectfully go to /sci/ to post "scientific studies" about creationism

You can't respectfully go to /hc/ to argue in favor of abstinence

It's not political correctness, it's common sense, reason for a board to exist is to gather people with a common interest. For obvious reasons /lgbt/ is not targeted towards people trying to prove why transsexualism is a mental illness same as /ck/ is not targeted towards the pro-ana crowd.

You are simply not welcomed there, not every 4chan board must be your echo chamber, only /pol/ is and that's one too much if you ask me.

>>553094
I understand the connection you're trying to show, I just don't agree it actually exists because only one of those (your example) seems offensive.

>your failure to grasp the connection really brings in the question of who has mental health problems here: you, or transsexuals.
...my failure to agree with you isn't a mental illness, but Gender Identity Disorder is. BTW, a mental disorder isn't an inherently inferior trait or a way to insult somebody.

>>553095
Rule 3 is a catch-all for disruptive, intentionally aggravating posters.

The enforcement of that vague rule is not dealt with in nearly the same way; /lgbt/ seems to be pruned of controversial content whether or not anyone is annoyed by it.

>>552842 (OP)

>Why exactly is /lgbt/ being censored so heavily?

Because this is 4chan and it has rules. If you do not follow those rules you get banned. If you were to go to /a/ and post pictures of hardcore porn you would be banned. This is not a free speech issue.

>If this is the first step towards a politically correct 4chan it's disappointing.

Says the guys who has only been here since the formation of /pol/.

File: 1366105922077.png-(255 KB, 486x506, xvcb.png)

255 KB PNG

>>552842 (OP)

>If this is the first step towards a politically correct 4chan

No, the first step towards a politically correct 4chan was moot deleting the lolicon board.

RIP in peace, /l/ ;__;

>>553110
>Currently you say that the difference is that there are many who consider transsexuality an illness, therefore calling it an illness is not trolling.

Discussing it politely and showing that it is an illness is not trolling, just a mainstream scientific understanding. It is not 'considered' an illness; whether a particular state of the body/mind is abnormal and causes impairment or harm is a fact, not something that's decided by the majority.

>>553283
>Because this is 4chan and it has rules

There's always one unhelpful twit in a /q/ thread who misses the point of the 4chan discussion board, isn't there?

>>552842 (OP)
>I'm not talking trolls, but legitimate posts that disagree with the majority (say, being genuinely respectful and explaining why transsexuality is a mental illness or why you don't believe in gay marriage) are being pruned.

What exactly is the point of explaining this, it's not like it affects you in any way?
Last time i checked calling people mentally ill based on nothing but personal felling's, and then hide under the "muh opinion" flag is still offensive and servers no other purpose than trying to start a flamewar or troll.

>>552994
Why not? There is a board dedicated to bashing fag's and every other form of life other than white, why shouldn't lgbt exist? other then "i find it gross"?

>>553341
>What exactly is the point of explaining this, it's not like it affects you in any way?
Can you not fathom this ever coming up in a discussion on a LGBT board? When it comes up as it does regularly, should only one side of the argument be allowed?

>>553341
>Last time i checked calling people mentally ill based on nothing but personal felling's, and then hide under the "muh opinion" flag
It's not opinion, transsexuals are mentally ill. That doesn't mean bad or gross or don't deserve to be treated respectfully or don't deserve hormone therapy.

I know OP, I know. I try not to glance at that part of the browser.

4chan with a dedicated, moderated hugbox.

I thought I would never see the fucking day.

>>553358
>transsexuals are mentally ill
youropinion.jpg

/lgbt/ is a new board and has taken a lot of shit from /b/, /pol/ and just about everyone (as expected).

Most of those threads are troll threads anyway.

If you really believe those things, be a bit more tactful and think about your post before you make it.

i am a fag and i would rather be called a degenerate pozcum-guzzling kiddy-diddler than be 'protected' by some dork with a line to moot

there are a fucking trillion "safe spaces" on the internet

>>552917
>I just hope all the boards (or NSFW boards, that seems more likely) don't slowly integrate the same no-disrespect-allowed atmosphere

they will, don't worry

also i can't speak for all gays but i am definitely an abomination

>>553124
>You can't respectfully go to /k/ to post pro-gun control threads

Yes you fucking can.

>You can't respectfully go to /sci/ to post "scientific studies" about creationism

Yes. You can.

>You can't respectfully go to /hc/ to argue in favor of abstinence

Yes you can, but that's a porn board so it will probably be pruned as not on-topic since it isn't an imagedump. If you posted on-topic content along with the text discussion, that would probably be perfectly fine, but would be somewhat defeating of your point.

>It's not political correctness, it's common sense, reason for a board to exist is to gather people with a common interest. For obvious reasons /lgbt/ is not targeted towards people trying to prove why transsexualism is a mental illness same as /ck/ is not targeted towards the pro-ana crowd.

No, you faggot, all of your examples are incorrect, and often happen. /pol/ has plenty of dissenting opinions and your argument is for a hugbox where only people you agree with are allowed a voice, which is not the case on ANY other board.

>that's one too much if you ask me.

And your true point is revealed: only things you agree with should be allowed on 4chan. As expected.

>>553547

See:

>>553489

I'm sorry but you're going to have to wait a while before you can start being controversial and edgy on /lgbt/

>>553574
>edgy
>agreeing that people whose brains think they're in the wrong body are mentally ill

Alright buddy

>>553574
>edgy

oh boy, one of those words

"Gays shouldn't get married"
and
"Transsexuals are just diseased, you'll never be a real [gender]"
are both pretty clear examples of shitposting. It's tossing a grenade, starting a flame war. You're a nigger.

>>553581
>complaining about "flame wars"
>on fucking 4chan

are you fucking shitting me, hoss

>>553581

If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. There are plenty of other sites that won't tolerate posts like that. And seriously? "Gays shouldn't get married" is "clear shitposting", "tossing a grenade"? Fuck you, you thin-skinned pansy faggot.

>>553578

See:

>>553581

If you honestly gave a shit about this, you could ask it anywhere. The fact you are complaining that a potentially sensitive board is blocking your troll posts just shows that all you intend on doing is starting a flamewar.

>>553587

You too. Read:

Global rule 1)

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"), post number GETs ("dubs"), or loli/shota pornography.

>>553587
I'm sorry, doublefaggot, is it really too much to ask for solid moderation like because 4chan disappeared the first time? Or are you some 2010 kid that thinks he's old fucking school because he helped shit up /v/?

Trolling on 4chan should be more than the same fucking thread 24/7 where nothing new is ever said or attempted, if it's done at all. 4chan CAN be thoughtful and decent and still be as combative and safe from mainstream limitations as ever. It's your shit that's the censorship. Stop shitting up boards you don't like.

>>553597

Don't listen to him, he's in another thread on /q/ defending shitposting and calling people out for complaining about it.

Definitely one of the post-2006 kids who thinks every board is /b/ 2.0

There was a trans thread, made by a trans, complaining that the tumblr-tranny community was ruining the main community with their prejudice and made up pronouns and prefixes. That thread got deleted.

Face it, /lgbt/ is an extension of tumblr and SRS, not representative of any of the actual LGBT community.

>>553594

I'm bi and I've been banned from /lgbt/ before for calling out this shitty culture of crying to the mods because someone holds an opinion you don't like. It's toxic and fucking pathetic, not to mention delusional and utterly contrary to every other interest-based or discussion-based board.

>>553597
>4chan CAN be thoughtful and decent and still be as combative and safe from mainstream limitations as ever

even if I believed that, the way you would achieve it would not be with the same babymode safemodding that the rest of the internet endures

but I don't because "decent" and "combative"/"unlimited" are incompatible

>>553603

You were probably coming off as a troll. I've said my fair share of 'controversial' opinions (Including that there is no such separation between 'gender' and 'sex' and I have never once been banned for it.

It's all about being tactful and careful with your choice of words.

>>553604

If you think 4chan is incapable of thoughtful and decent discussion then you're too new.

>>553606
did I say I thought it was incapable of either of those

I could swear I said something different

anyway, the situation you have here is actual LGBT people being banned for expressing themselves, and this almost certainly by straight mods

have fun with that

>>553612
>this almost certainly by straight mods

Proof?

>the situation you have here is actual LGBT people being banned for expressing themselves

Proof they aren't just trolling?

>>553612
>did I say I thought it was incapable of either of those

You implied they were incompatible on 4chan without 'babymode safemodding'.

I think you should just go back to /b/ where you clearly belong. 4chan was fine before the /b/ mentality of 'Shitposting and trolling is fine wherever I do it' flooded into the other boards.

As I said, you're too new to speak on this issue. You've already proven yourself to be an idiot in another thread. Just stop embarrassing yourself.

Because it's not actually for discussion. It's a board for enabling shitty behavior.

>>553606
>You were probably coming off as a troll.

Having the opinion that crying to the mods whenever someone mentions the word "faggot", as if it isn't a common word on this website, is coming off as a troll?

>It's all about being tactful and careful with your choice of words.

Why the fuck should anybody? Just to pussyfoot around in order to "not hurt someone's feelings"? As I said earlier, there are plenty of other sites entirely dedicated to LGBT discussion: if you don't want to talk about LGBT topics with the 4chan userbase, then don't do so. It's that simple. Trying to remove the 4chan out of 4chan.org/lgbt/ is a completely pointless venture.

>>553615

well, i'm gay, and i've been banned, so i guess you can use idiotic sententious doubt to obstruct anything you choose

>>553620
*having the opinion that crying to the mods... is a retarded idea

>>553615
>If you don't agree with me, you're new!

Evidently you're too new, yourself, to know that only newfags call others new.

You can't go to /a/ and make a polite thread explaining why all anime is garbage.

You can't go to /v/ and make a polite thread explaining why the video game medium is garbage.

You can't go to /h/ or /s/ and make a polite thread saying that pornography is immoral and you should stop posting it.

Boards are made under the assumption that the subject they're talking about is legitimate, and posts that go against that assumption get deleted. That's how it's always been. I'm against /lgbt/, but the ruling is consistent. If you want to debate marriage or argue that transexuality is a mental illness, then take it to /pol/, because it doesn't belong on /lgbt/.

>>553622
>only newfags call others new.

That's /b/ mentality. The simple fact is that if you think 4chan has never been capable of sensible discussion without trolling then you are obviously new because you seem to hold 2006-era /b/'s board standards as being representative of 4chan.org in its entirety.

>Having the opinion that crying to the mods whenever someone mentions the word "faggot", as if it isn't a common word on this website, is coming off as a troll?

Using the word 'faggot' in an LGBT board which was made very clear that it wasn't going to deal lightly with trolls is the dumbest shit you can do. I'm not surprised you were banned.

>>553621

So you're saying that anyone who bans gay posters who break global rule 1 must be some kind of OPPRESSIVE STRAIGHT TYRANT?

It's called enforcing the rules, the mods don't care if you are gay, straight or bi and you are in absolutely no place to assume they are straight just because they banned you. Not every gay person shares the same opinions as you.

>>553630

then 4chan has no reason to exist

>>553642
How does that follow?

>>553642

>I can't troll on 4chan so there's no point in visiting

Once again, these sort of troll threads are better suited to /b/. In fact, they are ideal for /b/ and would be much better than the typical shit that plagues /b/. Post them there instead.

>>553639
>Not every gay person shares the same opinions as you.

too bad I can't ban them for that!

the anonymous imageboard concept was literally invented to allow people to safely express dissenting opinions

you are trying to use a helicopter as a submarine and, when it fills up with water and is crushed by the pressure of the ocean, defending your gross malfeasance by resorting to simplistic property-law boilerplate

which would be fine except that helicopter is the only one we've got

why don't you go to 7chan and white-knight the rules there? god knows you'll get backpats over that

>>553670
>the anonymous imageboard concept was literally invented to allow people to safely express dissenting opinions

Agreed, but there is a difference between dissenting opinions and outright trolling.

When /lgbt/ started, it was made very clear that there was a zero tolerance policy on trolls, flames etc.

I have expressed many 'dissenting opinions' on /lgbt/ but I did so tactfully and with reasoning and logic and made sure I tried my best not to come off as a troll from /pol/ or /b/.

I was never banned and instead; the thread flourished with good discussion.

You are probably coming off as too aggressive or too preachy and deterring people with your attitude, so it's no surprise mods are choosing to ban you.

It's common sense that with boards like /b/ and /pol/, /lgbt/ was going to have an invasion of trolls and flamebait in its early stages. If you really wanted to express a dissenting opinion in a sensible manner, you would know to wait a while for the board to cool off before doing so.

>>553650
>people need to agree with me or its trolling

>>552842 (OP)

/lgbt/ is now a rerddit colony due to the massive amount of censorship.

Really having a problem understanding the logic of such a board.

>>553670
>the anonymous imageboard concept was literally invented to allow people to safely express dissenting opinions

Actually, it was literally invented to allow people to post news without getting in trouble and to allow people to treat ideas by their own merit and not by who posted them.

It's never been intended as a "FUCK THE RULES I CAN POST WHATEVER I WANT" card.

>>553547

>Yes you fucking can.

On /k/ this could probably work.

>Yes. You can.

... Here is where you are wrong, because if I went to /sci/ and "respectfully" said that people who believe in evolution are mentally ill then my post would probably be deleted.

>Yes you can, but that's a porn board so it will probably be pruned as not on-topic since it isn't an imagedump. If you posted on-topic content along with the text discussion, that would probably be perfectly fine, but would be somewhat defeating of your point.

Alright, go start a thread saying in /hc/ stating that porn is immoral/a bad influence/etc., and see how long it takes for it to get deleted, then!

>No, you faggot, all of your examples are incorrect, and often happen. /pol/ has plenty of dissenting opinions and your argument is for a hugbox where only people you agree with are allowed a voice, which is not the case on ANY other board.

Oh, I see, you're from /pol/. Banning the discussion of the validity of the board's theme in no way makes it more of a "hugbox" (i.e. /pol/ buzzword no. 4561) than any of the other boards here. On /pol/ you might be able to get away with arguing that politics is stupid because that is actually a political opinion, but as far as any of the topical boards go, you can't just argue that the theme of the board is not valid.

>>553592

>If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. There are plenty of other sites that won't tolerate posts like that.

You're one of those "4chan is for Internet tough guys ONLY" people aren't you? Have you ever visited places like /po/ or /c/? They're practically "hugboxes" compared to /pol/. On /lgbt/ you can still flame people, you just can't say that the topic of the board isn't legitimate. Stop pretending that 4chan is a place where you can say whatever because of some imaginary right to say whatever you want.

>>553642

Or, you know, you could use these boards for their intended purpose and discussion the topic!

>>553621
>implying you can't be a troll because you are gay
>implying you are gay

>>553581
No, they're not.
It's like saying "harem anime is shit" or "people who like the big 3 are retards" on /a/. It shouldn't be bannable by itself.

>>553682
>When /lgbt/ started, it was made very clear that there was a zero tolerance policy on trolls, flames etc.

here's where I say "this is stupid and already too common on the internet" and you come back with some tired shit about how it's moot's site and blah blah blah

>I have expressed many 'dissenting opinions' on /lgbt/ but I did so tactfully
>You are probably coming off as too aggressive or too preachy and deterring people with your attitude

cool, I have to appeal to some power user's idea of a civil person

that's totally why anonymous boards were invented

4chan is so far gone from what it should be that it needs to die

the only thing that will fix this is the destruction of the site

>>553689

* discuss the topic

>>553670

>the anonymous imageboard concept was literally invented to allow people to safely express dissenting opinions

No it wasn't: the anonymous BBS format was pioneered by 2ch, whose founder expressed that anonymity was desirable because it allowed ideas to be evaluated on their own merit, and not on the merit of the person who said them: which is a far cry from "I am anonymous, you have to respect my opinion!" An anonymous imageboard doesn't mean people have to respect "unpopular opinions" anymore than a regular forum does, all it means is that your opinion will be taken into consideration by its own merit and not on your identity's merit.

/lgbt/ - LGBT
This board is for the respectful discussion of LGBT lifestyle and the LGBT community.
Hookup and "rate me"/camwhore threads belong on /soc/.
Remember, this is a WORKSAFE BOARD. Absolutely no nudity or pornography!

OP is right. If it's 'respectful' discussion it's not against the rules and the janitor is a faggot. Put in the rules that you have to circlejerk each other in /LGBT/ or don't delete on-topic threads that do not violate the rules of the board.

>>553693
>It's like saying "harem anime is shit" or "people who like the big 3 are retards" on /a/. It shouldn't be bannable by itself.

Saying 'People who like _____ are retards' is absolutely a troll post.

Go read the global rules.

Wait, I recognize this user now.

He made a thread on here not too long ago bitching about 4chan and asking us why we don't go to Tumblr/Reddit/Twitter instead.

He then tried using marxism to argue that Moot shouldn't have control over 4chan, and then got butthurt and left.

Good times.

>>553714

Who? The OP or ODy+dF/s ?

>>553708
The global rules don't define trolling. Insulting people based on their tastes is a pretty common thing just about everywhere on this site and doesn't typically result in moderators taking action.

>>553717
ODy+dF/s

So he's homosexual and is incredibly left-wing. No wonder he likes Leddit more than 4chan.

>>553365
No. Relativism must stop somewhere and right here is it: Transexuals are mentally ill.

>>553693

In defense, those are threads are different than saying that anime is worthless, it's for manchildren, that people who watch it are all pedophiles, etc., etc.

>>553707

"Respectfully" discussing whether or not part of the board's theme is illegitimate? Doesn't matter whether you're "polite" or not when you make the post, any intelligent person knows that this would cause a shitstorm and is off-topic anyway.

>>553720

Yeah, within certain limits. I can tell someone that their favorite anime is shit on /a/, I can tell them that a certain genre is shit on /a/, and I can even say that an entire studio is shit on /a/. I can't, however, say that all anime is shit and that people who watch it have some sort of mental deficiency or are otherwise some undesirable characteristic.


>>553714

He's an awful troll anyway, this is not surprising.

>>553724
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_transsexualism
Especially read the part under Brain structure. Also links to a lot of studies and medical texts in the References.

Some more:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7477289

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10843193

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11826131

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18980961

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19341803

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20562024

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18056697

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16140461

http://avitale.com/developmentalreview.htm
Now sod off.

>>553726
then put it in the rules. dont delete posts and threads based over assumption.

>>553724
>>553728

This thread isn't really even concerned with whether transsexuals are mentally ill, it's concerned with whether it constitutes trolling and off-topic posting on /lgbt/.

>>553729

If you need it spelled out for you in big letters that saying the theme of the board is illegitimate then you have serious issues. In any case all the prerequisite rules exist for enforcing this, because it's a blatant form of trolling and does not refer to LGBT culture.

>>553714

cool, you're using my name to attack my arguments

is this "forum culture"

i mean, this is dead literally what anonymity is supposed to prevent- you're trying to use my post history against me to discredit my arguments

>>553699
>Q: Why did you decide to use perfect anonymity, not even requiring a user name?
>A: Because delivering news without taking any risk is very important to us. There is a lot of information disclosure or secret news gathered on Channel 2. Few people would post that kind of information by taking a risk. Moreover, people can only truly discuss something when they don't know each other.
If there is a user ID attached to a user, a discussion tends to become a criticizing game. On the other hand, under the anonymous system, even though your opinion/information is criticized, you don't know with whom to be upset. Also with a user ID, those who participate in the site for a long time tend to have authority, and it becomes difficult for a user to disagree with them. Under a perfectly anonymous system, you can say, "it's boring," if it is actually boring. All information is treated equally; only an accurate argument will work.

no one is saying you have to respect anyone's opinion

>all it means is that your opinion will be taken into consideration by its own merit and not on your identity's merit.

what doesn't this have to do with safely expressing dissenting opinions

for fuck's sake can you just go back to SA already

>>553736
>My posts were deleted after I argued with a tripfag over why she's being unethical concealing her biological sex from her sorority sisters who she shares bathrooms and bedrooms with.

that's considered off-topic and trolling?

>>553736
Considering that "trannys are mentally ill" gets spammed in this thread all the time this was needed to show that you people are pure trolls.

>>553742
>i mean, this is dead literally what anonymity is supposed to prevent- you're trying to use my post history against me to discredit my arguments

Actually, the reason we have IDs on this board is because we DON'T want Anonymity. Else anyone could samefag their opinion and attempt to influence board decisions.

You know you are posting with an ID, it's too late to complain about it now.

ID = Identification

>>553742
I already attacked your arguments without pulling in your name, but you're not responding, so hey, why not goad you a little and have some fun?

Anyway, the 2ch owner doesn't support your case. He says it clear as day: anonymony is supposed to let you post news safely and allow ideas to be judged on their own merit. It is not something that is supposed to be a ban shield. Even on 2ch you'll get banned if you go into the retro video games board and say "all retro video games are shit".

>>553736
>talking about whether transexuality is or is not a mental illness is not related to LGBT culture

this is retarded

also why, whenever we get into one of these, does it turn into you and some other paunchy bloviator congratulating each other on your sagacity

why the fuck are you even on 4chan? what do you see here? why do you come here? the nature and theme and dynamic of this site is so innately opposed to everything you do and are that your presence here does not make any fucking sense

people like you spend hours crying about how the vast majority of users disagree with you, how features intrinsic to the goddamn site need to be removed, how the way it's been since forfuckingever needs to be changed

jesus fucking christ, what are you even doing here

this is a hopeless situation for you. why waste your energy weeping about the lack of quality posting instead of devoting it to FINDING ANOTHER PLACE TO BE

>>553736
>>553743
>>553743
patiently waiting for your long-winded response dodging the question and trying to validate your own opinion as to what trolling is.

protip: its subjective.

>>553758
>so hey, why not goad you a little and have some fun?

here's the part where you try to explain how this isn't trolling or how trolling isn't "shitposting"

what is even your vision for this site? where do you see us in ten years?

>>553758
>Even on 2ch you'll get banned if you go into the retro video games board and say "all retro video games are shit".

This is true. Most of the boards on 2ch have a no-trolling rule right on the top of their page.

If you can't express your dissenting opinion without coming across like a troll then you should stay in /b/ or lurk more.

>>553766

And once again we're back at the '4CHAN IS A PLACE FOR NO RULES' argument.

I noticed you're quick to defend yourself against being called 'new' but it really is the only way to get through to you.

This skewed idea that 4chan is some kind of ruleless, lawless wild-west internet community is a lot of nonsense propagated by /b/ and people who think /b/ is representative of the rest of 4chan.

Trolling might be acceptable on /b/, but the other boards actually like to sensibly discuss their subject matter without having to put up with the childish /b/tard mentality.

Seriously, go back to /b/. That's not an offhand insult, this is actually my personal recommendation if you think 4chan is some kind of anarchist imageboard. Because /b/ is the only board which respects this nonsense.

>>553742

>no one is saying you have to respect anyone's opinion

So don't complain when your shitty opinion gets flamed and deleted. Just because this board is anonymous doesn't mean anything goes: all it means is that "[a]ll information is treated equally."

>what doesn't this have to do with safely expressing dissenting opinions

It's only marginally related: your dissenting opinions are now measured at face value instead of your posting history, and they can still be found to be shitty and you can still be told to fuck off.

>>553743

That post in itself isn't: what followed, which is the assertion that transsexuality is a mental illness, is.

>>553766

>why the fuck are you even on 4chan? what do you see here? why do you come here? the nature and theme and dynamic of this site is so innately opposed to everything you do and are that your presence here does not make any fucking sense

First of all, because I use the boards for their intended purpose and discuss their topics in an anonymous environment without telling everyone else the whole purpose for having the board is questionable.

What is the "nature and theme and dynamic" of this site that is "innately opposed" to that? Is your idea of 4chan a bunch of Internet tough guys sitting in a circle telling each other how TOUGH they are for being able to call other people retards?

>how the way it's been since forfuckingever needs to be changed

The way it's been "since forfuckingever" has been that the janitors delete threads like the one OP made. I can't tell you how many "anime is for manchildren" threads I've seen deleted in my stay here. When did you get here, 2010?

>jesus fucking christ, what are you even doing here

Drinking delicious tears from butthurt idiots like you!

>>553769

>protip: its subjective.

If there's no objective definition of trolling then don't complain when a janitor subjectively finds your post to be a troll post and deletes it on a whim.

>>553766
Aww, look, the little marxist fairy is mad. Don't be upset, comrade! Bare your arms and overthrow your oppressive rulers!

>>553770
>here's the part where you try to explain how this isn't trolling or how trolling isn't "shitposting"

Oh, that post? It's definitely shitposting, but I don't give a damn.

>what is even your vision for this site? where do you see us in ten years?

It'll most likely stick around, shifting to reflect the cultural changes of the outside world. I can't say exactly because I can't see the future!

>>553774

see, this is what i'm talking about. in all of these threads, there's one other guy who talks a lot like you and you two really hit it off and you spend the thread having fun little asides with each other

also, classy move your friend pulled trying to call me out for being gay, this is the dude whose opinion i trust on /lgbt/ moderation

>>553774
you can't "get through" to someone when you have less insight into things than they do

>This skewed idea that 4chan is some kind of ruleless, lawless wild-west internet community is a lot of nonsense propagated by /b/

/b/ has a lot of crossboard traffic, so saying that an idea was propagated "by /b/" is dumb

also a lot of people came here because they were banned from SA, including many of the founding staff

>he other boards actually like to sensibly discuss their subject matter

you're pompous enough that you think you can speak for entire boards

what the fuck are you trying to make this site into, you ignatius j. reilly looking motherfucker

>>553774

muh rules

lel
upboat
yay rerddit

>>553779
>Aww, look, the little marxist fairy is mad.

this is what people who like the /lgbt/ mods write like

this is your advocate of "respectful discussion"

I would also like to point out that, even if it isn't explictly codified in the rules, there's been a tradition of mods having a lot of control over rule interpretation. I remember Naruto threads on /a/ being consistently deleted ever since 2008 since they almost always invited shitposting and trolling, and /b/tards would randomly get permbanned for no actual reason, just as the most prominent examples. Not saying that I always agree with how mods interpret the rules (RIP Dreamcast threads ;-;) but this isn't some new thing, it's been part of tradition, and the creation of /q/ has probably just made it way more obvious.

AND WITH THAT BEING SAID

>/b/ has a lot of crossboard traffic, so saying that an idea was propagated "by /b/" is dumb

No it doesn't. Maybe back in the old days, but now, a lot of people ignore /b/ and view it as a containment board.

>you're pompous enough that you think you can speak for entire boards

Except he's not being pompous, a lot of people don't want /b/-tier shit on their boards. That's why there's always complaints on /q/ asking for deletion of shitty memes, requests to delete /b/, requests to purge /v/ of /b/ memes, why a lot of people hate /b/ to begin with, and why shitposters are always told to go back to /b/.

File: 1366129153386.jpg-(102 KB, 512x512, OP's a git.jpg)

102 KB JPG

>>553807
>Waaaaah I am not allowed to troll /lgbt/
>All dem mentally ill trannys
>muh culture. I internet tuffguy

Gets called on his shit

>I deserve respectfahl discassian!!!!

>>553797
>your friend
>in all of these threads, there's one other guy who talks a lot like you and you two really hit it off

I don't know about 'hit it off' as much as just 'agreeing'.

Looking through some of the other threads you've posted in I can't actually see his trip anywhere.

I think you just need to accept that you're wrong and many people disagree with you and are willing to be vocal about it.

It also sounds to me like you don't know a lot about 4chan's history.

Before /b/ hit the headlines in 2006, it was a (somewhat retarded) place to discuss anime/random topics. There was no 'ANONYMOUS IS LEGION' there were no 'RULES OF THE INTERNET'. Some people posted gore and porn because they were anonymous, but it wasn't what /b/ was all about.

After 2006 a lot of kids flooded into 4chan - specifically /b/ and assumed it was exactly what Fox News had claimed it was - Gore and CP. This misrepresentation soon had people assuming that every other board on 4chan was the same and that 2006-era /b/ represented 4chan.

It didn't and it still doesn't.

That's why people hate your 'TOUGHEST PLACE ON THE INTERNET' shit. It's why people are sick of offtopic 'MUH BOARD CULTURE' posts and it's why people often disagree with you and call you names.

Please get it out of your head that 4chan == /b/.

It doesn't. The rest of 4chan was fine with discussing its subject manner relatively sensibly and stayed on topic before all the /b/ shit started in 2006.

>>553810

man, someone complained about shitty moderation on /lgbt/ and you called them "a little marxist fairy"

you lose

literally everyone but you and pretentious dickholes like your pal hate the new 4chan moderation

shut the fuck up

if you want a site with rules, go to a fucking forum

>>553815

Actually 4chan already has rules.

4chan.org/rules

Global rule 1 specifically states no trolling.

You broke this rule and you got banned.

Now you're crying on /q/ that '4CHAN HAS NO RULES, IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT GET OUT!!!'

Well actually it seems like the reverse is true. You're the one that 'got out' because you didn't follow the rules.

Good riddance.

>>553815

>if you want a site with rules, go to a fucking forum

You're not even trying anymore, are you.

>>553815
What's the matter, fairy? Can't refute my arguments? 4chan has literally always had rules since it's very existence. But I guess historical revisionism is rather common for marxists, eh?

>>553812

censored_vagina was literally a mod here

we had a fucking guro board, we had lolicon and shotacon boards, we were modded by literal pedophiles and people who were banned from everywhere else, and you're trying to tell me this was a place for rules?

we were run by a fucking 15-year-old on a site that was supposedly 18+

what

just what

>>553630
>You can't go to /v/ and make a polite thread explaining why the video game medium is garbage.

Oh yes you can.

>>553630

Yes, you can do all of these. If you hold an opinion, you should be able to back it up or your opinion is completely worthless. Censorship of dissent because your opinion is worthless does not make your opinion more valid.

>>553833
>we had a fucking guro board, we had lolicon and shotacon boards, we were modded by literal pedophiles and people who were banned from everywhere else, and you're trying to tell me this was a place for rules?

Yes. Use archive.org if you don't believe me. 4chan has always had rules. Just because you have that sort of content doesn't mean you can't have rules.

>we were run by a fucking 15-year-old on a site that was supposedly 18+

Breaking your own rules doesn't mean they don't exist.

>>553842
No, you can't do that. Try making a thread on /a/ saying that all anime is garbage and watch how long it sticks around.

>>553833
>we had a fucking guro board, we had lolicon and shotacon boards, we were modded by literal pedophiles and people who were banned from everywhere else, and you're trying to tell me this was a place for rules?

Yes and all those boards vanished rather quickly too. Long before any bandwagon jumping /b/tard set foot on 4chan.

Just because there were a handful of boards dedicated to niche interests does not mean that every other board is or was lawless - it wasn't.

And if you were actually around, you'd know that the loli, shota and guro boards were very different from the types of things that are posted on /b/.

>>553833

Yeah. The loli and shota boards both had rules which were enforced. You couldn't go into /l/ and start talking about how everyone who posted there were sick pedophiles who needed to be chemically castrated, either.

>>553689

Go try it right now. They often have creationism vs. evolution threads, and if they don't now, it's because people who made those threads got bored of having their asses destroyed in debate, not because a holier-than-thou mod came and banned all of them right from the start.

>You're one of those "4chan is for Internet tough guys ONLY" people aren't you? Have you ever visited places like /po/ or /c/? They're practically "hugboxes" compared to /pol/.

That's because they're no fucking discussion to be had there. What you are suggesting is banning LEGITIMATE topics of debate involving the LGBT community, just because you don't like it, and you call anyone whose opinion you don't like a "troll" because it's an easy (and lazy) technique to discard opposing opinion.

we still need upvote button and like on facebook, to be perfectly socially acceptable site. /lgbt/ is only afirst step on the long road

>>552919
The /lgbt/ janitors are not 4chan janitors.

>>553849
Look, I'm just saying that 4chan has always been a place for dissenting and socially unacceptable views, that its antecedents were, and since it's always been that way, banning people for those views is dumb.

>>553778

Transsexuality IS a mental illness. Repeating that it's an opinion doesn't change that. Homosexuality is too. Pressuring the medical community to accept it for the sake of political correctness doesn't make it a normal condition of humanity in the same way that mild depression isn't a normal condition, even though many people suffer from it at some point.

>>553345
I find it gross.

Get off my site you subhuman.

>>553858

Once again:

There is a difference between trolling and posting dissenting and/or socially unacceptable views.

I've posted many dissenting views on /lgbt/ and I never got banned. The simple problem here is that you clearly come across as though you are trolling and that is not acceptable.

>>553692
>>implying you are gay

No true fucking Scotsman, eh? "No REAL gay person would disagree with the feminazi janitor!"

>>553726
>I can't, however, say that all anime is shit and that people who watch it have some sort of mental deficiency or are otherwise some undesirable characteristic.

Yes you can, you fucking idiot. People will tell you to go back to /v/ or ignore you; they won't cry on /q/ that they're being oppressed like a little faggot.

>>553865
"Check your privilege" is not a dissenting view.

>>553858
No one is denying this. However, it has always been a place with rules, and dissenting views may be curbed depending on the board and moderator. As I said, since 2008, Naruto threads have always been banned because they invite shitposting. And even on 2ch, you can't say "ALL RETRO VIDEO GAMES SUCK" on their retro video game board.

>>553865
>There is a difference between trolling and posting dissenting and/or socially unacceptable views.

That difference is subjective.

The only argument you have for why I should have to pussyfoot around lest I offend some random dude is that they know the guy who owns the place.

>>553847

That won't be because it's deleted by a mod, you
fascist scum. It'll be because people are able to not respond to someone disliking what they like on legitimate boards instead of constantly having to reply to it.

>>553876
Right, the difference is subjective, and dependent on the mods. That's how it's been for a very long time.

>>553875
>dissenting views may be curbed depending on the board and moderator

Then we need to get rid of the moderators in question.

You and that other dude are tools. You cry about how people think that "respectful discussion" stuff is bullshit and then go on to call someone a "marxist fairy". You are AT LEAST a hypocrite.

>>553876

The difference is indeed subjective, which is why the mods will make decisions based on common sense.

If you're so butthurt about being banned: file a ban appeal

But don't come around here claiming that your ban is unfair because '4CHAN IS A LAWLESS PLACE WHERE ANYTHING GOES', because evidently from your ban - it is not.

>>553853

>That's because they're no fucking discussion to be had there.

/c/ occasionally has discussions although it's primarily for imagedumps. /po/, however, is a discussion board. Just because they don't talk about what you like in the manner that you do doesn't mean there's "nothing to discuss." Not every board flames and trolls and shouts about negroes every three minutes.

>What you are suggesting is banning LEGITIMATE topics of debate

Legitimate, sure -- outside of /lgbt/. Why? Because in order for /lgbt/ to actually function as a board it has to assume that its own theme is valid. It's not a matter of debate in /lgbt/ any more than whether or not Otaku Culture is a legitimate subculture is in /jp/, or whether or not cartoons are a distinct medium in /co/.

>>553873

>People will tell you to go back to /v/ or ignore you; they won't cry on /q/ that they're being oppressed like a little faggot.

The thread will be deleted by a janitor regardless of whether or not some /a/nons cry on /q/, as they have a tendency to do. Also, the only people making /lgbt/ threads are... What a surprise! People complaining about the "fascist mods" on /lgbt/.

>>553876

>That difference is subjective.

If the difference is purely subjective then it's up to the personal opinion of whatever janitor happens to be browsing the board at the time to decide what is and is not trolling. In other words: they can delete your posts based on what they think.

>>553884

I didn't call anyone a 'marxist fairy'. Stop assuming everyone is samefagging/in cahoots against you.

I couldn't give less of a shit what your political views are, the fact is - you got banned for breaking the rules. If you don't like it - leave. Don't tell others to leave because they don't appreciate your 2006-era vision of 4chan.

>>553884
>Then we need to get rid of the moderators in question.

Then you are the one wanting to change 4chan's traditions, not us, because that is how it's been for a very long time.

>You cry about how people think that "respectful discussion" stuff is bullshit and then go on to call someone a "marxist fairy". You are AT LEAST a hypocrite.

When did I ever mention anything about respectful discussion? All I've ever been posting about in this thread is that the ruling of the mods in this particular situation is consistent with tradition.

File: 1366131235368.png-(154 KB, 409x484, IMaid.png)

154 KB PNG

>>553861
look at,read and understand >>553728

A literal difference in the brain. Easily demonstrated post mortem by opening up the head and looking at the brain.

>Oh lawd. Dat mental illness

>>553888
Being banned for dissenting opinions on a site made to express them is dumb.

>>553895

we have gotten rid of the moderators in question before

>>553873
>>553897

No one cares.

>>553898

You've never been able to say whatever you want wherever you want on this site. Get over it. If you want the rules to be "ZOMG NONE!!!1" then go to /b/, where you can say anything you want.

>>553904
even /b/ has rules

4chan is a failed implementation of a good idea and needs to be removed so that other sites can flourish in its place

>>553900
Right, but not just for curbing dissenting views. What you seem to be advocating is that mods can't remove dissenting views PERIOD, which is against 4chan's traditions because that's always been accepted of mods, to varying extents.

>>553898
>on a site made to express them

But it isn't.

If you care so much about this, why don't you make a thread about it or talk to moot on AIM?

>>553890

To clarify: I meant that there's no sort of discussion topic that could be in any way touchy, but on second thoughts, /c/ could have debates: but why the hell should they be censored? Are you arguing that? And are you seriously arguing that if I went on /c/ and said, I don't know, Yotsuba a shit - okay, bad example, no-one touches Yotsuba, but let's pretend - that the mod wouldn't be seen as a fucking retard if they got so uppity and offended that they banned me for that out of pure anger? Banning someone just because, fair enough, mods are fags, but you're genuinely arguing that they are right to be offended and not fucking retards who don't understand the site and userbase they're supposedly familiar with.

Either way, this is 4chan, it's an anonymous imageboard. It's the MO to get fired up about nothing and say 'no hard feelings' (not that you'd know it) to the person you're arguing with when they make a different point in a new post.

>Legitimate, sure -- outside of /lgbt/. Why? Because in order for /lgbt/ to actually function as a board it has to assume that its own theme is valid.

>implying liking fucking ponies isn't a mental illness
>implying being a racial realist isn't suicide in this day and age
>implying being a neckbeard NEET doesn't make people kill themselves

All of those boards manage just fine without being constantly told, "It's okay! You're great! I'll ban all those meanies who think you aren't a special snowflake!"

>>552842 (OP)
>being genuinely respectful and explaining why transsexuality is a mental illness

that's called trolling, brotato.

>>553904
>No one cares.

"Your point was shit." "HURR NO-ONE CARES."

Amend your incorrect point or abandon it, it's your choice.

>>553898

But we are talking about a cis-based board. The voice of the cis must be minimised to allow for true equality.

>>553916
stop that. ironic shitposting is still shitposting.

>>553916

I'd rather know what straight people think than be protected from it

>>553906
1. Don't post federally illegal shit
2. Don't abuse the report button
3. No ban evading
4. No avatars/sigs/ponies (which everyone fucking ignores anyway and is never enforced)

Oh my god, you're just locked up in chains aren't you?

>>553913

No one is making a point about "muh feelings," what's being said is that debating the very purpose of the board isn't allowed. And yes, going on /mlp/ and saying "people who like ponies are mentally ill" would get your post deleted.

It's not about "feelings," it's about letting the board discuss its topic. The very reason that there's a discussion board for a particular topic assumes that the people actually participating in discussion accept the theme of the board.

>And are you seriously arguing that if I went on /c/ and said, I don't know, Yotsuba a shit - okay, bad example, no-one touches Yotsuba, but let's pretend - that the mod wouldn't be seen as a fucking retard if they got so uppity and offended that they banned me for that out of pure anger?

Saying "Yotsuba a shit" is fine, although you'll probably get called a shitface for it (which is also fine). /c/ isn't about Yotsuba. If you said that anime can't be cute and that all these imagedumps are pointless circlejerks and that people who think anime is cute are mentally ill, then yes, I would think you ought to have your post deleted.

>>553915

>Amend your incorrect point or abandon it, it's your choice.

The "incorrect point" they were addressing was something I didn't even say. I've never said that transsexuals were or were not mentally ill, I've just said that discussing it on /lgbt/ is against the rules. I even explicitly stated this in >>553736.

Please actually read what I say before rambling on about it.

>>553935

no one's talking about debating the purpose of the board

we're talking about debating topics within the board

you are a very shallow thinker

>>553935

Actually it looked like I misquoted initially: I meant to quote >>553861 and >>553897

File: 1366132335195.gif-(353 KB, 480x220, gokoudance1.gif)

353 KB GIF

>>552842 (OP)
In the end this all boils down to R-E-S-P-E-C-T, find out what it meaaans to me:

1. Can you, respectfully, walk into a gay bar and give a TED-level talk on why being gay is wrong? No.

2. Can you walk into a gay bar and give a TED-level talk on why being gay is wrong? Yes.

>We can debate this til the cows come home but it seems the mods and most people would agree with me

Replace gay with black, jewish, muslim, atheist, or whatever else you want. It's pretty much the same reason all the Israel/Palestine threads on /int/ get deleted:
>ITS AGAINST THE RULES

/lgbt/ - LGBT
1. This board is for the respectful discussion of LGBT lifestyle and the LGBT community.
2. Hookup and "rate me"/camwhore threads belong on /soc/.
3. Remember, this is a WORKSAFE BOARD. Absolutely no nudity or pornography!

not to mention
Global 3 because it's obvious trolling. Let me just run into downtown detroit and start screaming about niggers and violent crime.
>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"), post number GETs ("dubs"), or loli/shota pornography.

and probably Global 10 if I am to assume you post these threads over and over again even though a mod keeps deleting them...
>No spamming or flooding of any kind. No intentionally evading spam/post filters.

>>553943

If you take the position that transsexuality is a mental illness and not a real thing then there's no purpose in having a board to discuss LGBT topics as if they were a legitimate thing.

>>553946

The rules are dumb and wrong.

If 4chan is going to have rules like these, 4chan needs to stop existing.

>>553581
>You're a nigger.
FAGGOTS AND DYKES, EVERYBODY

>>553952

You can go somewhere else if you'd really like.

>>553957

4chan is too big. There is no way for any other sites to flourish while 4chan exists.

Site needs to die, bro.

File: 1366132708899.png-(38 KB, 495x495, 6711233253.png)

38 KB PNG

>>553959
>There is no way for any other sites to flourish while 4chan exists
You are retarded.

>>553961
by sites I mean imageboards

are you blind to context or something

>>553959
Tough shit, then. If sites with less censorship fail to flourish, then that's an indicator that people don't care that much about it, and are willing to trade it off for a more active userbase with more content.

>>553959

Every other imageboard out there is even less tolerant of your variety of bullshit than 4chan is, because they see rules as a way of keeping out unwanted behavior that they associated with 4chan /b/tards.

>>553964
Thanks for the clarification. To reiterate, you are retarded.

>>553959
Also I forgot to mention that 7chan and 420chan were pretty popular at one point, albeit no where near as 4chan's level. Imageboards are just losing popularity in general.

>>553952
How about you just GTFO?

>>553969
That is so 2010. Facebook is losing users to 4chan nowadays.

>>553965
>Wal-Mart's success means Wal-Mart's a good thing!!

>>553967
>I'm going to make generalizations that I can't back up!

>>553968
>I consider 420chan "flourishing"!

>>553969
I am talking to the reason for this

>>553971
I've been here for most of my adult life

why don't you

>>553977
>The rules suck. 4chan needs to die
Told to GTFO if he doesn't like it.
>Instead I want you to leave the site I disrespect/want to die.

Ishyigidi wigidi

>>553973

I actually agree that (for the most part) Wal-Mart's success is a good thing.

Also I'd say his generalization is mostly true. All the other imageboards I've been to has stricter moderation than 4chan.

>553977

Evidentially, you haven't been an adult for very long, considering your gross ignorance of several aspects of old 4chan.

>>553981
"Don't look at it if you don't like it" is some DeviantArt fetish-porn tier shit

I pity the person who thinks that's a valid suggestion.

>>553973

>>I'm going to make generalizations that I can't back up!

Ironic coming from you, but let's look at 7chan's rules:

>Do not start flame wars. A debate is one thing, but constant bickering and arguing will be dealt with. These posts will be deleted, and the poster will be banned if this behavior continues.

and

>Please use proper grammar and spelling outside of /b/. Mistakes are fine, but poorly written posts will be deleted.

Or how about we check 420chan, which has roughly the same traffic as 7chan?

>If you act like some dumb kid or an arrogant douchebag or really anything we deem an "undesirable element" (camwhores, trolls, etc.) you can expect to not remain here very long.

On the drug boards on 420chan, you're also not allowed to go on about how drugs are bad.

I can't tell you how many times I've seen people banned for shit on other imageboards that is accepted as normal on 4chan.

>>553985
>I actually agree that (for the most part) Wal-Mart's success is a good thing.

This and your "marxist fairy" gaffe have basically ruined you

I already knew people who white-knighted mods, especially the new mods, were terrible

thanks for confirming what I already knew

>>553985
I would also like to point out that comparing Wal-Mart to 4chan is fucking stupid. Wal-Mart has objective, measurable impacts on the economy, while 4chan is ultimately just a site for entertainment.

>>553926

Then you have no home on /lgbt/

>>553991
Yeah, use English-speaking 4chan spinoffs, that's not cheating

none of this is even relevant to the point at hand, which is that 4chan needs to go under if we're going to improve the situation

look at it this way: no website means no shitposting

>>553996
If a gay person has no home on /lgbt/, the board is a mistake and needs to be deleted.

>>554002

call the cops

>>553999
How the fuck is it cheating? Do you want us to learn a different language just to post on a imageboard?

>none of this is even relevant to the point at hand, which is that 4chan needs to go under if we're going to improve the situation. look at it this way: no website means no shitposting

This is retarded. 4chan is entertainment, and ultimately, entertainment is subjective. And do you seriously think that if 4chan drops, all the shitposters will kill themselves or something? If they don't go to Leddit or Facebook, they'll flood the fuck out of the lesser chans. It's what happens whenever 4chan's down for an extended period of time.

>>554008

If 4chan drops, you won't be able to read 4chan posts, and you won't be able to call them shitposts!

It's a win-win.

Asexual thread get deleted too, because
>not lgbt relevant

You would think faggots would be more tolerant because of all the oppression. Hey, turns out they can be as douchy as everyone else.
Like thise kid, who was beaten by his parents, who beat his children in turn.

>>553999

>Yeah, use English-speaking 4chan spinoffs, that's not cheating

No it's not, because virtually every English-speaking imageboard today is either a spinoff of 4chan or a spinoff of a spinoff.

Unless you mean you're going to go to non-English imageboards, in which case I don't see why 4chan would impede their development.

>>554014
Oh, okay.

7chan, 420chan, and leddit will all just get shittier in it's place then.

>>554019

They were already shitty. 4chan had the potential to be awesome but wasted it.

>>554019
And then there's all the inevitable 4chan spinoffs that will be created in it's place. Can't wait for 5chan or something like that.

>>554025
Again, that's subjective. Go find another imageboard that shares your ideals on how moderatorship should work, or create your own.

>>553991
>or really anything we deem an "undesirable element"

That is bassically like saying "If we don't like you you can GTFO"

What a shitty rule.

>>554037
I believe that is his point. 4chan's pretty rules-loose as is, despite what the marxist fairy will have you believe, which is why all the other competing imageboards has more rules to try differentiate themselves.

>going to /lgbt/
It's almost like you WANT to get anally inflicted death sentence

>>554031

Everybody uses 4chan because it's just okay enough that enough people stay to keep it useful.

It's a fucking blight. The era in which there were a lot of small imageboards was way more vibrant and fun than this era, where we have one monolithic 2ch-in-name-only clone.

The best possible thing would be for 4chan to be gone within the next two years.

>>554037

As >>554042 said, the fact that 4chan is pretty loose on rules means that other imageboards, attempting to avoid the fate of 4chan, generally have much broader and strictly enforced rules.

Then again, 4chan does have global rules 6 and 17.

>>554037
>That is bassically like saying "If we don't like you you can GTFO"

It's the same here, but they're not as up-front about it.

>>554048
We still have a few small imageboards, it's just that they've lost a lot of their userbase because 1) they grew up and stopped caring about imageboards and 2) Leddit has made imageboards less popular to begin with

I'm not exactly sure what you're advocating here. A lot of smaller imageboards have even more rules than 4chan, and that's apparently stricter your problem with it. So what will 4chan dying do to make things better?

And as the other guy pointed out, those smaller imageboards you've mentioned has stricter rules than 4chan.

>>554055
There's a difference between "Hey, you don't like this board, so why don't you leave? Though, we're not going to force you out." and "Hey, this mod doesn't like you, so I'm going to permban you."

>>554064
>There's a difference between "Hey, you don't like this board, so why don't you leave? Though, we're not going to force you out." and "Hey, this mod doesn't like you, so I'm going to permban you."

Yup! Too bad 4chan is the latter.

I am advocating doing whatever it takes to get 4chan to 404.

Are a lot of smaller imageboards stricter? Yes, but that doesn't matter. When 4chan goes, the refugees won't all go to one site. My assumption is that they'll disperse to many smaller sites, making same larger (and thus faster and more usable), while removing control over a large user population from the hands of any one person.

"Don't go if you don't like it" is a hollow argument when it's the only game in town.

4chan really does need to be shut down. We're pandering to the lowest common denominator, vocal complainers, people like you and that other normie douche who basically hate every aspect of 4chan's culture that makes it 4chan. The cancer is terminal and it has reached the brain. Palliative care is getting to be a bummer, and euthanasia is looking like our best bet.

>>554088

I mean, every fucking day on /q/ we see threads about how this is no longer allowed or that is no longer allowed, split this board, split that board, ban ban ban, mods mods mods

Just fucking kill this thing already and be done with it instead of letting it die in pieces like this

>>554088
>Yup! Too bad 4chan is the latter.

Except for the most part, no it isn't. Outside of /b/, I've never seen anyone get banned for bitching about the site. Shit, on /q/ we get threads daily calling Moot a jew or the mods faggots, whatever, and I've never seen them get banned. I'm sure it has happened a couple of times because mods are as egotistical as anyone else, but it's not too often.

>My assumption is that they'll disperse to many smaller sites, making same larger (and thus faster and more usable)

Uh, what? They'll disperse, and create larger and faster sites? Wouldn't the userbase being divided mean that the boards would be smaller and slower?

(And this assumption is rather dubious. This hasn't happened to 4chan yet, but usually division of userbases end up leading to another monopoly or duopoly anyway. As a personal example, when NSider got shut down, there were many boards created to fill in the void, but eventually NSider 2 got monopolized as it's replacement anyway)

>while removing control over a large user population from the hands of any one person.

Moot doesn't have control over us. We voluntarily post on 4chan. He is not holding a gun to our heads and making us do this. I can very well go to a different website without suffering any consequences whatsoever.

>"Don't go if you don't like it" is a hollow argument when it's the only game in town.

Except, it's not. 7chan, 420chan, Leddit, Tumblr etc. These are all websites dedicated to posting images, and are all viable alternatives to 4chan.

>We're pandering to the lowest common denominator, vocal complainers, people like you and that other normie douche who basically hate every aspect of 4chan's culture that makes it 4chan.

We've already gone through this. You're the one hating on 4chan's culture here. You want 4chan to become a place of lawlessness and anarchy, when it never was one to begin with. It has almost always been a website where the mods have a lot of power on their boards.

>>554088

>hates 4chan
>posts on 4chan

File: 1366138097163.gif-(1.2 MB, 250x188, lol.gif)

1.2 MB GIF

>>553999
Yeah. Mootles is going to kill the site so you can have your tantrum.

>>554103
>Outside of /b/, I've never seen anyone get banned for bitching about the site.

Except we have threads here, daily, about people being banned because mods don't like them. Really, given the subjective nature of our rules, that's the only way you can GET banned here. So, you're wrong right off the bat.

>Uh, what? They'll disperse, and create larger and faster sites?

Larger and faster than they are now. This relates directly to the following.

>Moot doesn't have control over us. We voluntarily post on 4chan.

4chan is the largest anonymous imageboard on the internet, and of the sites you mentioned, two are nearly dead and two are neither imageboards nor anonymous.

Giving someone either no alternatives to your option or unworkable alternatives to your option is coercion. Your solution to problems with 4chan is "don't go there". If that is a valid solution, then isn't getting rid of the site a better one, because it solves everyone's problems at the same time?

Also, I remember people derailing threads on blue boards with hentai and suffering no consequences for it. I remember people sharing hand-activated java spam scripts and reposting copypasta ad infinitum. I've seen stickies full of porn stay up on blue boards for half a day.

Don't try and bullshit that we haven't become more strict. We have.

Your problem is that you insist on being a 30-year-old dude on 4chan, instead of going to a site that's more your speed.

>>554150
Weeaboos never fail to make people dislike them. I don't even know what you fags are talking about, but I already loathe the guy who posted this image. So obnoxious.

>>554133
>muh website love it or leave it

>>554150
Moot's full of shit. He says one thing and then does another. He's enough of a flake that even if no one takes action to drop the site, he'll probably end up killing on his own. This has actually happened before.

File: 1366138564639.jpg-(79 KB, 1280x720, [gg]_Anime_Mirai_2013_-_L(...).jpg)

79 KB JPG

>>554154

>I don't even know what you fags are talking about, but I already loathe the guy who posted this image.

Can't you just relax, man?

>>554154

My guess is he's either a mod/janitor or a hanger-on in one of their IRC channels. Same with the other one.

I even have some guesses as to who!

Anyway, though, the new topic of this thread is how 4chan has failed to deliver and needs to be shut down.

>>554161
>muh website love it or leave it

Why come here if you hate it?

>>554153
>Except we have threads here, daily, about people being banned because mods don't like them.

Most of those threads are just people butthurt and were actually in the wrong. Some complaints are valid, especially when it comes to /int/, but sometimes it really is the users are in the wrong.

>Really, given the subjective nature of our rules, that's the only way you can GET banned here. So, you're wrong right off the bat

Just because something is subjective doesn't mean that all interpretations are equal, and as you yourself have said, Moot has removed mods because he thought their interpretations were unreasonable.

>4chan is the largest anonymous imageboard on the internet, and of the sites you mentioned, two are nearly dead and two are neither imageboards nor anonymous.

7chan and 420chan aren't "nearly" dead, they just seem so because you're comparing them to 4chan's insane amount of activity.

Leddit/Tumblr aren't anonymous imageboards, true, but that doesn't mean they can't compete with 4chan. They're still discussion boards in which you can post images, and you trade in beig anonymous for other benefits which may vary depending on your liking.

>>554153
>Giving someone either no alternatives to your option or unworkable alternatives to your option is coercion.

No, it isn't. It'd be coercion if Moot held a gun to your head and made you visit the site, but that's not the case. You are voluntarily going to 4chan because you find it superior to all other options. Moot is not forcing you in anyway. You will receive no punishment whatsoever if you decide to go on 7chan or 420chan.

>Your solution to problems with 4chan is "don't go there". If that is a valid solution, then isn't getting rid of the site a better one, because it solves everyone's problems at the same time?

What if we like the current userbase of 4chan, and don't want to see it fragmented? Are we forced to suck it up?

>Also, I remember people derailing threads on blue boards with hentai and suffering no consequences for it. I remember people sharing hand-activated java spam scripts and reposting copypasta ad infinitum. I've seen stickies full of porn stay up on blue boards for half a day. Don't try and bullshit that we haven't become more strict. We have.

Never said we haven't become more strict, but strictness is a spectrum. We are still way less strict than most other forums on the Internet. And besides, how the fuck are those bad things? Banning spam is a good thing last time I check.

File: 1366139662741.jpg-(578 KB, 849x700, ComplainingAboutWeeabrosO(...).jpg)

578 KB JPG

>>554154
Are you really that new?

>>554200
What does this have to do with complaining about weeaboos? Fuck off.

>>554174

Why don't you go make a new thread and let this one die in peace?

>>554182
Everywhere else is dead or even worse.

>>554186
>Most of those threads are just people butthurt and were actually in the wrong.

Your opinion. Seems a lot of people don't share it. If mods want to run imageboards like this, they're welcome to, but only AFTER 4chan has ceased to exist and they can no longer exercise undue influence due to size.

>Just because something is subjective doesn't mean that all interpretations are equal

Well, the current interpretations suck and they're not going to get better. We have entire board cultures being destroyed for the benefit of a few people who can't survive being exposed to unfiltered discussion. Nah, fuck that. 4chan was never supposed to be that. People JOKED about it becoming like that. As it stands, we've failed to provide the only thing we're better suited to provide than other sites. We've done what we claimed we would never do. This MUH RUURUUHS SA-lite shithole doesn't even deserve to be called "4chan".

And yeah, those other sites are fucking dead. Move the goalposts, I don't give a fuck, but they are. They have no cultural capital. They don't matter.

And no, you can't have a massive monopoly on anonymous places to go on the internet and then claim you're giving Free Rational Agents a Legitimate Choice. That's bullshit.

>What if we like the current userbase of 4chan, and don't want to see it fragmented? Are we forced to suck it up?

You don't! Your pal is trying to get fucking waifu threads banned from /a/, for god's sake! The only way 4chan is at all palatable to a dude like you is when it's filtered through about 5MB of rules and monitored day and night by a collective of surgically altered mod-autists. You'll benefit from 4chan's dissolution most of all.

>We are still way less strict than most other forums on the Internet.

Have you ever been on Tumblr? Also, banning spam got rid of copypasta, which is one of the few things we did that mattered.