(untitled)

>Regardless, I also don't see this thread as being productive or quality in the future, as many have made up there minds and are insulting rather than discussing, at this point. Much of what could've been written has been and so this is locked. Not just banning those breaking the rules? You know, its not your job (hah, as if you get paid) to micro manage discussions on this site If someone posts a low quality post/thread then warn or ban him/her Don't go full on cocky thinking you can hide your bias behind your "desire for better discussion". Dont fuarrrk with me boy, I got power of God an d Anime on my side so don't get me pissed off Or I am going to teleport behind you and just finish you with one blow to the neck You will be stone cold buddy boi,not even playin with you So try me I dare you fuarrrker Its your move

>Not just banning those breaking the rules? The posts in that thread weren't necessarily deserving a ban, but the opening post, while a nice notification, was already a bad post and had merely accumulated several replies, along with being on the topic of censorship and so I opted to warn, instead. The warnings for it still apply. >You know, its not your job (hah, as if you get paid) to micro manage discussions on this site It's not your place to tell me what my responsibilities here are. In moderating discussion, I inspect every post made in the boards I primarily overlook. >If someone posts a low quality post/thread then warn or ban him/her That's what I did. >Don't go full on cocky thinking you can hide your bias behind your "desire for better discussion". In a similar vein to the earlier EFF thread in /sec/, there simply wasn't much left to discuss on the topic and so the thread was mostly becoming insults and accusations being thrown back and forth, which is the reason it was locked. It was also a sensitive manner of topic that was less related to security and privacy than other topics on the board, exacerbating things. >Dont fuarrrk with me boy, I got power of God an d Anime on my side so don't get me pissed off >Or I am going to teleport behind you and just finish you with one blow to the neck >You will be stone cold buddy boi,not even playin with you >So try me >I dare you fuarrrker >Its your move This was entertaining to read. I could respond with an equally memetic reply, but I don't care to. Now, to conclude, both of these threads may and probably will be unlocked at a later date to give the threads another chance of sorts.

You're a glitterboy stiffling certain topics because few cunts that whine about it

>Regardless, I also don't see this thread as being productive or quality in the future, as many have made up their minds and are insulting rather than discussing, at this point. Much of what could've been written has been and so this is locked. Does this mean that a new thread centering around the same topic would get locked too as if being guilty of issues of the previous one? Also what's with the estimate of how much of the topic was covered? With short threads this seems particularly like guess work prone to error. I don't like that as a reason for closure.

>>4618 TLDR: Two points, 1. Relevance to topic of the board. 2. Rules 1 If you break the rules we will delete your post. Do it repeatedly and you'll be derezzed. and 4 You should always elaborate on your opinions rather than just spilling the soykaf. Long version: Regarding the first point /sec/ is for Security Discussion, it isn't for the discussion of social issues or politics of organisations regardless of whether those organisations are the NSA, the FSB, the EFF, the Tor Foundation, the FSF etc. It is not a replacement for /civ/ or /pol/, if you are not actually discussing security and you are posting in /sec/ then it is highly likely you are posting in the wrong board. Currently if you want to discuss social issues that have an impact on humanity (or people feelings in general) then /hum/ is the board for that, and if you want discuss political issues than please do so in /r/. inb4 , everytopic is political. No every topic isn't inherently political, people can have different view points, but what matters is how the discussion is framed. In this particular case the OP of that thread framed the discussion quite poorly, it was a 1 line OP asking people how that felt about a claimed topic with total implicit context, that required reading a series of external news articles that were not linked or summarized in the post. If people had trouble reading the supporting meme image and the small text inside, they had difficultly understanding the context and why their emotive responses were even being sort on the topic, this is evident by 2nd and 3rd replies. Regarding the second point, The mentioned thread is soykaf, not only because of the terrible quality of the OP and the leading question about feelings of a false accusation, e.g. Just because members of a organisation don't like something doesn't mean they can shut down or stop an existing deployment of a distributed protocol. But because of the voracity of the arguments regarding topics totally unrelated to security, but also the replies that are not in good faith and just arguing topics which have nothing to do with security, e.g. race, nazis, jews, etc . Previously these topics were post blocked by word filters by lainchan's founder, they are not currently post blocked because lainons are capable (hopefully) of having reason discussions involving them. Also the level of elaboration in the replies given was insufficient, because it was mostly people just say I feel A or I feel B or C I feel C, and statements or >neurosuggesting arguement D instead of actual elaboration on why people feel how they feel and what they read or observed that caused them to feel like that. >Does this mean that a new thread centering around the same topic would get locked too as if being guilty of issues of the previous one? If you made a new thread about the exact same topic , that is No Subject and a 1 line OP in /sec/ with a How do you feel about XYZ ?, then yes that thread is likely to be locked for the same reasons as similar threads which have been locked in the past. If you want new threads to not get locked, then put enough effort into writing them and actually talk / ask about security on the /sec/ board. >Also what's with the estimate of how much of the topic was covered? With short threads this seems particularly like guess work prone to error. I don't like that as a reason for closure. This wasn't so much about coverage of the topic, as to the fact that people were not having open discussion, instead there was one open question with little or not context in OP and a bunch of people shouting closed answers of either, Yes I care and it will stop me for using TOR, No I don't care because it doesn't matter to me, No I don't care about the issue is a moot point, and no actual discussion (open or otherwise) about the differences in the answers or the reason for asking the question.