(untitled)

please just IP range ban these people that are making these hebe/loli threads, I am confident that its the same guy who makes the same thread because he is salty that his threads kept getting deleted. Mods and appleman have made it clear that they don't want to have discussion about this yet it still happens, at this point the person making these threads is obviously trolling and somewhat not listening I am referring to >>>/hum/29727 >>>/hum/29932

>>8430 >>>/hum/30016 I understand why you're sensitive to this stuff right now, but these are not the same thread.

Totally not the same thread. I find the most recent lolicon thread to be quite interesting.

As much as i detest cartoon pedophiles, they are not 100% equivalent to irl pedophiles.

>>8430 Man I'm not advocating for these but please, as long as the thread don't derail keep'em alive. We want to be able to discuss some subject even if they seems/are disgusting. Put your sensitivity away or lurk another way. Because: internets.

Why do you care?

please just IP range ban these people that are making these ban/slience controversial topic threads, I am confident that its the same guy who makes the same thread because he is salty that his threads kept getting deleted. Mods and appleman have made it clear that they don't give a fuarrrk yet it still happens, at this point the person making these threads is obviously trolling and somewhat not listening I am referring to >>>/q/8430

>>8446 Can confirm, one schizo poster is responsible for: - "muh hate" - "muh moderation" - 5G/Vaccines/"Clamping" posts When they get sufficiently butthurt, they turn to spam and posting child porn. This person is a known quantity, and honestly the mods need to act and purge this individual.

>>8449 They've got a pedo thread the mods are letting go on. It's exactly what you'd expect, they're congratulating themselves (or, this schizo is congratulating himself) for finally subverting lainchan's rules. The mods are so damaged, they can't recognize the need to act. People are already calling lainchan a pedo spot for them allowing it to go on. Pretty sad to see such things happen to the site.

>>8464 Schizopostee, post proof, no one cares about lainchan

>>8473 what are you even talking about? you must be the schizo

>>8430 I actually do agree with the guy on lolicon but it's gotten out of hand, to the point that he's spamming threads.

>>8476 All of his threads involve him spamming. The mods removed one of this threads shortly ago, and he recreated it over a hundred times. It's ONE PERSON.

[0/4] I'm going to post in a couple parts because I can't figure out what's causing the spam filter to block me, bear with me...

I'm the OP of the lol-icon thread, and I just want to say I'm not upset it was deleted. All the good discussion happened during the first two days and after that it got bombed out with unrelated posts. I'm not the pedo/schizo poster people keep associating that thread with. It would be nice if a post could be evaluated on it's own merit and not who you think wrote it. It would have been kind of nice to have a >>>/hum/29727 style explanation along with locking the thread and leaving it temporarily visible as a means of transparency, especially since it was up for like a week which means at least some of the mods believed (as I did) that it had value beyond pedo-pandering. That being said, I don't really mind and I certainly don't blame the mods for purging it after what it turned into. Lol-icon material is super prevalent, even in the West (69,000 tags for Lol-icon on Nhentai). The purpose of the thread was intended to be a sort of anthropological survey of lol-icon consumers on how they view themselves, which is something you can't really do outside of an anonymous imageboard format since people are naturally very unwilling to associate themselves with it irl. Whether or not you agree with the consumption of lol-icon it's a real phenomena and derailing the thread doesn't make it go away. I'm not asking anyone to accept lol-icon, and I'm not even saying I agree with the consumption of lol-icon, but the psychology behind it is something I'm really interested in. Of course, I could go post such a thread on 8kun or some soykafhole, but I already know the types of responses I'm going to get there. Forcing discussions like these to places like those is what's creates echo-chambers. Anyway, I just wanted to say thank you to the lainons who posted well thought-out responses regardless of their beliefs. I'm glad we could have a genuine conversation, if only for a moment.

>>8574 >>8575 Haha, nevermind, I think I figured out which word was added to the spam list. (Please don't delete me for evasion, there's no other way to express what I'm trying to say this and this is the last post I'll make on the subject).

>>8575 Also I meant >>>/hum/29753 not >>>/hum/29727

>>8575 Fwiw I thought it was a good thread and am very disappointed that we couldnt collectively just be mature about it. I would encourage you to make more threads like it, but with less sensitive subject matter. This crowd just isnt ready for that kind of discussion, the best thing to do is just recognize it and accept it.

>>8430 I second this request.

https://archive.is/x7iR6 here is proof that its by one guy or a group of trolls, been spamming this nonstop

>>8579 >>8575 You're schizo posting your post about not being a schizoposter? C'mon man, at least fuarrrking TRY to sound believable.

>>8575 Sorry that it wasn't locked and warned like the other thread, with the additional 2 weeks of post life I wasn't sure that the spam brigading in other threads for another 14 days was sustainable. As it is there was a much higher load of spam in response to its deletion.

>>8588 Yeah, no worries. I never imagined it would cause so many problems. Sorry to do that to you.

I wasn't here when the supposed "spam" happened but was it really necessary to delete the whole fuarrrking thing? What are the mods trying to obliterate?

>>8591 fuarrrk off pedo