Topic: TC is so dead
Anonymous A started this discussion 6 years ago #96,756
No one has posted there in over 24 hours!Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 1 minute later[^] [v] #1,092,438
Eco must have been arrested again.
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 7 minutes later, 8 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,439
Delete the eco spam threads and you'd basically have a month of threads on the front page.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 22 minutes later, 31 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,441
Minichan: the thinking person's BBS(tm)
Anonymous B replied with this 6 years ago, 9 minutes later, 40 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,442
@1,092,439 (C)
And even if you took away the Eco posts, a good chunk of the activity after that is topics about Minichan drama.
And even if you took away the Eco posts, a good chunk of the activity after that is topics about Minichan drama.
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 30 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,444
Since On abandoned the place a while ago it's left Namefag in sole charge, and no forum moderated by him was ever likely to last long.
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,446
Anonymous E replied with this 6 years ago, 11 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,447
@previous (F)
Nah, he was ok as mods go. When Namefag was turning off the mod edit notice to change people's posts, On told him to cut it out. He also tried to get him to ease back on banning pretty much everyone from the forum but in the end just gave up and left.
Nah, he was ok as mods go. When Namefag was turning off the mod edit notice to change people's posts, On told him to cut it out. He also tried to get him to ease back on banning pretty much everyone from the forum but in the end just gave up and left.
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU replied with this 6 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,449
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 2 hours later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,517
Posting was down for a while. That’s why it looks so “dead”.
(Edited 31 seconds later.)
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 4 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,521
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 6 years ago, 48 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,538
@1,092,517 (G)
> Posting was down for a while. That’s why it looks so “dead”.
Let the autistic shit posting resume!
> Posting was down for a while. That’s why it looks so “dead”.
Let the autistic shit posting resume!
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 12 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,542
@1,092,447 (E)
On used to be an okay mod. Most recently, he threatened to ban people for calling out pedophiles. A bit concerning, if you ask me.
On used to be an okay mod. Most recently, he threatened to ban people for calling out pedophiles. A bit concerning, if you ask me.
Anonymous C replied with this 6 years ago, 11 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,545
@previous (I)
He didn't threaten to ban anyone. He just asked that the number of posts about pedophilia be kept to a minimum.
He didn't threaten to ban anyone. He just asked that the number of posts about pedophilia be kept to a minimum.
Anonymous B replied with this 6 years ago, 15 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,550
@previous (C)
Oh, so was the "defending pedophiles" actually him telling the local obsessives to pipe down? That's much more plausible.
Oh, so was the "defending pedophiles" actually him telling the local obsessives to pipe down? That's much more plausible.
Anonymous C replied with this 6 years ago, 13 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,556
@previous (B)
Pretty much. The 3 or 4 regulars there are obsessed with the subject and it was at a stage where every thread was flooded with them calling each other pedos.
Pretty much. The 3 or 4 regulars there are obsessed with the subject and it was at a stage where every thread was flooded with them calling each other pedos.
(Edited 30 seconds later.)
Anonymous I replied with this 6 years ago, 29 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,559
@1,092,545 (C)
He did, actually. Not publicly, but via PM.
@1,092,550 (B)
Normally I'd see it this way, but he didn't do anything to advise any of the other dedicated spammers to pipe down. That's where the concern is coming from. Why only choose the Anti-pedo spam and ignore all others?
He did, actually. Not publicly, but via PM.
@1,092,550 (B)
Normally I'd see it this way, but he didn't do anything to advise any of the other dedicated spammers to pipe down. That's where the concern is coming from. Why only choose the Anti-pedo spam and ignore all others?
Anonymous C replied with this 6 years ago, 1 hour later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,570
@previous (I)
You seriously want to suggest that On sent you a PM saying "If you continue to call out pedophiles, I will ban you"? That's bullshit and you know it is.
You seriously want to suggest that On sent you a PM saying "If you continue to call out pedophiles, I will ban you"? That's bullshit and you know it is.
Anonymous B replied with this 6 years ago, 5 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,572
@1,092,559 (I)
No, I think Anonymous C is right. There's plenty of dullards in these parts who will call each other paedophiles and such all day if they're allowed to. They're like robots. Minichan has moderation so they're kept under control here, but they'd run rampant in a place with hardly any moderation.
No, I think Anonymous C is right. There's plenty of dullards in these parts who will call each other paedophiles and such all day if they're allowed to. They're like robots. Minichan has moderation so they're kept under control here, but they'd run rampant in a place with hardly any moderation.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
tteh !MemesToDNA joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 6 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,576
Anonymous I replied with this 6 years ago, 1 hour later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,595
@1,092,570 (C)
It actually isn't bullshit. And if you'd read my comment to completion, you'd realize my issue with him isn't because he is anti-spam. It's because he singled out one of many issues with spam and ignored all others.
@previous (tteh !MemesToDNA)
I'll happily admit that, because that isn't my issue with him.
It actually isn't bullshit. And if you'd read my comment to completion, you'd realize my issue with him isn't because he is anti-spam. It's because he singled out one of many issues with spam and ignored all others.
@previous (tteh !MemesToDNA)
I'll happily admit that, because that isn't my issue with him.
Anonymous C replied with this 6 years ago, 30 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,599
@previous (I)
So you're doubling down on the claim that On sent you a PM and said he'd ban you if you didn't stop "calling out pedophiles"? That's how he phrased it?
Yeah, you have no credibility.
So you're doubling down on the claim that On sent you a PM and said he'd ban you if you didn't stop "calling out pedophiles"? That's how he phrased it?
Yeah, you have no credibility.
Anonymous I replied with this 6 years ago, 15 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,600
@previous (C)
Oh, you must be from TC. Your low-effort/heated trolling is very telling of your intentions in this discussion.
Oh, you must be from TC. Your low-effort/heated trolling is very telling of your intentions in this discussion.
jodi !ariasXXmaE joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 5 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,602
how dead is it
Anonymous C replied with this 6 years ago, 3 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,604
@1,092,600 (I)
I'm saying there is no way On threatened to ban you for "calling out pedophiles". The guy was historically one of the strictest deleters and banners of actual nonce stuff on there. The fact you're lying about his PM to you indicates you still haven't realized why he asked you to stop doing what you were doing.
I'm saying there is no way On threatened to ban you for "calling out pedophiles". The guy was historically one of the strictest deleters and banners of actual nonce stuff on there. The fact you're lying about his PM to you indicates you still haven't realized why he asked you to stop doing what you were doing.
Anonymous I replied with this 6 years ago, 56 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,619
@previous (C)
My guy, scroll up and read my previous replies. I know exactly why he was doing it. He was cleaning up spam. My concern is that he doesn't clean up the other 90% that's plaguing the site. He hasn't even merged an Eco thread in ages. He gave up on every other bit, then randomly decided to care about that one specific type of spam.
How have you not grasped that yet? Are you that desperate to have an ongoing argument on a forum?
My guy, scroll up and read my previous replies. I know exactly why he was doing it. He was cleaning up spam. My concern is that he doesn't clean up the other 90% that's plaguing the site. He hasn't even merged an Eco thread in ages. He gave up on every other bit, then randomly decided to care about that one specific type of spam.
How have you not grasped that yet? Are you that desperate to have an ongoing argument on a forum?
Anonymous L joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 4 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,621
On is a pedo
Anonymous C replied with this 6 years ago, 7 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,625
@1,092,619 (I)
> My guy, scroll up and read my previous replies.
Ok...
@1,092,542 (I)
> Most recently, he threatened to ban people for calling out pedophiles.
Yeah, you were full of shit.
> My guy, scroll up and read my previous replies.
Ok...
@1,092,542 (I)
> Most recently, he threatened to ban people for calling out pedophiles.
Yeah, you were full of shit.
Anonymous I replied with this 6 years ago, 1 hour later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,643
@previous (C)
See also:
> Normally I'd see it this way, but he didn't do anything to advise any of the other dedicated spammers to pipe down. That's where the concern is coming from. Why only choose the Anti-pedo spam and ignore all others?
Your replies have proven to be nonsensical and are only derailing my original point. In other words, I won't be acknowledging you anymore. Take the "win" if you'd like, hot-headed Anon.
See also:
> Normally I'd see it this way, but he didn't do anything to advise any of the other dedicated spammers to pipe down. That's where the concern is coming from. Why only choose the Anti-pedo spam and ignore all others?
Your replies have proven to be nonsensical and are only derailing my original point. In other words, I won't be acknowledging you anymore. Take the "win" if you'd like, hot-headed Anon.
Anonymous C replied with this 6 years ago, 8 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,645
@previous (I)
Just so you know, this is the kind of thing you got warned for:
https://tinychan.org/topic/55324#reply_581470
You're a very weird and sick person.
Just so you know, this is the kind of thing you got warned for:
https://tinychan.org/topic/55324#reply_581470
You're a very weird and sick person.
Anonymous I replied with this 6 years ago, 2 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,646
Anonymous C replied with this 6 years ago, 20 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,653
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 22 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,656
How can this be? Bert said TC is where it's at...
Anonymous I replied with this 6 years ago, 6 hours later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,763
Anonymous N joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 33 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,766
They probably just need some motivational bulletins.
Anonymous C replied with this 6 years ago, 7 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,835
Anonymous I replied with this 6 years ago, 3 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,933
@previous (C)
That isn't anti-pedo spam. I fail to see why you think that comment is what I've gotten warned for.
That isn't anti-pedo spam. I fail to see why you think that comment is what I've gotten warned for.
Anonymous C replied with this 6 years ago, 17 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,937
@previous (I)
You really are very slow up on the uptake aren't you?
Anyway, you were warned because you write really weird and psychotic posts about how great it is when people's relatives die. People who you don't even know beyond an internet shtick. You get yourself into these really intense and obsessive battles with people where you'll spend weeks spamming relies over and over again. In the end, we stepped in.
You really are very slow up on the uptake aren't you?
Anyway, you were warned because you write really weird and psychotic posts about how great it is when people's relatives die. People who you don't even know beyond an internet shtick. You get yourself into these really intense and obsessive battles with people where you'll spend weeks spamming relies over and over again. In the end, we stepped in.
Anonymous I replied with this 6 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,939
@previous (C)
Do you think that linked comment was me? What in this thread made you believe that was me? Also, are you Matt? I've never gone after your dead relatives. Mods can look through my history if they'd like. Sorry I unintentionally stuck a chord with you there, man. Try and calm down a bit.
Do you think that linked comment was me? What in this thread made you believe that was me? Also, are you Matt? I've never gone after your dead relatives. Mods can look through my history if they'd like. Sorry I unintentionally stuck a chord with you there, man. Try and calm down a bit.
Anonymous C replied with this 6 years ago, 8 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,947
@previous (I)
> Mods can look through my history if they'd like.
You're still not getting it are you?
> Mods can look through my history if they'd like.
You're still not getting it are you?
Anonymous O joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,951
Anonymous C replied with this 6 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,962
Killer Lettuce? !HonkUK.BIE replied with this 6 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,963
Anonymous P joined in and replied with this 6 years ago, 25 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,975
Father Merrin !u5oFWxmY7U replied with this 6 years ago, 33 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,984
@1,092,559 (I)
> Normally I'd see it this way, but he didn't do anything to advise any of the other dedicated spammers to pipe down. That's where the concern is coming from. Why only choose the Anti-pedo spam and ignore all others?
Hello friend!
If I'm remembering correctly there was someone on that site - I don't recall his name - who kept deliberately goading its 4 regular users into posting non-stop spam about pedophilia. I think he said his aim was to clog the board up with nothing but threads where the same 4 people accused each other of being pedophiles over and over and over again, for no greater reason than his own amusement and to make every normal user leave the place.
I think that's what On was trying to crack down upon. It wasn't so much 'spam' in general (hence why On allowed eco to keep posting his threads). I think he wanted to stop those 4 regulars from being so effortlessly tricked into turning the board into nothing more than "You're a pedo", "No, YOU'RE a pedo", "You seem mad", "No, YOU seem mad", and so on. Because such a thing would end up killing Tinychan, and nobody wants to see that happen.
Bless you for the observations, friend!
> Normally I'd see it this way, but he didn't do anything to advise any of the other dedicated spammers to pipe down. That's where the concern is coming from. Why only choose the Anti-pedo spam and ignore all others?
Hello friend!
If I'm remembering correctly there was someone on that site - I don't recall his name - who kept deliberately goading its 4 regular users into posting non-stop spam about pedophilia. I think he said his aim was to clog the board up with nothing but threads where the same 4 people accused each other of being pedophiles over and over and over again, for no greater reason than his own amusement and to make every normal user leave the place.
I think that's what On was trying to crack down upon. It wasn't so much 'spam' in general (hence why On allowed eco to keep posting his threads). I think he wanted to stop those 4 regulars from being so effortlessly tricked into turning the board into nothing more than "You're a pedo", "No, YOU'RE a pedo", "You seem mad", "No, YOU seem mad", and so on. Because such a thing would end up killing Tinychan, and nobody wants to see that happen.
Bless you for the observations, friend!
Anonymous I replied with this 6 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,985
@1,092,947 (C)
Your lack of denial is leading me to believe you're Matt. Would it help if I told you I respect your privacy and the privacy of your family? Again, I've never even thought about abusing you on such matters.
Your lack of denial is leading me to believe you're Matt. Would it help if I told you I respect your privacy and the privacy of your family? Again, I've never even thought about abusing you on such matters.
Anonymous C replied with this 6 years ago, 10 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,092,999
@previous (I)
> Your lack of denial is leading me to believe you're Matt.
You've said that already, dumbass. And I can only respond by reminding you that this forum has a policy of temporarily banning people who mistakenly accuse others of being Matt. So do you want to go ahead and officially make the claim?
> Your lack of denial is leading me to believe you're Matt.
You've said that already, dumbass. And I can only respond by reminding you that this forum has a policy of temporarily banning people who mistakenly accuse others of being Matt. So do you want to go ahead and officially make the claim?
Anonymous I replied with this 6 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,093,005
@previous (C)
I'm not "accusing", I'm making an observation and apologizing for getting under your skin so hard. All you had to do was say "it's cool" or something. I'm just trying to calm you down here and have a civil discussion. No hard feelings. <3
I'm not "accusing", I'm making an observation and apologizing for getting under your skin so hard. All you had to do was say "it's cool" or something. I'm just trying to calm you down here and have a civil discussion. No hard feelings. <3
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous C replied with this 6 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,093,007
@previous (I)
> I'm not "accusing", I'm making an observation
Relax bud, I didn't mean to put you on the defensive. Nobody's going to ban you for seeing Matt everywhere.
> I'm not "accusing", I'm making an observation
Relax bud, I didn't mean to put you on the defensive. Nobody's going to ban you for seeing Matt everywhere.