Melanie Herring / Purplekecleon / PK / PapayaKitty / GlitchedPuppet / Ash Hazel Woods / Floraverse - Abusive, manipulative SJW artist whose ex-husband fucked a dog and teenagers and whose current husband thinks he's trans because of a TF fetish, admitted to fucking two dogs and letting her cat eat her out

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.

So what's your deal, anyway?

  • I used to be a fan of PK's and was already a Kiwi

    Votes: 235 7.9%
  • I made an account just to post in this thread

    Votes: 265 8.9%
  • I was never a fan of PK's but this shit fascinates me

    Votes: 1,318 44.1%
  • This thread is a fucking circlejerk trainwreck and I wanna watch

    Votes: 1,171 39.2%

  • Total voters
    2,988
For the record, there is an "Edit Silently" option, but I only use it to fix people's spelling errors.
Off topic but...the fact that's an ability is kinda terrifying because it's mere existence can be used as ammo to question anything posted on the farms by the cows themselves.:c
 
Last edited:
The only times mods have edited shit is to fix awful grammar and to merge double posting unless the person goes off the deep end and starts making nonsensical and offtopic posts or if they post shit that's actually illegal. The entire ratings system exists so that other users can tell you that your post was retarded.
 
The only times mods have edited shit is to fix awful grammar and to merge double posting unless the person goes off the deep end and starts making nonsensical and offtopic posts or if they post shit that's actually illegal.
Except that will make the post display it was edited by a moderator. Silent edit to me sounds like it doesn't display a moderator edited a post. I don't think you're understanding. I get staff isn't gonna abuse it, but a lolcow doesn't.
 
Last edited:
Alright, I'm gonna try something different here.

What logic applies to openly admitting moderation can edit our posts without the site displaying it on a thread that a cow has displayed they actively read while also displaying a great deal of paranoia? There was pretty much no chance of Glip or Eevee manning up and coming on here but now it's a certainty.
 
What logic applies to hiding it? If they found out about it some other way they would still throw a fit about it. Even if it weren't possible they would probably assume it was anyway. Moderators being able to moderate a forum isn't a big deal.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: beepboopbloop
What logic applies to hiding it? If they found out about it some other way they would still throw a fit about it. Even if it weren't possible they would probably assume it was anyway. Moderators being able to moderate a forum isn't a big deal.
Except now they have a staff member admitting said function exists, thereby vindicating them of their paranoia.
 
Except now they have a staff member admitting said function exists, thereby vindicating them of their paranoia.
They've been caught using the same function on the Floraverse website, except maliciously. If they complain about it here then all we have to do is point and laugh about them being hypocrites.
 
They've been caught using the same function on the Floraverse website, except maliciously. If they complain about it here then all we have to do is point and laugh about them being hypocrites.
Point taken. Granted they can do the same then.
 
The ability to silent-edit really shouldn't come as a surprise to Eevee and Glip. They've moderated their own comments sections before using similar methods. Being honest and transparent about the function would give paranoid verified users a chance to screencap/archive their posts before a mod tampers with them, if they really didn't trust KF.

Ninja'd
 
Except now they have a staff member admitting said function exists, thereby vindicating them of their paranoia.
If they get super paranoid, they can archive the page after posting and when the edits happen, they have proof that the admins have edited the post.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Upsy Daisy
I'm just going to go on record saying I don't want Glip or Eevee to be here. having the person of interest visit the forums is almost never as interesting as is hoped, and the odds are it would just be a predictable slap fight with them tweeting a side storm off to the side about how 'boring' and 'out of touch with reality' and shit we are.

also, the point isn't to get Glip (or Eevee's) attention either. I laughed when Glip was talking about "okay KF you finally have my attention now what"- because that's really not what the goal is- it's not about interacting with Glip. anyone can do that by literally messaging Glip wherever. I don't want Glip's attention. I don't want to talk to Glip. I want to watch what's going on and discuss it like a season of a weird tv show because people are fucking fascinating. and also giving Glip 1:1 attention is just feeding them anyway.

honestly, threads are most interesting when the subject doesn't know they have a thread or that people are watching them- watching how someone behaves without interference is a thousand times more interesting than "THE FARMS ARE OUT TO GET ME". that's what kf is for- cow watching. we don't make harassment campaigns. we're not supposed to poke the cows. we're supposed to just watch and record. obviously you can't put the genie back into the bottle in this case, but that's my opinion.

the stuff with Lian and Bigfluff was pretty pivitol. I'm glad that info got out, I'm glad it made people aware. But that wasn't a campaign by us, that was just the result of us having the information.
 
What? KF's purpose is to archive this stuff. Why would we ever edit their posts anyway, to make them look bad? How could we do a better job than the one they've done themselves? Tampering with their posts would kind of go against the reason for this site.

The "smear campaign" they think is happening is just that we have receipts of the mean shit they've said and done and they absolutely refuse to acknowledge any of it was their fault. We don't have to edit shit.

Also yeah, the hypocrisy is real.
 
Body count... do they mean Chloe Sagal? I read their ED article and Kiwifarms is barely mentioned, with this site only documenting the attention they brought to themselves. A lot of websites and people were blamed for their suicide that had way more involvement. Good lord, that person was mentally unstable without any help. If anybody wants to read the article that's fairly new to KF, it's right here: https://encyclopediadramatica.rs/Chloe_Sagal
 
  • Informative
Reactions: NoFeline
It's funny, really. She cries and complains about how no one will explain what she's done wrong, loads of people attempt to explain what she's done wrong for years but "they were mean" "they were in bad faith" "they misgendered her" "they were rude" "they were mentally ill" "they remembered wrong" so all of their statements can be discarded completely. It's splitting. If she was going to understand it she would have by now.

(this is actually a combo of narcissistic deflection and devaluation, not splitting. they know what they're doing wrong, theyre just a narc. they know theyre in the wrong so they resort to deflection and devaluation in order to not actually take responsibility for the things they did)
 
Back