💬 Off-Topic Weening

  • ⚙️ Performance issue identified and being addressed.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Status
Not open for further replies.
AnOminous said:
Fucking nothing. We're not going to do some dumb Stalinist purge. If it ever ceases to be amusing to do it it all goes public again.

If he actually doesn't have access or it's really inconvenient, it's pissing him off. If he does have access and actually has to restrain himself from openly gloating, even more funny.

I think it's more likely weens are feeding him shit selectively and that will eventually ruin it, but ultimately, who cares? It's been a hoot.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know where you're coming from, it's still making his life more difficult and pissing him off, so him seeing some posts is only a small victory. We could take the list of people who have access and cull anybody relatively new or suspicious (especially if the guilty user has true and honest status as @MMX says) but it would be effort that it's probably not worth.
 
MMX said:
More notably the
"Dont ask about xoici"
And we get a video about them the next day.
Or "bet he doesnt inhale" callout.

Honestly i dont care that phil can see content. He can pretty much guess our reactions at this point and some ween is posting our more autistic and a-loggy stuff to reddit.
What bugs me is judging by the ratings shown on the screen caps whoever is "leaking" has true and honest status.
Click to expand...

So dox them or quit bitching.
 
Karen Riley said:
Yeah, I know where you're coming from, it's still making his life more difficult and pissing him off, so him seeing some posts is only a small victory. We could take the list of people who have access and cull anybody relatively new or suspicious (especially if the guilty user has true and honest status as @MMX says) but it would be effort that it's probably not worth.
Click to expand...

You know were buds right.....
But there was a point when you were new and were generally considered a ween for giving chris money.
Cant just ban people without reason.

AnOminous said:
So dox them or quit bitching.
Click to expand...

I dont have their dox....so i guess that means i get to keep bitching until i can dox them.
Not that i care enough to do so, i just want to point and laugh.
 
MMX said:
I dont have their dox....so i guess that means i get to keep bitching until i can dox them.
Not that i care enough to do so, i just want to point and laugh.
Click to expand...

Doxing isn't bitching until you get it for free. Just do it or admit you're a pussy and don't even know how to dox someone!
 
AnOminous said:
Doxing isn't bitching until you get it for free. Just do it or admit you're a pussy and don't even know how to dox someone!
Click to expand...

How do i dox someone without knowing whos actually doing it ? (And i dont care)
Ive never claimed i did know but it doesnt take a genius to notice that the leaked posts on 8chan have access to the a-log and deviant rating enabled.
I can randomly dox people if you like but i dont think thats going to be helpful.

Gotta be honest if someone inboxed me, told me they were behind it and doxxed themselves i wouldnt care.
Its not like im a mod or supervisor, just a random user watching events unfold, i have no stake in it
 
Last edited:
MMX said:
You know were buds right.....
But there was a point when you were new and were generally considered a ween for giving chris money.
Cant just ban people without reason
Click to expand...

I don't see this as being a same thing. This was a forum that was made private in order to prevent Phil seeing what was being discussed about him. So if someone has signed up this year, rarely posts or is known by anybody and yet has access to this subforum, there's the potential they could be leaking what's said and they shouldn't be allowed to see what's discussed until they become better known around here.

There's next to no benefit in the forum being private if anyone can be let in. Just to clarify, by 'cull,' I mean they should be removed from this subforum, not banned entirely. I can get why you'd see that as a ridiculous suggestion.
 
Karen Riley said:
I don't see this as being a same thing. This was a forum that was made private in order to prevent Phil seeing what was being discussed about him. So if someone has signed up this year, rarely posts or is known by anybody and yet has access to this subforum, there's the potential they could be leaking what's said and they shouldn't be allowed to see what's discussed until they become better known around here.

There's next to no benefit in the forum being private if anyone can be let in. Just to clarify, by 'cull,' I mean they should be removed from this subforum, not banned entirely. I can get why you'd see that as a ridiculous suggestion.
Click to expand...

Lets be honest Null made the forum private to stop phil from seeing it and to prevent further tranny drama.
The only instructions we were given was to block obvious socks.
The whole access rules thing was something @Smutley @Ravenor @chimpburgers and me pulled out of our ass and immediately there were issues and exceptions, but none of it was offical it was just a case of "we think this will work". It wasnt a MOD thing or any instruction from null just a case of what i guess you could call "personal bias".
It would be pretty shitty to just revoke someones access just because were decided they no longer fit criteria or they said something suspicious.
 
Last edited:
MMX said:
Lets be honest Null made the forum private to stop phil from seeing it and to prevent further tranny drama.
The only instructions we were given was to block obvious socks.
The whole access rules thing was something @Smutley @Ravenor @chimpburgers and me pulled out of our ass and immediately there were issues and exceptions, but none of it was offical it was just a case of "we think this will work".
It would be pretty shitty to just revoke someones access just because were decided they no longer fit criteria or they said something suspicious.
Click to expand...

That's all well and good but it's becoming clear that Phil still is seeing the forum, so the purpose of privatising isn't being completely fulfilled. I love you and everyone you've listed and wouldn't have been able to do any better myself but maybe not having a clearly defined set of requirements for anybody who signed up led to too many people being granted access who didn't earn it
 
Karen Riley said:
That's all well and good but it's becoming clear that Phil still is seeing the forum
Click to expand...

Not really
Whilst its likely phil is being fed info theres nothing to indicate he has access.
For the record "I" and "another" fed phil info to let him know tweaker/EyeWasATeenageMallgoth were banned. A half truth for one and a lie for another but hes stopped his dumb threats.
Its not like phil is hard to contact or anything.

Karen Riley said:
but maybe not having a clearly defined set of requirements for anybody who signed up led to too many people being granted access who didn't earn it
Click to expand...

Strongly disagree
They fit the criteria we set down so earned it.
If a ween or sock account gained access then it shows we were too flexible.
Im not sure why people assume they need to earn access to content they can see by literally just looking at phils facebook account, its not super secret spy shit.
The assumption is that the leaker didnt earn it but ignores the fact that long established users do dumb shit all the time.
 
Tranhuviya said:
Could the supervisors compile a list of who has access, and a list of persons of interest to take a second look at?
Click to expand...

Pray tell what would they look for ?
The only reason i came up with the minimum post rule was so if we did catch a phil sock we could post any shit he talked about his fellow tranny cows.
Just keep ignoring the fact that the leaker isnt some noob
 
MMX said:
Pray tell what would they look for ?
The only reason i came up with the minimum post rule was so if we did catch a phil sock we could post any shit he talked about his fellow tranny cows.
Click to expand...


you can easily shitpost a sock account post post limit. there needs to be stricter vetting
 
CatParty said:
you can easily shitpost a sock account post post limit. there needs to be stricter vetting
Click to expand...

Gotta be honest one of the criteria we all agreed was
"Has true and honest status".
And now we have a leaker/s with true and honest status.
 
I was unaware that the Phil forum was a secret, its hardly that interesting but I can see why it should be a relatively hidden subforum.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom