>>160212
Just accept it, this site is fucked up.

Sex is not allowed for minors
Drugs are....
...
wait...

manley thread

Fine Manely, I'll give you the really blunt answer.
Because talking about drugs is more socially acceptable than talking about sex.
Deal with it.

>>160215
http://gifsound.com/?gif=https://i.imgur.com/qnDEQKV.gif&v=UINhE8L1yXg&s=60

Let's not tempt fate, Manely

>>160214
Depends on the drug. Alcohol and tobacco are drugs and both are illegal for minors to consume

>>160216
I will not "deal with it". It's fucking bullshit that worthless potheads get to talk about doing illegal things while this website demonizes sex like it's a bad thing. Why do we allow worthless disgusting people to talk about their vices and not about something that every healthy adult should?

>>160216
Ok, even I cry bullshit on that

>>160220
I don't really mean it.

Sex is a respectable act. Drugs are not.

>>160221
Stop crying

>All the mods are bisexual and have twice as much sex as most people.
I'm offended.

>>160224
And yet sex isn't allowed.

>>160226
And hypocritical.

>>160226
lol u marmalade we get half the sex?

>>160227
Because you disrespect it by bring it into public topic.

>>160225
You know what? Be quiet, Anon. I actually think Manley makes a good point!

>>160219
>I will not "deal with it"
You don't really have a choice.
>It's fucking bullshit that worthless potheads get to talk about doing illegal things while this website demonizes sex like it's a bad thing
Yes it is. What do you want to do about it?
>Why do we allow worthless disgusting people to talk about their vices and not about something that every healthy adult should?
Because that's the way things are and nobody really cares to change them.
>>160221
It's true though. Given the choice, people would rather talk about drugs on public forums than sex. And that probably reflects real life as well.

>>160219
but we do get worthless disgusting people talking about sex as if they know it

>>160231
Berry Punch tried to bring this up and basically the mods told her to shove it.

Manely, /meta/ is that way.

>>160231
>Raven telling a Anon to fuck off
I'm quite happy with this.

>>>/meta/

Bring it up on /meta/... they're still not gonna do shit about it, but this isn't the board for it.

>>160232
You don't change things by not talking about it. You always take a "that's the way things are, can't change it" attitude about everything. And that's really kind of sad.

>>160238
This isn't asking the mods to change anything. They already told Berry Punch they weren't going to change it. This is just pointing out the hypocrisy.

>>160234
Well, its like this:
Make them both allowed or make neither of them allowed
Don't make one allowed and the other not!

Last edited at Fri, Aug 15th, 2014 18:34

>>160219

>looks out window
>pigs are not flying
>gravity is still functioning
>the tenth level of hell has not overrun the face of the earth

>agreeing with Manley

>>160234
She wasn't making any good arguments other than "get rid of this I don't like this". Of course nobody took her seriously.
>>160235
>>160237
>>160238
Please no, I'd rather it die here than go on for days on /meta/.
>>160239
The problem is that a LARGE amount of people on this site disagree with you. Not everypony wants to change it. You are not the only person on this site.

>>160240
There is no hypocrisy.

>>160234
Mostly because she's really bad at presenting arguments which are coherent much less reasonable. I don't think a conversation about drug top is unmerited, it just needs a more rational and capable champion such as... well frankly not you either.

>>160231
I don't give a fuck. It's the reason he made this thread that bothers me. It's the reason he makes every thread for that matter.

>>160243
I agree with him. Why not fucking but drugs? Makes no sense to me.

>>160243
Shuckle!
Don't you see people in this thread ARE agreeing?

>>160246
Oh yeah? And what's that reason, Anny?

>>160241

>Make them both allowed or make neither of them allowed

Why?

>>160243
Meta it is, then.

>>160245
Yeah, I didn't read much of it. But it is sort of a weird issue. Drugs are illegal. Talking about other illegal activities is not allowed here either. We don't have threads about stealing every day or assualt every day. And sex IS legal.

>>160250
It's like black people allowed to say the N word, but white people not. It's not fair.

Just like people are allowed to talk about being high and tripping balls, but not allowed to talk about getting laid.

If one is allowed and the other isn't, there's a problem

>>160249
Attention seeking. He doesn't actually give a fuck about the majority of things he goes on about.

>>160218
that is a really unrelated picture.

>>160252
>It's like black people allowed to say the N word, but white people not. It's not fair.

Yeah I'd have to say thats not like that at all

>>160251
Because the mods are basing it on "What will piss off the larger amount of users?" rather than rational or moral arguments.
I mean, yeah I agree that it's bullshit, but I don't see any chance of it changing.

>>160252

>It's like black people allowed to say the N word, but white people not. It's not fair.

One, it's not hard to understand why there's a huge difference between blacks and whites using that word.

Two, how the fuck is what you just said related in any way to my question?

>>160248
Shuckle always thinks the status quo is infallible. If something is a certain way then that's "Just how things are" and "we can't change it." even if he agrees that it's wrong. It's something we disagree on a lot.

>>160254
It's related because Manely loves porkymon. Esp. glaceon given how many times he posts that OP everywhere.

>>160259
BUt I told you i don't like these pictures. They're too...feral, I guess? And I don't like piercings.

>>160247
It makes sense: Ponychan has a large population that is not ok with talking about sex, but is ok with talking about drugs. What is there not to get?
>>160248
There four people who agree in this thread: You, Manley, Strangehoof(?), and one anon. 5 if you count Berry Punch. You're up against from what I can tell is the majority of Ponychan. Good luck.
Though I will say if you do attempt this you might have better luck if you go on the "Ban all drug talk" platform than "ban all drug but allow sex talk" or "allow both drug talk and sex talk" platform.
>>160252
>It's like black people allowed to say the N word, but white people not. It's not fair.
Raven no. Please no. Jesus christ this is turning into the 9/11 of threads.
>>160258
I don't think the status quo is infallible, I just know when to pick my battles (somewhat).
Also nice quads.

>>160260
>nonips

>>160261
>You're up against from what I can tell is the majority of Ponychan. Good luck.

Where the hell are you getting this from?

>>160260
>not pimping out your pokemon with jewelry

>>160257
You must be really thick headed.

If it is so racist for a white man to say that word, why is it acceptable for a black man to say it? If anything, they would be insulting themselves by saying it, because it is a degrading word used against black people

Just like sex vs. drugs
Sex is legal (at the appropriate age of course)
But drugs aren't legal PERIOD.
SO, how does making drug posts allowed when sex posts aren't allowed work?.

>>160244
I pointed out to him the actual definitions of "Hypocrisy" and "Hypocrite" on Skype and explained why they aren't applicable here, but I guess he just ignored me.

>>160261
How is it "ok" to talk about illegal drugs with minors but not sex? Neither is allowed, this website is just being lenient on drug talks for no reason.

And you "pick your battles" and I pick mine. And I'm going to point out how stupid that line of thinking is and how hypocritical they are being. Bringing it up MAY not change it, but completely ignoring it certainly wont change it.

>>160265
Alcohol and caffeine are two examples of legal drugs. Cannabis is legalized in two states and legalized for medical purposes in many others.

>>160265
>If it is so racist for a white man to say that word, why is it acceptable for a black man to say it?

You are really, really dense, aren't you?

Or am I being trolled, here?

>>160265

>You must be really thick headed.

No, you're the thick-headed one and there is a huge fucking difference between a black dude and a white dude using that word. I mean this is literally the definition of white privilege right here (inb4 lol sjw).

Drugs are perfectly legal, I picked up some drugs the other day. At a store for drugs. A drugstore, if you will. It seems there's drugstores all over the country. Crazy!

And what if I lived in Colorado or Washington? I could smoke weed every day. And it would be totally legal.

>>160268
Alcohol is illegal for minors. So is tobacco. And many other drugs are regulated or outright illegal.

>>160265
It comes from an idea of "reclaiming" a negative word. It's not really a practice that always works or is universally agreed on. I certainly don't use that word, because it's bad.

While this thread is going downhill, how do you guys feel about gender roles in today's society?

>>160270
You just proved my point, dumbass!

If drugs are even being made legal, and sex is legal, that just PROVES even more so that they should be both allowed

>>160268
>>160271
Sorry i missed the entire point of your post bro lol

>>160271
That's correct. Still, saying "Drugs are illegal PERIOD" is simply not true.

>>160263
From Berry Punch's thread on /meta/, and the fact that people have been fighting this "Allow all lewd speak" for years now and it's always failed. It's always failed for a reason: Ponychan doesn't want it. Like I said, if you want to go ban all drugs, maybe you'll have success, but Manley's proposition is pretty much a no go.
>>160265
Raven please I beg of you stop. Don't do this man.
>>160267
>Neither is allowed, this website is just being lenient on drug talks for no reason.
It's not for no reason, it's because the site populace is generally ok with it. What is hard to understand about this?
>And you "pick your battles" and I pick mine
Ok. You're picking a really fucking stupid battle.

>>160273
Lets also talk about the homosexuals!

>>160274

Porn is legal and it's not allowed to be posted on this site.

Posting somepony's full name, telephone number, and address is legal too.

Guess what? Neither is allowed on this site.

Therefore your logic fails and you're wrong, try again!

>>160277
You know what? I think this thread is crying out bullshit on something that makes sense, so I won't back down unless I can't take it anymore

>>160277
I'd rather sex AND drugs talk be banned than just sex. And the "site general populace being ok with it" is wrong. The "general populace" was ok with sex talk too. That's why the mods had to crack down on it. There was so much of it. Sounds like they were plenty ok with it. It is the mods who decided it wasn't allowed. The only reason one is allowed and one isn't is because of their policies.

And if you think it's stupid, go find something else to do?

>>160280
>Manley, and Raven team up to argue about something

>>160279
And posting pictures of pot and heroin and meth is???????? How the fucking hell does that make sense?!?!?!?!?

>>160282
I'm not affiliated with him!

>>160283
>implying graphic pictures of hard drug use won't be deleted

>>160283
I am personally triggered by pictures of white dust and dried leaves.

>>160283

Your point you were trying to make desperately was "It's legal therefore it should be allowed."

I gave you two examples of things that are legal and against the rules.

Simply saying "It's legal!" is not a compelling argument for both being allowed.

Try again.

You're not allowed to talk about sex here? Why?

>>160284
But I like your idea!

>>160288

because ur gay

  I didn't want to do drugs again until I saw this thread and the other one. Oh well. Shouldn't do that shit, just the alcohol talking.
Posting gravediggaz because gravediggaz is always appropriate.

>>160288
You are. You just aren't allowed to make threads about sex because at one point they threatened to overwhelm the board.

>>160288
The mods basically said there were too many lewd threads before I came back and cracked down on them. Which left room to be filled with constant drug and Rarity threads.

>>160285
You'd think those would be more warning of effects pictures than anything. Though they could fall under gore sometimes I guess.

>>160285
Let's test that theory!

  *sigh* Is meta gonna tell me to screw off like they told Berry? Well in that case...

>>39350054
I don't' see how Rarity threads should be banned though. This is a MLP fansite, Rarity is a main character. Seems a bit silly to get mad about Rarity threads.

Why sex threads are not allowed:
http://www.ponychan.net/chan/?p=rules#63

Why drug threads are not allowed:
http://www.ponychan.net/chan/?p=rules#OhWaitTheresNothingBecauseTalkingAboutTheUseOfIllegalSubstancesIsInNoWayComparableToTalkingAboutSexualPursuits

>>160295
I'm not sure you know what the word 'graphic' means

Also the filename is hilarious
>The-Signs-of-Cocaine-Addiction.jpg
"If you, or someone you know, often snorts cocaine through rolled up dollar bills you may be addicted to cocaine"

>>160298
Exactly., the only reason one is allowed and the other isn't is because the mods arbitrarily decided one was bad and didn't need to be talked about and one was ok. And the rules reflect that arbitrary decision.

Don't throw the rules in my face when a rule about not talking about drugs could just as easily have been added at the same time.

>>160300
You are correct, it could have.

The reason it was not added is because talking about the use of illegal substances is in no way comparable to talking about sexual pursuits.

>>160300

>scribbles "arbitrary" down in list of words Manley does not understand

>>160301
And WHY, may I ask?

>>160301
Why is one allowed but the other not? Sex is legal, drugs are not. Threads about committing other crimes are not allowed, but drug threads are. There is a bias there for no clear reason.

>thread dead
YA-
>moved to /meta/
Oh boy here we go. Well, might as well retype out my post.

>>160280
You're gonna regret that I'm just gonna let you know that right now.
>>160281
>I'd rather sex AND drugs talk be banned than just sex
That's a little bit better, you might actually get some support with that.
>The "general populace" was ok with sex talk too. That's why the mods had to crack down on it. There was so much of it.
There was so much of it because about 3-4 users would shit up threads with it constantly and it was cracked down upon because everyone on the entire board complained.
>And if you think it's stupid, go find something else to do?
Because I care about you and I don't want fuck up even more than you already did. Also I didn't want a 300 post meta thread about nothing. Though that seems unavoidable now.
>>160288
Allowed:
Hey I just lost my virginity but I forgot to wear a condom, am I screwed?
Not Allowed:
EXPLICITLY TALKING ABOUT SEX
pls don't ban mods I'm giving an example

Last edited at Fri, Aug 15th, 2014 19:19

  Is this graphic depiction of drug use?
If not, it's still okay to tell folks how to correctly take DXM right? Even though recreational use of DXM is illegal in every state, it causes brain damage and is an addictive drug? Cause I've told folks how to get high on it plenty of times and the only warnings I've ever got were for sexual remarks or that one time I posted gore.

>>160301
How is it not comparable?

>>160302
Wouldn't the inverse of that list be more efficient?

>>160304
Sam talks a lot about how much she likes to steal things, which is honestly kinda weird... but she's kinda weird.

I'd rather they banned pokeshit and animeshit.

now that we're in meta, wasnt manley warned and banned in the past for being a weird shithead when it comes to gays and such? why is he once again allowed to do the same stuff which has caused so much trouble in the past all over again

>>160305
<pls don't ban mods I'm giving an example

Can I post some "examples" of hardcore pornography (purely academic reasons) and not receive a ban?

>>160310

Must be good buddies with Orange..

>>160310

I wonder if the increase in the amount of anons doing that stuff is because they saw Manley doing it and not getting banned and figured it was a free ticket to do likewise.

See, I'd be fine with restricting talk of drug use if the users want it if only we had some nice, clearly defined parameters like in the no sex threads thing. Making talking about drugs on the site against the rules would be absurd, but using the sex threads as a template for something similar with drugs could work out. The OPs would be the only thing judged.

>>160311
Fair point.

>>160305
You know what Shuckle? Alright.
I said what I wanted to say, I'm done. I got other things to deal with right now

>>160303
>>160304
>>160307
A story about sex can be called pornography and can be used as a masturbation aid due to creating mental images depending on choice of and arrangement of words.
A story about drug use is not comparable to actually using the substances it describes, and cannot be used as an aid for taking them unless the story specifically goes into detail about proper use.
Which in itself might fall under the "Do not use this website for planning or conducting any activities which violate United States law." part of this websites rules, if not for the fact that simply talking about the proper method does not force or encourage people to take illegal substances any more than a murder mystery encourages people to kill another human being.

>>160310
"Because orange unbanned him" is my best guess, asking other mods about it since you raise a pretty good point.

>>160314

Mods should also post ponies. Represent the chan theme.

>>160316
You've made a wise decision.

>>160314
Something like that would be a nice compromise. Because use the same baseline for other illegal or controversial activities.

>>160312
He's Orng's bf

>>160317

be prepared for "b-but we like him, teh ride never ends lulz" and such i am sure

w/e

>>160320
>Manley being reasonable
This is good start.

>>160321

Must be.

>>160314
I don't agree that there are clearly defined parameters for the sex. I've been banned over vaguely defined sex rules too much in the past to even remotely agree with that.

>>160318
Got something against Zebras and Griffons, bub?

I don't have many pone pics on my phone.

>>160317
So it's only decided by what other people choose to do with the discussion and not actually the discussion? Some people get off to violence, but talk about violent acts is still allowed.

>>160317
>>160310
You're gonna have to define what "weird shithead" means before you can even poise that a serious question. Also talking about homosexuals is not why I was banned.

Last edited at Fri, Aug 15th, 2014 19:25

>>160326

Put some on your phone?

>>160324
=3

>>160327
Heeey, some most people get off to ponies, why aren't they banned?

Last edited at Fri, Aug 15th, 2014 19:26

>>160327

"gays are sluts that get twice as much sex as everyone!" is something many people have told you to shut the hell up about in the past yet you keep saying it. you've been warned before about that shit too, yet ever since orange brought you back you've basically had free reign to shit all over people all over again

Last edited at Fri, Aug 15th, 2014 19:27

>>160317
>A story about sex can be called pornography and can be used as a masturbation aid due to creating mental images depending on choice of and arrangement of words.
Not all discussions about sex have this intention, and I rarely see any any on this site that do, even counting threads that are moved or deleted.

> if not for the fact that simply talking about the proper method does not force or encourage people to take illegal substances
And discussion about sex forces people to masturbate?

>any more than a murder mystery encourages people to kill another human being.
That still doesn't prevent anybody from encouraging it. As far as I know, I can go right ahead and make a thread titled "Everybody should smoke meth" without any negative consequences. That simply wouldn't be the case if the topic was "everybody should try anal."

I'm only going to skim this thread since anything Manley posts is brain-damaging and can only serve to cause trouble, but did no one really comment on
>the mods are bisexual and have twice as much sex as most people.

>getting laid

>>160330

Makes sense. Orange is the worst thing about this place. It limps along miraculously despite him.

  >>160317
But plenty of times me and Crimson have gone into exact detail on the correct manner to use dxm in a recreational manner and I've never gotten so much as a warning. Going into what brands to buy, substances to avoid, dosing procedures, all of that sorta thing.
Since the mods have never reacted to it and the users have never reported me on such I always assumed that going into details on how to perform illegal drug use was perfectly condoned by both the users and staff.

I don't see how it's different from telling people the correct method for turning powder cocaine into crack cocaine. I've even shared the recipe for extracting LSA from morning glory seeds, a procedure which is illegal in every state in America, multiple times.

So if it's only based on if we have proof that someone follows through with the instructions, then that's an absurd metric for moderation. You've effectively legalized detailed instructions on law breaking to be posted as long as folks say "It was only academic of course."

From my experience on the chan, it's easy as fuck to share illegal drug recipes and instructions, I've done it plenty of times without so much as a warning. It's not even a rule really, much less an enforced one.

>>160330
That picture is not allowed.

>>160331
Not once did I say "gays are sluts" in this post. I said bisexuals have more sex, because they are attracted to both sexes. I can ask to have that part removed if it bothers you. But I haven't had "free reign" I have been watching what I say about homosexuals, sex and other topics.As per the rules. You're just mad I was allowed to come back at all.

>>160333
2x0=0

>>160333
People did, anon.

>>160337
>tfw

>>160335
>plenty of times me and Crimson have gone into exact detail on the correct manner to use dxm in a recreational manner and I've never gotten so much as a warning. Going into what brands to buy, substances to avoid, dosing procedures, all of that sorta thing.Since the mods have never reacted to it and the users have never reported me on such I always assumed that going into details on how to perform illegal drug use was perfectly condoned by both the users and staff.
>I've even shared the recipe for extracting LSA from morning glory seeds, a procedure which is illegal in every state in America, multiple times
Ok, that does actually seem a bit problematic and I'm surprised.

>Do not use this website for planning or conducting any activities which violate United States law.

Hell, even the drug-centered sites like 420chan and Erowid have to give lots of disclaimers and eschew their responsibility, which Ponychan does not do. Allowing specific discussion of how to break U.S. laws is a problem topic. I mean, would the site want people discussing in detail how to hack another website? How to make a pipebomb? How to keep your CP downloads private? Probably not.

Last edited at Fri, Aug 15th, 2014 19:34

>>160336

If I was mad you were back I would have expressed that a long time ago. For awhile I was even saying you had somehow miraculously improved, yet somehow you've managed to degenerate into basically the exact same thing you were before, just with a passive-aggressive tint towards the mods whenever you don't get to talk about fucking cartoon animals.

Your whole shtick is "Gay/bi people have more sex than straights! If I was gay I wouldn't be straight, would I?" and your wonderfully put "All I can read in your posts is that you like dicks!" at me earlier just sort of cements that you can basically do whatever you want at this point short of talking about porn. And you're trying to burrow your way into doing that too

>>160341
>If I was gay I wouldn't be straight, would I?

Well no, he wouldn't.

>>160342

I meant "If I was gay I wouldn't be a virgin"

>>160341
My comments about not being a virgin if I were gay are not directed at anyone in particular, nor is it a coded way of saying "homosexuals are promiscuous". On top of that, it's not against the rules. I still have to follow all the rules everyone else does. Both you and fenolio have your own personal biases against me that you need to check at the door if you want to seriously discuss something I'd doing. Because being "a weird shithead" is not a legitimate complaint. It's you insulting me.

And this is not about talking about sex. It's about drugs being allowed but sex not being. I would rather neither be allowed than both, to be perfectly honest.

>>160344
>nor is it a coded way of saying "homosexuals are promiscuous"

That's pretty much exactly what it is with absolutely no ambiguity on the issue.

>Manley thread gets derailed into Manley discussion instead of site issues he's raising
Top kek.

>>160344
Pretty sure most of us would rather you not be allowed, so if you want to get into the whole "I don't want thing", you're far more likely to get voted off the island first.

>>160346
Manley's all about attention and himself, with an "issue" always masking the fact.

>>160346
It never ends

>>160345

He started defaulting to "men have propositioned me" as his defense as to why it's not that.

>>160349
I neither know nor care about his personal history. I'm only interested in the content of his words in the moment.

>weird boy on the internet who watches My Little Pony and goes by the alias "Manly McDragonPuncher" during his excessive time spent on the internet tries to make people believe he gets propositioned for sex on the regular
acronym for laughing goes here

>>160311
Does anyone really need an example of hardcore pornography? Keep in mind that every person here has been on the internet...

Please dont

>>160344

I'm sorry for calling you a weird shithead. You are one, but I'm sorry for calling you it openly. Funny how you managed to slip right past insulting me just the other night/basically degenerating to a step above calling me a cocksucker/faggot/whatever

and you can basically pretend all you want that that isn't what that means, but you've been saying it forever. i've also seen you proclaim multiple times in the past that gays are super-promiscuous as well. i know what you mean regardless of how you're trying to dress it up nowadays

>>160350
And the content is not about gay being promiscuous unless you assume that's what it means.

>>160347
We don't get to ban people based on consensus. Have you MET RetroGrade?

>>160354
You know what? Fuck this. Its like arguing with a dog.

>>160354
>We don't get to ban people based on consensus.
Except Bags.
And we don't get to ban topics based on consensus either. It has to be a good reason - then again, there's plenty of good reasons for showing you the door and not allowing whoever to pointlessly let your mind-blowing stupidity back.

>>160353
I'm sorry you took it that way, but that's not my intent. I do not use words like that anymore, and some of them I've never used. I do not wish to insult you or anyone. I have not made a thread about homosexuality or any type of sexuality since I came back because I know people always take them the wrong way.

>>160346
Oh the glorious irony

>>160357

>I have not made a thread about homosexuality or any type of sexuality since I came back

Shit I guess all those Pokesexuality threads with Manley T. McDragonpuncher marked as the OP were just a gigantic fever dream I had. Thank God Manley didn't constantly make threads with "Arceus HATES Poke-fuckers!" as an image and him posting about how people who want to have sex with Pokemon are terrible. It would be really shitty if he had done that in real life instead of in the hallucinations I had where that happened.

>>160327

What's Not Okay

visible genitalia
description, allusion, or depiction of sexual acts in dialogue, text, or images
underage sexualization of any kind
impending, implied, or visual rape
bondage/other kinks
toys, aids, and devices
tongue play, horn play, or wing play
sexual fluids, defecation, excessive saliva, and breastfeeding


And "weird shithead" generally means your lack of tact, your blanket statements based on your own experiences, and your stubborn refusal to accept the fact that other people can and do think differently than yourself.

>>160332
>Nitpicking
No shit a lot of threads are not meant to be fap-aids, that was just a simple example of how different talking about sex is from talking about drugs.
Once talking about taking cocaine can possibly give you the feeling of taking it, they'll be comparable.

>And discussion about sex forces people to masturbate?
No, but it could certainly encourage it which would in turn encourage more lewd posting.
And please dont say "That could never happen / that never happens" as i have heard several persons accountsabout that exact thing happening in the fetish threads and a few RP threads that went lewd.


>As far as I know, I can go right ahead and make a thread titled "Everybody should smoke meth" without any negative consequences.
Also 'no shit', because who in the hell would investigate an anonymous faggot on an imageboard dedicated to my little pony who decided to tell people to smoke meth.
It's a waste of time and resources and not worth bothering with.

>>160335
>>160340
Not entirely sure on the legal shit in this instance, will get back to you.

>>160356
Bags? I vaguely remember him. What happened there?

Except there isn't. If I start breaking the rules, then I will be punished. But I haven't. Being stupid is not breaking the rules. Now can we PLEASE talk about the topic at hand? That being hold threads about drugs to the same exact standards as threads about sex.

>>160359
Those... don't count. Pokesexuality is not actually a group.

Last edited at Fri, Aug 15th, 2014 19:57

>>160352
Wikipedia articles focused on sex feature images of people fucking. Purely for academic reasons, not to arouse the user. Look up "pegging" on wikipedia for an example.

By that same logic, do we really need images of ponies? I mean, this is the internet. Everybody's seen ponies.

>>160360

What about gore rp?

>>160361
>>160361
We are, i.e., >>160340 >>160360
For example.
We also happen to be discussing how nothing of value would be lost if you were to walk into a jet engine tomorrow.

>>160360
>No, but it could certainly encourage it
No, it does not.

>Also 'no shit', because who in the hell would investigate an anonymous faggot on an imageboard dedicated to my little pony who decided to tell people to smoke meth.
That's completely irrelevant. Nobody would "investigate" me for encouraging anal sex, either.

Last edited at Fri, Aug 15th, 2014 19:59

>>160364
Well you're free to think that. Discussion over.

Reminder that Manley has images of women getting fucked by pokemon on his Tumblr.

>>160367

Manley is fucked in the head.

>>160361

>that doesn't count as a thread about sexuality because I would look like a massive liar if it did

k

>>160366
For you, maybe, I'm more than happy to continue with the rest of us who are at consensus you're an aberrant stain on the site.

>>160367
that's got nothing to do with anything.

>>160368
That is also irrelevant.

>>160359
Funny that he hasn't responded to this.

>>160370
It doesn't!

>>160371
That counts as derailing this thread with an irrelevant topic. Which is against the rules.

>>160373
I did. >>160361

>>160372

Sure it is because you demonstrate how much you are in threads like this one.

i love when people have to use smug cutesy pics to try to bolster their posts with some semblance of self-assuredness, I get a nice hearty chuckle

>>160374
Manley you should no by now how little the rules as written have to do with the rules as enforced.

>>160335
You raise an interesting point, but I don't believe recreational use of DXM is illegal. Wikipedia says there is no legal distinction between recreational and medical use.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recreational_use_of_dextromethorphan#Legality

Therefore I'm pretty sure your entire argument falls apart, assuming you are using the example of talking about recreational DXM use as a precedent.

Last edited at Fri, Aug 15th, 2014 20:06

>>160377
this thread WAS on /oat/ and I was going to make a more presentable one for /meta/, but the mods moved it before I could. I could delete this one and start over. I'm not sure yet.

>>160378
That's what this is about.

>>160380

Or how about you just gtfo.

>>160382
No.

>>160383

Right. Orange's butt isn't kissed enough yet.

>tfw this thread was actually going somewhere until about 40-50 posts ago when people derailed it into a manley thread
Guys pls

>>160384
I didn't kiss his butt. He offered it to me. What is your problem anyway?

>>160386
>I didn't kiss his butt. He offered it to me.
Always thought he'd be more of a top

>>160387

>>160385
How do we bring up a rules revisale with the mods anyway?

>>160363
What's Not Okay

visible organs
copious amounts of blood
overly suggestive or implied gore
torture/abuse
mutilation, even if self inflicted
murder/suicide

But mostly it's a case-by-case thing since it doesn't come up that much and it's harder to invoke the same feelings through text that seeing gore does.
I've dealt with it about, once, ever.

>>160365
Except it isnt, as it's why the feds havent busted down your door about it or why they havent told us to crack down on Anon's wild meth parties.
There's a bunch of posts in the other thread about it, the chain starts here: http://www.ponychan.net/chan/meta/res/159979.html#160036

Burn it all

Purge with holy flames

Scrap and scrap

>>160386

This used to be a nice place a long time ago before asshats like you found it and started trying to turn it into whatever you felt like shitposting it up with.

Orange needs to be kicked to the curb, the lot of shitposters like you with him and maybe then this place will be decent again.

>>160389
It looks like it's getting back on track, I would reply to Fen's arguments.

>>160390

It happens in the HAY thread on occasion.

>>160389
"I want to revise rule X."

Then state your reasons, they'll be discussed and something might happen if you raise a good point or have a suggestion that people can agree with.

>>160394
Next time it happens report it or throw a link at me and i'll see if they're going too far.
If it's uncomfortable for you though, have you tried asking them to stop, tone it down or /hide/ it? It'd be better all around than if a mod just drops in thwaps people on the knuckles.

>>160395

If you ran this place it might actually be decent again. Unless you grew away from ponies too.

>>160395
I want to revise the rule on threads specifically about drug use as suggested in >>160314 to better match the rules that already exist on threads about sexual topics. This would not ban talking about drugs at all, but it would prevent threads specifically about drugs from being created with no other purpose, and it would prevent detailed or graphic discussions on the topic, just as threads of a sexual nature are regulated.

>>160398

Honestly, I think that seems mostly fair. You still have to set up those lines, though. What sort of drug talk would be okay, and what wouldn't be?

>>160397

I think less than half the mods actually watched season 4. I don't think the admins have even seen season 3. Strange for a site like this, but it's how stuff falls, I guess.

>>160399
I watched Season 4! I'm looking forward to Season 5!

>>160399
All illegal drugs, Marijuana and non-drug items used in an illicit drug context, such as cough syrup.

>>160399

It's just wrong. The mods of this place don't even watch the show?

That's a big part of this place's problem.

Does Orange even watch it?

>>160399
Well I know Lemming and Noble haven't. I know Crimson Risk and Artee have. With me, that's more than half. I don't know about anyone else, really.

>>160402
I watch the show!!!

>>160402
He has not.

>>160402
Orange hasn't watching since like season 2

>>160401

Marijuana, specifically is legal in some places, though. When can you talk about legal use and when is it illicit? Do posters have to lie about their location to discuss it?

>>160402

It's not hard to convince him to drop in on a stream, but I don't think he really follows the show, no.

And while it's really weird, I don't think it's really a problem, either. You don't necessarily have to see the show to know what porn looks like and delete it.

>>160400

I know Artee and Yang have and are, as well. I'm sure there's others, but I know there are some that haven't, too. I don't exactly keep a scorecard of the site's powerlevel.

>>160403

Is three already half? Maybe I can't count.

>>160405

Eeyeah. He needs to be booted to the curb.

>>160403

Don't watch the show, no modding duties. Simple.

>>160404

You are awesome.

Wait, why is watching a TV show about horses a prerequisite for skilled moderation and administration of a website?

>>160407
That's why I specified it seperatly from "illegal drugs". And it'd fall under the same context of non drugs like cough syrup. If they are talking about using it in a drug context.

>>160409
Obviously only stable, fair people do that.

>>160409

Would you let non-Christians moderate your Christian image board? I think not. Keep the site pure and righteous. None may mod without reading the scriptures.

Edit: To clarify, that is a joke. I forgot this isn't on /oat/ anymore and people might take something like this seriously.

Last edited at Fri, Aug 15th, 2014 20:40

>>160408
Well it's a good thing that Lemming, Noble and Orange are the three least active members on staff by a very wide margin, then.

>>160406

There's the problem.

>>160407

I think it's a major problem. This place was at it's best when the community revolved around the show. The mods had a passion for the show and it showed in their work. It creates more of a fun atmosphere and place where people want to be rather than yet another generic chan board.

>>160411
Huh?

>>160412
By Celestia's grace

>>160413
Does Flutterguy count?

>>160413

Then they shouldn't be on staff and their places should be taken by others who want to be there, have a passion fo the show and hence it's community and thus will put in a good effort due to this passion.

>>160398
Do this more often and we might actually get somewhere.

Anyway, like i'm talking about in modchat:
We disallow sex things because of the web host, and we disallow sex threads because people abused the "grey area" of the rules.

Talking about drugs is okay with our web host as far as i know, and we currently have no rules about drugs beyond "Do not use this website for planning or conducting any activities which violate United States law."

To quote someone from the other thread:

"Now, Ponychan isn't drugs, so the 'conducting' part is already accounted for. Planning could be done, people would have to discuss doing drugs at a certain place and time."

Taking all that into account, regulating both types of topics in the same manner does not make much sense.

You have a potential case if an overwhelming majority of the site does not wish to talk about or even see talk about drugs, but personally i would just direct you to the 'hide' feature in that case.

>>160399
I've watched most of it, skipped a couple episodes though due to working at air-times but i got the synopsis afterwards, I'll watch them eventually.
R.I.P Library and Ponyville's sleep schedules.
Heavily into fandom shit around it though, specifically AU-fanfics at the moment but i still have http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0ZyTzgoLGA on my phone.

>>160414
>The mods had a passion for the show and it showed in their work. It creates more of a fun atmosphere and place where people want to be rather than yet another generic chan board.
I can agree with this, this site seems pretty depressing without ponies livening it up. Nothing happens and there's no fun but empty shitposting.

Tangently related, there was a Ravenheart thread this morning that wasn't necessarily pony related, but it was basically old school /oat/ roleplay and it was the most fun I've had one the site in a long time, possibly since i returned period. There needs to be more of that, honestly.

>>160414
"The Good Old Days™" Do not exist. They never existed. For anything.

>>160408
Hooray!

>>160409
Because ponies.

>>160416

I might agree with them not being on the staff, if only because I don't feel they contribute much, but I wouldn't say they need to be replaced, because we've basically been fine without them. Too many cooks spoils the broth, that's always been my motto.

>>160414

Like Yang said, all the really active ones, the ones everyone knows, they'll post a lot, do pony stuff, and are generally fun pony people.

The rest tend to post anonymously, if at all, and don't do pony stuff so much. Which isn't really a bad thing on its own, it's not like we should purge all our anon posters, it's just weird.

>>160417
>AU-fanfics

Oh? Like what?

That's off-topic. Perhaps I'll ask you somewhere else, though.

>>160410

So you can't talk about abusing cough syrup, then?

>>160417
So consensus decides the rules? What if I got a general consensus that sex threads should be allowed? Would you change the rules then? I would assume not. So then why must i get consensus to do the reverse?

The "web provider" excuse also doesn't fly. The provider bans sexual images or porn. It does not ban talking about sex.

>>160421
I would say no.

>>160419
Iunno, before the dinosaurs killed my parents and ate my house was pretty good ole days

>>160412

If you want it to be a nice peaceful place and not die out you do.

>>160418

That's fine. Some of that is healthy. But when it becomes the norm rather than a fun diversion the common theme gets too diluted and the chan just dies. the fans of the theme go elsewhere to get away from the non themed stuff and the ones that stay behind for little cliques based upon their peronsal interests.. pokemon.. anime and before you know it, the post count plummets and the chan withers away.

Well, mods don't give a shit about the theme, why should I. Healthy chans do a good job of sticking to their themes and the mods actually care about those themes so try their best to attract new posters also interested in the theme.

>>160422
>What if I got a general consensus that sex threads should be allowed? Would you change the rules then? I would assume not.

I think you're assuming wrong, but there's two caveats to that.

1. The owners still own the site and get to freely decide what they want on it. It's probably in their best interest to appeal to the majority, but there comes a point where you have to let them do what they want.

2. The consensus was that sexual stuff was out of hand and everyone was sick of seeing it. To be fair, there's been a wave of anti-drug stuff recently, too, which makes this thread at least a little bit valid, despite the wording of the OP.

>>160424

I was just curious.

The line here is kinda hard to draw. One one hand everything is banned, and people can't even mention that they used something last weekend. On the other extreme, people might go on for a while talking about how great it is to abuse cough syrup, which is bad for obvious reasons.

I think I might draw the line somewhere similar to what Yang was saying. No threads explicitly about drug use, and no handing out information on how to acquire illegal drugs. I would advocate, though, that casual mentions of what you did during your day are pretty important, especially on boards like /oat/ or /chat/, and furthermore that discussing their use would actually promote drug safety, which is also important.

But again, threads like "Yo, who's a stoner here? Blaze with me." or something might give the site a different image than we want, and a lot of users are actively complaining about drugs in the past week, so it's worth looking at and discussing.

>>160427
Um, are you sure you replied to the right person? I was agreeing that we need more pony stuff and saying that stuff like the old /oat/ rps without the forced derails and with more ponies would be nice.

>>160421

It sets a bad example. Mods don't give a shit about the theme or rules. Why should I? I can do what I want, mods won't do anything, they're never here.

That's what people will think when they hear half the modstaff doesn't care.

Perfect example is Dragonpuncher there. Orange doesn't give a shit so he's back annoying people.

If Orange was replaced with someone competent, this thread wouldn't even have happened.

>>160429

Yes.. I was agreeing with you that some of that is fine.. and just going on with my line of reasoning.

Apologies Shuckle.

>bows to the Princess.

>>160422
>What if I got a general consensus that sex threads should be allowed?
We'd say no because the privilege was abused.

The provider bans sexual material from being posted on this site.

If i purposely posted an explicit clop fic on here and the webhost got wind of it, they would send me / the admins an angry email and possibly have grounds to take down the site if i was kept on staff afterwards.

Have you even read this part of the rules i linked earlier?
http://www.ponychan.net/chan/?p=rules#63
It's literally an FAQ about the ban on sexual threads.

>So then why must i get consensus to do the reverse?
Because that's exactly what other people did to get the sexual threads rule to be a thing.

They considered something a problem.
They told mods about the problem.
Mods and they discussed solutions to the problem.
Problem was theoretically solved and now only relies on mods doing their job.

>>160427
Hence why i still advocate that making /oat/ every-topic was one of the stupidest things this site has ever accomplished.

>>160430
Cant exactly re-ban Manley even if orange was replaced right this second.
Doesnt sit right with my morals and i think the other mods agree.

>>160432

Re-ban him? Well no.. my point was if Orange was replaced when he should have been. Manley wouldn't have been unbanned in the first place. If Fen had been kept in charge, this wouldn't be a problem. But nope, the rot had to return at the top and well, pretty much all hope.. and much post count, was lost.

One stupid thing among many. First being a creation of a board for every topic under the sun.

>>160430
You did hear that Orange isn't admin anymore, right?

>>160435

He owns the site, does he not? He unbanned Manley, did he not?

>>160428
All I'm asking is that we try and regulate the amount of drug threads. Completely getting rid of them is impossible, but regulating them is not.

>>160430
>>160435

Orange was definitely replaced last summer. Whether or not he was replaced with someone competent is a different discussion.

>>160436
He doesn't own the site and hasn't for almost a year. He was only removed as admin earlier this week.

>>160439

Great news! Part of the problem solved!

>>160438

Who replaced him?

>>160436

That's true. But that only happened very recently, and not only wasn't all that bad a decision (Manley's a fairly popular guy, really, and usually doesn't cause problems), but it was practically his only decision in the past year.

>>160440

Inkwell.

>>160440
Inkwell.

>>160441
>>160442

Does this Inkwell watch the show? Is he involved in the site? Or is he just a puppet of Orange's?

>>160444

No, no, and no.

>>160446

So it was.. pointless.

A case of Orange going well, if I don't want it, nobody else can have it, which this seems to essentially be.

>>160444
He's essentially been absent for the last year or so, causing Fenolio to drink even more than he does normally.
>>160447
Not totally pointless. Inkwell is really rich so he can pay for the site.

>>160448

But why would he pay for a site he seems to have no interest in?

Is anyone actually in charge of this place?

>>160448
>Not totally pointless. Inkwell is really rich so he can pay for the site.

A plus, but plenty of other people could've done that.

>He's essentially been absent for the last year or so, causing Fenolio to drink even more than he does normally.

I really feel sorry for Fennec sometimes...

>>160449
Well apparently according to
>>160140
He's back, whatever that means. I have hope.

>>160449
>But why would he pay for a site he seems to have no interest in?

I have no idea, and I've tried to ask him. He's got a reason, I can tell. He won't tell anyone I know, though, which worries me. He wasn't here before becoming a mod, suddenly became a mod for a friend who he later unceremoniously removed from the staff with his own absence, then decided that spending a whole load of money on the place is a good idea, and then left again.

>Is anyone actually in charge of this place?

No, that's why everyone's always complaining. There's another thread on /meta/ right now where Inkwell came out to apologize for no one being in charge of the place. He promised changes to that soon.

Also, we're really derailed, as per usual, but I think Manley was gonna start up a more /meta/-esque thread rather than "The mods are all faggots." So I might encourage he do that.

Whoever in the blue hell thought it was a good idea to unban Manley should be tied to a pole and tickled for 80 hours straight before being allowed to be on the internet again.

>>160451
>>160452

Why does this place have to be in a state of perpetual mess? I've been here since the beginnings of 2.0 and it's always in crisis.

>>160454

Apparently he's popular.

>>160455
To Orange, maybe, but pretty much everyone save for the clueless have been sick of his shit for quite a long time. I don't see why people can't understand that this guy is never going to change or improve, or find any sort of way to not be an insufferable whiny asshole. It's just his constant state of being.

>>160456

This place is too full of the clueless.

>>160456

Obviously you've ignored like the entire time he's been back, where he's generally shown improvement. If he does anything ban worthy, he'd be banned. I mean, just look at his most recent posts in the thread. Nothing about that is insufferable or whiny. They were well thought out, easy to understand, and informative posts. Why pop up just to complain about him being unbanned in the first place?

*does the sperg dance*

>>160458

Your trip looks familiar. You seem like a pretty level headed individual.

>>160458
It was funny, because Manley was being pretty thoughtful and constructive, and then people came in just to complain about Manely being here and derailed the thread, which was then blamed on Manley. The guy can't win even when's he's not doing anything wrong.
>>160460
It's Mondo.

>>160460

Oh, it's Mondo. My computer stores cookies weird, so my name falls off sometimes. One time my whole tripcode fell off and I had to dig it up again, which was rather a pain.

As for being level headed, it probably depends on who you ask.

>>160458
Hardly, he's been the exact same ever since he came back. The only excuse I can think of for the lack of response this time is simple crippling apathy in both the userbase and in the staff.

>>160463
>Hardly, he's been the exact same ever since he came back
He wasn't at first, he was actually doing pretty well and didn't say anything stupid, then the pokefuckers thing happened and yeah I don't know what's up with that. But to say he hasn't improved would be just not paying attention.

>>160463
>>160464

Right, he's far from perfect, and I can totally see why some people might consider him a less than ideal poster, but he has improved from where he was, even if he's a broken record when it comes to his jokes.

>>160464
Admittedly, he's not being nearly as rampantly homophobic as he used to be, but I think he's right about made up for that with endless thread after thread about pokefucking. If you're going to make threads like that, at least think of an interesting question, like musing how ghost pokemon can breed when they pass through each other. That would be a REAL mystery.

...sorry, I'm going on a bit of a tangent. I should probably go to bed.

>>160466
>If you're going to make threads like that, at least think of an interesting question, like musing how ghost pokemon can breed when they pass through each other. That would be a REAL mystery.
Nobody is forcing you to look at the thread, there is a hide button for a reason. If you really are annoyed that much by threads that aren't amusing enough for you, then just filter them. Or better yet, just filter Manley and all your problems will be solved.

>>160462

Man, I haven't talked to you in years.

Well, you seem so to me. Do you love ponies?

>>160469

I do. I still watch the show, dig up art, and I probably participate in the more pony oriented parts of the board more than I ever have. I've never been one for enthusiasm, but at the very least, my feelings for the show haven't really wavered any in the past few years. Looking forward to season 5, and even the new EqG movie.

>>160470

You.. are awesome!

>>160473

Well, thanks, Anon. I'm sure you're pretty awesome, too.

>>160474

If you're not a mod.. you should be!

I have finished the show and watched all of season 4, looking forward to the new EQG movie, and I'm really into fan fiction and before the military worked with a lot of writers to help improve their works.

Since apparently that was a question at some point in this mess.

>>160494

>>160494

Awesome!

You rule!

>>160458
Frankly, I'm not for threatening people with bans.

But this thread...

I personally could deal with his jokes on gay people or women or pokemon or whatever. My mod sie, however has always been annoyed with his fighting against mod decisions, about the whole thing where his obvious lewd threads get removed and everything. Reading threads like this makes me remember that it was an unthankful and maybe poor decision to undo the ban.

>>160212
I read the premise of this thread and thought about it. I might out myself as a big perv, but why is drugs on ponychan less of an issue as sex?
Sex makes people horny, drugs generally doesn't really drag people into drugs themselves.
If you talk about sex, you listen to sex and you're just encouraged to get lewder on lewder, cause that's the vortex your mind sets in on.
And that is something that I notice bout sexual threads. People get in, start to share experiences and in the end, they're talking about what odd places they shot their load in.
It's that mindset that makes the whole sex thing on a place that tries to be more or less family friendly and doesn't allow porn, a very unwelcome thing.
As such, I think comparing drugs and sex is a fair comparison.

Frankly, you're gonna have to deal with this as it is, until you can get a massive enough support and someone to listen to you on /meta/.

>>160545
>My mod sie, however has always been annoyed with his fighting against mod decisions, about the whole thing where his obvious lewd threads get removed and everything.

That's fair, yeah. There are things he wants that aren't really allowed by the rules, and when he doesn't get them or finds a "loophole" of sorts, he likes to press it to make an issue of it. I can't blame you for getting a bit annoyed with that.

>>160452
>He wasn't here before becoming a mod
He was actually
http://www.ponychan.net/chan/arch/res/17356.html

>>160557

I meant immediately before. He had been absent for several months.

>>160558
Alright, that makes sense.

That's weird. I deleted this thread like a week ago so I could start a more serious take on it here on /meta/ This thread with this wording was never meant to go here and some mod decided to play jokester and move it. I was just about to start the new one.

>>160702
In either case, I'm gonna go do that now. Start a serious thread with a serious starter for /meta/