>>163435
Tossing in my approval / desire to talk about it, but i am about to go to bed so the buck is being passed to yang until i wake up again.

>implying inkwell exists.

>>163435
I still have my reservations, but I'm always willing to discuss things.

>>163431
>>163433
you're right, and you're right to say that leaving the site is too sensitive a thing for many to do... but it doesn't change the fact that they will.

Some of our nicest ponies on the site, the ones with the cheeriest demeanors and most to add, are also the most sensitive. they seek ponychan as a pony related shelter for them to be themselves.

The ones who don't leave are the ones who the internet has hardened... they will stay, because they have a thick skin. but this is natural selection in a way; the more sensitive ponies we lose, the more the kindness seeps away and is replaced by... i guess, a more typical internetty hardness.

now, maybe that's what the site is aiming for. The sensitive... feelings oriented ponies are my ... crowd? they are the posters i relate to most. so, for me, i speak in relation to how i understand them.

>>163424
...sorry. i do respect you, fenny. i guess i am soapboxing a little bit.

>>163432
i was getting some skype grumblings... and there were a few little chitters here and there on /oat/, in some of the "why is the board anonymous" threads.

...but, i honestly am satisfied with the answers i've gotten, at least. from admiral, fenny, and crimson. And, of course, Zeke... he's really great, that Zeke.

>>163435
...it was more about the user's knowledge, than mine. But yes, i overreacted.

If something comes up in the works, don't even think about me; this is for the best. i didn't mean to make it about me to begin with... sorry. i'm a heel sometimes.

>>163436
please be nice to inkie. he does the best he can, with the limited time he has.

He's done a lot for this site. He pays for it out of his pocket. And he's a good administrator who really tries his best.

>>163436
>>163437
>>163435
...i am glad. if at least, bringing it up could be one step towards atonement... i will say no more; the less i have to say on it, the better for everypony. it is how it should've been to begin with.

>>163439
I doubt he's saying anything actually negative about the guy, or not being nice. It's a simple statement of fact, he's not here. Somehow the site got passed to quite honestly the only person around even less than the last one. That's not a slight to the guy, it's just the way it is. Doesn't make him a bad person. Just one who isn't present.

>>163438

>The ones who don't leave are the ones who the internet has hardened

well im sorry moony but maybe they need to grow some nuts if not having a name on an imageboard for a brief period of time makes them run away, or else i fear they may die of a heart attack if a loud noise happens close to them or at the very least flee and cower when a breeze brushes against them too forcefully

>>163441
...maybe they do, anon. i'm not saying they shouldn't be a bit tougher... merely that they aren't

>>163441
I wouldn't give two flying feathers over the whole posting anon thing.
But the arguments I've heard tonight makes me really reconsider if contributing to ponychan should still be worth my time.

>>163443

i don't know what you're talking about so you have to elaborate

>>163443
...i know how you feel

>>163444
The ideal clean slate solution to /oat/'s stagnancy. Getting rid of the tripfags who have poisoned and continue poisoning /oat/ with their clubhousing and socialisation and replenish the space with new people who go for content instead of the other stuff.

Even if this is probably not seriously executable, it remains a thought that lives with plenty of people.
f people don't want my contributuons to /oat/ anymore, then either I should stay away or act in defiance and let haters hate. On whichever I'd choose, I have a major fanfic to read and new year to come along. I'll have my time to think about it.

Last edited at Sun, Dec 28th, 2014 20:36

>>163446

those arguments are misinformed and more or less forget the fact that as long as /oat/ has existed it has been mainly full of people with tripcodes

blaming tripcodes for the pitfalls of the site population and degradation is very short-sighted. that's more due to board structure, pass transgressions by the staff, and the natural splitting of the fanbase than anything

>>163447
honestly, this. this has been a tripcode site basically since the day it was formed... and i don't think its tripcodes poisoning the well.

I think what really made this not work as well was the fact that people could just sign their posts with their names. That's a pretty lame way of circumventing what could be fun and probably should've been a bannable offense if the staff really wanted to do this. I mean, I liked it how it was, but this would've made an improvement.

>>163449

That's a lot of effort for some random spur of the moment thing that a lot of people got super upset about (even if they shouldn't have).

>>163450
>>163449
...but if the purpose of this was just "spontaneous fun" and not an experiment... then this would be a waaay big overreaction, to ban others, for not wanting to play in that way.

>>163450
>>163451
Go big or go home.

>>163449
I liked how the community dished out it's own brand of justice by "stealing" the names of people doing that.

experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment, experiment

>>163451

>>163449

the community self-moderated there and told the people doing it they were being foolish, so that's a plus

Also I never said anything before, but I did notice that if you post with a tripcode, your trip is visible in /oat/'s Recent Posts section of the frontpage (at least it was last night). Really fun to see the stupid things people say when they think nobody knows it's them.

>>163409
>>163413
>Sadly i dont think it is retroactive like that.
just posting here for a bit before I make a thread on /oat/ and return things to normal. Based on the way I had it force anonymity, it will most likely show the original names.

>>163458
Aw shit nigga this gon b gud.

>>163458
>>163459
...oh golly.

>>163404
>except that it seems to have flipped several people's switches into shitpost mode
This.

I liked it at first, but some people really proved by the end of it that they couldn't handle being anonymoose.

And the post signing got really annoying too.

hey zeke

come
home
bitch

>>163458

>tfw I've been anonymous the whole time anyway

oh you're home

fix
the thing
bitch

>>163463
>tfw
feels good man

>>163462
>>163464
I am home. Working on it now.

>>163461
i post signed maybe twice... and then totally gave up... because it sort of defeats the point, i guess.

>>163466
you know, i have a funny feeling that when it is deanonymized, everyone will still say "anon."

because when i come to meta, i am anon now too. i have to reenter my name

>>163468
>because it sort of defeats the point, I guess.
That's what annoyed me about it. Like, for threads like Sherlock's where he was updating people on important events that were going on in his life, it made sense for him to say "hey guys, Sherlock here". But most of the things people posted really didn't need signatures attached to them and it just made their posts look like grabs for attention.

>>163470
>But most of the things people posted really didn't need signatures attached to them and it just made their posts look like grabs for attention.
Just like names/trips in general

>>163471
In a way, I guess. But it's kind of different when you're on a board that has names and trips enabled and a lot of people have them. If you're on a forced anon board and most people are rolling with it, on the other hand, signing posts just makes you stick out like a sore thumb.

>>163472
Sticking out is the whole point of having a name or trip or expression viewer or signature. That remains true when these types of people are either a sizeable majority or an insignificant minority.

>>163473

Well you don't really stick out if everyone has a name, do you?

>>163474
Not everyone here does, though. Using a unique expression viewer is also a much easier way to stick out.

"having an identity" is not the same thing as "sticking out." people have been using usernames expression viewers and signatures on the internet for a long time with little fuss from others until relatively recently

>>163475

Oh, here, sure. I guess I was thinking of forums or online games or whatever sorta thing where you're forced to take a name.

>>163476

Yeah, that, basically.

>>163477

even on those forums people could just mash a bunch of letters or something as a username if they really wanted to not be recognized, or even just post as a guest in some cases

the only reason people give a shit about this nowadays is that either side has begun to drill into other people's heads their own viewpoint, though admittedly the anon side usually carries a really weird and stupid dogma along with it. if you post here as anon, often stupid people will ignore you. if you post on 4chan with a trip, stupid people will shout at you

neither is inherently better or worse than the other. it's just a bunch of idiots peer pressuring each other, with people in between just trying to figure out the easiest ways to fit in without causing a lot of trouble

>>163476
And ponychan's name culture is not reflective of the entire internet's

>>163477
I thought it could be assumed I was talking about ponychan since we're on /meta/ and all.

>>163479

but it is reflective of a named internet community of its size. with a ton of people packed away into the megathread quarantine area and a great deal of others having either left or chased away, we have a relatively small userbase on /oat/. one where everyone recognizes each other and their quirks. naturally there's going to be a lot of interpersonal discussion, especially during a long between-seasons offtime

>>163479

Probably. I dunno, I'm tired. I haven't slept worth shit lately.

>>163480
It's natural that it turned out this way, but it remains that those without names/trips or expression viewers do not stick out in Ponychan's crowd of names as much, and therefore do not get as many replies. The point of having an identity is because you feel that you should be identifiable. On a site like this, the most likely reason people feel like they should be identifiable is so people will remember you, so people will acknowledge you as a person and not just an opinion, and so people will pay attention to you.

>>163481
Stay up with us
You don't need sleep
The computer is your friend

>>163479
>ponychan's name culture is not reflective of the entire internet's
It is actually, it's just doing it in a medium that traditionally doesn't have a name culture, leading to an inherent dissonance. There will always be some of that, no way around it.

>>163484
If you want to get technical, 4chan and other boards are an incarnation of the original BBS things from the early days of the internet and DID require a user name. So now playing the boards are supposed to be anon business.

>>163487
And we can get further technical and say it all stems from the telegraph, but that's not exactly a relevant point.

>>163488

considering one is way more related than the other, i would say it is relevant

imageboards aren't exactly a remarkable or radically different form of communication than forums or subreddits or what have you, and they all stem from the bbs