/meta/ - Meta and Operations

Wheel-Greasing

SAVE THIS FILE: Anon.cafe Fallback File v1.0 (updated 2021-01-10)

Want your event posted here? Requests accepted in this /meta/ thread.

Max message length: 5120

Drag files to upload or
click here to select them

Maximum 5 files / Maximum size: 20.00 MB

Board Rules
More

(used to delete files and postings)


Open file (376.86 KB 1372x1049 changelog.png)
Bugs, Issues, and Changelog Anonymous Board owner 09/02/2019 (Mon) 15:52:13 No.18
If you notice something wrong that isn't "it's slow", post about it here. If something is fixed or changed, it'll be posted here.
Open file (12.12 KB 485x378 ClipboardImage.png)
Two issues: - I just made two posts on my board with nothing in the name field, but my name and role signature appeared both times. I looked in my account settings, but there does not seem to be a control option for this. I know I've posted without my name and signature before even while logged in. - The Tomorrow theme (which I'm using via the dropdown menu at the top of the page) is broken on the board settings page. I thought the fields were broken, but it turns out they were just displaying black text on an extremely dark grey background. This should be changed to white text in every field.
Can you switch the date and time back to the proper way? I'm sick of seeing the retarded burger calendar.
>>13902 This. What's next, MM:SS:HH ?
>>13902 I third this change.
Testing.
>>13901 Thank you for the report. We'll fix the CSS soonish. In the mean time you can work around the problem by switching back to Yotsuba B from the top panel. >I looked in my account settings, but there does not seem to be a control option for this. I know I've posted without my name and signature before even while logged in. This is downright mysterious. I just posted >>13905 without my role signature and I can't reproduce the problem. Were you using the quick reply panel? If so, perhaps your #rs and name were filled into the top reply? It's unlikely - on my browser the fields mirror each other - but it's all I can think of. >>13902 >>13903 >>13904 We'll have a look at this at the same time as the CSS problems.
>>13907 >Were you using the quick reply panel? I was. >#rs in top reply Not possible. The fields mirror each other on my browser, Firefox. I specifically deleted the name field when I made the second post but it was still there.
Is it possible to bumplock threads? I don't see it in the moderation tools, yet a /meta/ thread is bumplocked. Also I have a small request for <pinktext functionality. Thanks for your time.
Keep indexing on frontpage and boardlist box will not stay checked Check box > Save settings > Reload page > Box is unchecked and the function is not working Yes, the box above it is checked.
Upon recent events, can you guys set up something like a Pleroma account just like sturgeon has? Also was it caused by a anti-spam bot targeting Cockbox?
>>13914 >Upon recent events, can you guys set up something like a Pleroma account just like sturgeon has? or a static site on neocities or txti.es.
Now that we are properly back, an explanation of the recent spot of downtime seems a good idea. Short version: It had nothing to do with Anon.cafe; the ASN in which our VPS resides got hit by a nasty blocklist that asks ISPs to pay them for delisting. In our provider's words: "The cause stems from "anti-spam" RBL UCEPROTECT blacklisting port scanners, which has caused quite a fuss at one of our datacenters. Our understanding is that any internet-wide scan, including for Minecraft servers, is enough to be listed in UCEPROTECT." Unfortunately, email blocklists also tend to be mis-used for general traffic blocking purposes, so our DC's upstream networks suddenly blocked about half the provider's servers - including Anon.cafe's. If a data centre finds any of their IP prefixes listed in UCEPROTECT, the German man who runs the list demands a ransom fee to delist them in less than seven days. You can read more about UCEPROTECT's practices at https://blog.sucuri.net/2021/02/uceprotect-when-rbls-go-bad.html. About two weeks ago, UCEPROTECT "changed" their policy to be more aggressive, and the number of ASNs they listed subsequently increased from 28 to 843 - a 2910% increase. Our provider speculated that this was a cynical attempt to milk ISPs for delisting money. Our new Pleroma account is live at https://freespeechextremist.com/anoncafe and in future we'll use it for announcements during situations like these. Apologies for the disruption. (In better news, our VPS's hypervisor appears to have become more stable!) ---ALL TEXT ABOVE BUT NOT INCLUDING THIS LINE IS SIGNED BY THE ANON.CAFE DONATION ADDRESS (bc1qs0ceuczuwd27k99qyv52wnz809f4ssl7sau0f5) WITH THE SIGNATURE BELOW THIS LINE--- ICE01/mjurNIUoyBe4iQPiFM6QYmM6XC7cqUUIVCFvhNRJjSFy7n694KAJUph1mYbQZcFhEQt7Q0FdtTAzqs6fc=
Open file (450.93 KB 650x487 anon in 2059.png)
Not sure if this is the right thread for it, but I wasn't sure that the question warranted its own thread. What is the website's official stance on loli images? The rules say that CP isn't allowed (which makes sense) and provocative pictures of real children aren't allowed (which makes sense), and that images created with a strong resemblance to real children aren't allowed, such as 3D models (which I also feel makes sense). However, the particular issue of 2D cartoon characters like the average anime loli is not addressed. I'm not clamoring for a loli board or anything; I was just curious about that particular topic since it's usually a sticking point for many anons.
>>13963 >However, the particular issue of 2D cartoon characters like the average anime loli is not addressed. Frankly I don't care but I can say people post those pretty much innocent pictures on 4chan all the time. If even cuckchan allows it I don't see why we shouldn't. I'd say suggestive is where the line is drawn. But since literal glownigger jewish pedophiles like "esther aronowitz" post pedo shit in an attempt to false flag boards to censor free speech I can see why it's not a good idea.
>>13963 >>13964 I'm not a regular user here, so my opinion should be taken skeptically. >Loli may refer to: >Lolita (term), meaning a "precociously seductive young girl" >Lolicon, a Japanese term for an attraction to young girls, or associated media. Loli has a specifically sexual connotation. Regular anime depictions of kids does not constitute loli. With that in mind, I think that anyone who looks at loli, or even uses the word loli, should kill themselves. Sexualizing children is wrong, and no amount of mental gymnastics will change that. "but it's not real" it's realistic enough to be obvious they depict children, and it's realistic enough to excite perverts. "but cuckchan allows it" does mean it's good? why would you want to do anything cuckchan does? Any image depicting sexualized children, no matter how unrealistic or poorly rendered it is, should be ground for ban not only from imageboards but from existence itself.
>>13969 Thanks, Esther.
>>13970 You're welcome.
Open file (83.27 KB 750x599 passaway.jpg)
>>13969 OK enough virtue signaling for today on anonymous imageboard fucktard, nobody said what you're even countersignaling dumb dumb hence the non-suggestive. Next you're gonna tell us it's anudda shoah that people post a frame from a disney movie. Also those glownigger perverts are gonna get excited anyway lol, they're the elite jannies that are the biggest pedos actually, because they're the people that protect and serve pedo elites like Epstein and Ghislaine and Podesta, Bill gates, Clintons, Rotherdam anyway that literally and actually rape and enslave, torture children and babies to pleasure themselves on "Lolita express" and in Washinton DC while to control politicians and celebs yet nothing is done about them, they even brag about it on instagram. Think about that you fucking retard. But yet here you are giving your bullshit about >>13963 honest literally innocent question. Also newsflash twitter refused to censor literal child pornography(google it) and they asked their users "how they felt about it" cry up their tree nigger because this ain't it.
>>13963 >>13964 >>13969 Thank you for justifying my janitoring >>>/x/16 I believed my stance on the issue was in the same opinion as the majority here. I hadn't come across much of that content on anon.cafe. Am I wrong? Is it outlandish for a BO to have such a stance? Was I asking for it by making the rule explicit? Or are these just protestors from other boards?
>>13973 >I believed that people on image boards wouldn't want to post loli. Am I wrong? You're retarded at the very least.
Open file (19.25 KB 480x358 konata 2.jpg)
>>13973 >Is it outlandish for a BO to have such a stance? Yes. You are a massive faggot who would be better off on Reddit.
>>13974 But on every single board regardless of category? >>13975 Reddit can suck my dick, but I forgive you.
>>13973 If a board owner wants to ban pictures of cars transforming into warrior robots i think he is in his right to do so, why would he want to do that is a mystery for sure but he can due to his owner rights. In the case of /x/ i think loli content doesn't affect anything at all but if the BO wants to ban it i guess it will not affect in anything the content he probably wants to be posted there, it certainly is odd but nothing wrong with it. That's my opinion, i can also add the majority of anon.cafe lurkers are not phased by loli either, they might not post it but are not offended by it, in fact as a personal opinion i can say someone getting offended over it can be classified as a different breed of anon, particularly one of a newer genesis than the rest of us, in short a newfag or someone who was not made with the same tools and materials as some of us.
>>13973 a >I believed my stance on the issue was in the same opinion as the majority here. Probably yes, I don't care so much but prefer not to be blasted by degen >I hadn't come across much of that content on anon.cafe. Am I wrong? No and continue drawing the line at suggestive because then it just becomes perverted and weird, actually it's all pretty weird sum total but I don't have a problem with it anyway as long as it's not suggestive. That's my opinion. >Is it outlandish for a BO to have such a stance? Was I asking for it by making the rule explicit? Not at all, it's your choice.
Open file (199.58 KB 1018x1280 1613165956080.jpg)
>>13977 >in fact as a personal opinion i can say someone getting offended over it can be classified as a different breed of anon, particularly one of a newer genesis than the rest of us, in short a newfag or someone who was not made with the same tools and materials as some of us. I'll add to this and say cute anime posting(not suggestive) drives away normalscum and activates jews shrunken amygdala and psychopathy. And that's a good thing, even though I was never an animespergposter.
>>13976 >but I forgive you. Fuck your forgiveness, fag
Open file (172.59 KB 640x480 1145403083996.jpg)
Open file (74.29 KB 816x683 1147396223165.jpg)
>>13976 >But on every single board regardless of category? Yes, and you're a triple faggot if you genuinely can't see it. Posting unrelated bullshit in a post image is a time-honored tradition that goes back to the earliest days of any image board on any continent. According to you, pic 1 would be a banworthy offence and pic 2 would be toeing the line because her shirt is falling off her shoulder. >>13978 >it just becomes perverted and weird, actually it's all pretty weird sum total Where do you fuckers come from? >>13977 >it certainly is odd but nothing wrong with it. I'd agree with you if loli hadn't always been a canary in the coal mine for image boards and retarded BOs/mods who power trip their boards to death. Not every board should feel obligated to cater to everyone, but the /x/ BO is going way too far here. >in fact as a personal opinion i can say someone getting offended over it can be classified as a different breed of anon, particularly one of a newer genesis than the rest of us, in short a newfag or someone who was not made with the same tools and materials as some of us I agree with that, which is why I'm pressing the issue although I never expected it to get this much traction. There isn't any good reason for banning it, since even if the servers are hosted in a country where such things are illegal the owner can always find different service providers. I know zzzchan's servers are somewhere in Eastern Europe and the providers don't give a fuck what's hosted on them as long as it isn't CP.
>>13979 It might be because it's still seen as a fringe taste of certain urban tribes, particularly what some may call as jap lovers or "nerds" in a very general term, they try to shame or poke fun at such posters without realizing they are in company of plenty of users who see them as natives rather than weird foreigners. Some boards do dislike it publicly, like TVch, but i can bet good money most of them don't mean it completely seriously as most of the posts there are shitposts of ironic nature, if we took them with face value we could say they are Bernie-friendly donut-store maniacs with an interracial porn CK-tier affinity who, somehow, belittle anime fans for not watching shows with real people in it. Sadly some other boards think they are actually posting seriously, which deserves the mockery for not understanding such obvious humorous nature.
Open file (58.01 KB 500x145 Ironic shitposting.png)
>>13981 >Some boards do dislike it publicly, like TVch, but i can bet good money most of them don't mean it completely seriously as most of the posts there are shitposts of ironic nature, if we took them with face value we could say they are Bernie-friendly donut-store maniacs with an interracial porn CK-tier affinity who, somehow, belittle anime fans for not watching shows with real people in it. <no, no, the people on tvch are actually VERY smart <they're being IRONIC about their shitposting!
>>13981 >According to you, pic 1 would be a banworthy offence and pic 2 would be toeing the line because her shirt is falling off her shoulder. Correct. It is a SFW board. >I'd agree with you if loli hadn't always been a canary in the coal mine for image boards and retarded BOs/mods who power trip their boards to death. It's not like I'm trying to get every other BO to explicitly ban it like I had, I just wanted to know where I stood. /x/ will remain SFW, and I'll stop discussing the issue here. >>13977 >>13978 >>13979 Thanks for the feedback.
>>13984 >Correct. It is a SFW board. Top kek, boomer
>>13981 >I'd agree with you if loli hadn't always been a canary in the coal mine for image boards I kinda agree with that statement but back in the day the canary was /hebe/ and borderline teen porn, you try to bring either of those and many will scream in pain. I don't mind those but here in anon.cafe there's actually a rule based on the hosting country's law that disallows that, yet in a board hosted in a non-romanian country i wouldn't defend an admin who bans obvious adult actresses larping as grown teens. That was the real canary, borderline enough for many to question it but always the rule set to know if a site was getting glowed and/or if the owner was an outsider. In recent years many users didn't actually grow seeing such a site so i can expect in a near future other users not allowing loli either as some countries have banned it, but anyways here i would say the closest to a canary is loli, sure enough, yet if a BO doesn't want it he is in his rights just as we are to not use his board as other internal places allows us loli posting. I repeat i find odd he wanted that but i guess it's just as odd as /britfeel/ not wanting an outsider 'aving some fun banter and calling them sheep shaggin' arabs who drink carbonated piss from their mum's penis. >providers don't give a fuck what's hosted on them as long as it isn't CP. Anon.cafe servers are hosted in an eastern european country, Romania, and their laws clearly specify not even 3D render porn of people who look underage, if they caught you watching some video of a 18yo adult actress who looks 15 they can easily sentence you if they want to, watching a raw 2000's era render of some Warcraft monster impaling some teen can also be grounds to give you forced community service to go and paint the houses of some shitassed gypsies in the outskirts. I also said they can change service providers easily but after going through it myself once in an unrelated venture i can say the less you think about the hosting and the servers along with possibly transporting them to another site, the better, because i think those and the technical glitches in the site are the major time drains, the more time an admin can actually use his own site for fun the more will be the possibility of him maintaining the place. An admin that spends most of the time fixing a site will very likely kill it even if the users beg him not to. >>13983 >He actually thinks TVch are 20 Louis CK clones talking to each other about the joys of letting some gangbangers gangbang your wife and kill every white male while posting detailed analysis about how Justice League - Director's Cut will be a groundbreaking piece of media. lmao'ing at yer leif m80
Open file (138.82 KB 1080x1244 bbb.jpg)
>>13981 >Where do you fuckers come from? I'm an oldfag lol incessant trannime spam didn't really become widespread culture on western boards until the anime pro otaku spergs swamped in, they mostly stayed in their caves and got heavily ridiculed, we were more into 3d. Not that you'd know anything about that though lol newfag.
>>13984 >Correct. It is a SFW board. >you can't post jokes on a SFW board using a spoiler Kill yourself, newfag. >>13986 >back in the day the canary was /hebe/ and borderline teen porn What, back in the days of 2015? I'm talking about the internet as a whole, man. The people who claim loli is a harmful poison of the mind are, without fail, either literal pedophiles or sex pests or some other kind of of lowlife. It's not like I enjoy lolicon myself or anything, but it's a victimless "crime" and shouldn't be prohibited unless the servers are hosted in an extremely strict country (and in that case, I think the servers should be moved). >watching a raw 2000's era render of some Warcraft monster impaling some teen can also be grounds to give you forced community service to go and paint the houses of some shitassed gypsies in the outskirts. That blows. What an awful country. >the less you think about the hosting and the servers along with possibly transporting them to another site, the better I sympathize with that - I'm a programmer myself - but the fact remains that having an arbitrary ban on certain types of reaction images is not good for the community of an image board. >the BO can do what he wants I agree with that, but he should ensure that his views and actions align with the views and desires of his prospective user base. If the BO has such a stick up his ass that he won't allow any nudity of any kind whatsoever, even under a spoiler, then the discomfort will be too great for people to post. I truly think that he doesn't understand the subject matter of /x/ and all the weirdo sex freaks it attracts if he thinks that such a ban won't harm his board. >>13987 Like clockwork.
>>13988 No he said unrelated stuff >>>/x/81 I guess loli is unrelated
I think the BO of /x/ should just return to Cuckchan, either that or he should set up a subreddit for others of his ilk.
>>13988 >I'm talking about the internet as a whole, man Then i agree all the way >back in the days of 2015? Back in my days at least, 2007, /b/ and some other boards were not shy to post the classical jailbait pictures even if the topic wasn't related at all. A real canary talk was made in 8chan when Jim banned the local version of /hebe/, and while they did tiptoe the line with actual pictures of teens, none were under-dressed or anything making it a weird venture to be fair but they did eat ice cream suggestively. I can find such sweet eating pictures and even videos in any social sharing site so the fact it was banned for that while other boards posted dubious porn webms was damning to be true. It proved to be correct as we later saw it. >That blows. What an awful country. Doesn't mean it will happen but if they want they have all the legal ways to pull it out. >having an arbitrary ban on certain types of reaction images is not good for the community of an image board. Yeah, i agree too hence why i am in favor of long-winded rule explanations to leave no shadow of a doubt but that must be done by the BO, the admins really don't have no say in that and honestly the matter here is inside the jurisdiction of what the BO can do, doesn't mean all the boards will abide by his will, it's just house rules of his. >he should ensure that his views and actions align with the views and desires of his prospective user base In my opinion only the most basic of moderation should be done in newly-made boards, that is delete spam and post about banners, CSS and such. He already went and done goofed it with those rules in terms of an anon's confidence in going to his shack but i think in due time the userbase can soften a man's views on something, especially when he's not against it personally, he just doesn't want seeing it My problem with him is not his loli posture but the fact a /x/ board is SFW, almost by definition it will definitely not be SFW in half of the topics it will touch, namely the nudism in fringe/gnostic talks, the satanism in occult threads, the gore in serial killer threads, the alien pictures which surprisingly a high number of people consider it a very serious phobia (IIRC from the old /x/ days it was the most common fear many anons had) so one would say someone visiting /x/ is already expecting to see shit that will question his feelings. >all the weirdo sex freaks it attracts I don't recall it being that pervasive but in that case i do think his ruling makes sense, i rather talk about something trying to find an objective truth or fact than finding the erotic meaning (as in aesthetic values rather than horny state of being) of some strange topic. If that ruling halts almost every succubus and injecting semen inside an egg thread then isn't that a good thing, loli matter excluding?
>>13963 >What is the website's official stance on loli images? The rules say that CP isn't allowed (which makes sense) and provocative pictures of real children aren't allowed (which makes sense), and that images created with a strong resemblance to real children aren't allowed, such as 3D models (which I also feel makes sense). However, the particular issue of 2D cartoon characters like the average anime loli is not addressed. See >>7 which states: >Regarding the global rules, we asked a few hosts with servers in Romania about the anime-style loli matter and they responded that “cartoon” (I.e. 2D) loli was not considered child pornography under their policies. So one might naturally conclude that 2D is not included under the Romanian law unless it “credibly simulates” a juvenile or has been produced as a derivative work of actual abuse material. We couldn’t find any clarification beyond that. Naturally if we receive takedown notices from Romanian law enforcement then we have to comply. Regarding purely textual stories, we don’t know, but it seems a great stretch to call a story a “credible simulation”.
>>13991 >>13992 BO clarifies >>>/x/92 According to root admin, sfw means no “explicit content” even behind a spoiler. Is this correct?
>>13993 >sfw means no “explicit content” even behind a spoiler. Is this correct? The Global Rules state: >Do not post adult content on SFW boards >If a board owner has marked a board "SFW" (Safe For Work) then you must not post pornography or other explicit adult-only content to that board. Posting pornography or other explicit adult-only content on to a SFW board, even if done as a spoiler, is still posting it.
>>13911 >Is it possible to bumplock threads? I second this question.
>>13992 Ah, that clears things up. Thanks; I wouldn't have bothered to ask if I'd seen that post before.
Open file (8.50 KB 473x500 89697563.png)
>>13981 >>13986 >>13988 >>13991 this pedo really wrote all that
>>13997 >>13998 You'll have to try harder if you plan to have any impact with your scheme here friend.
Open file (39.68 KB 686x479 nope.png)
>>14002 That's a slight improvement. At the least you're not the most lazy-assed lebbit-tier nigger on earth. Still, you're not having much impact beyond the sheer mental masturbation of it on your part. Don't you even care friend? Won't someone please just think of the children for once?
>>13911 >>13995 As far as I know, Lynxchan doesn't permit manual bumplocking of threads. It was a surprise for us as well.
>global.css >.catalogCell img Set min-width/height for it, to prevent nigh unclickable threads in the catalog (your announcement that /fascist/ is being deleted using a single pixel image).
Site was inaccessible for about an hour and change after something caused high rates of packet loss. We alerted our provider to the problem and things seem OK again, though we're still waiting to hear from them what the actual cause was, or if they did anything at all.

Report/Delete/Moderation Forms
Delete
Report

Captcha (required for reports)

no cookies?