>>393 That was my bad. I was watching the Overboard and thought you had made your post on /v/. Just appeal that ban and I will remove it.

>>394 There's nothing to appeal, unless you mean the /v/ weekban I got yesterday, which I already appealed. I used TOR for the last two meta OPs, because I figured someone might pull something like this. I'm getting really fucking nervous here, you feel me?

For archival purposes, the full text of the first, deleted meta thread is as follows: >/v/ >over forty fucking posts deleted >entire fucking post history >shit I put effort into >shit I actually wrote out beforehand >shit I fucking researched >including shit from days ago >literal days worth of effortposting >no explanation >just a snotty, opaque, dave-style "/v/ is the video game board" >posts were all about video games or video game adjacent shit >was replying to things other people said >wasn't even changing the fucking topic of conversation >banned for a week

>>397 I feel you. I've removed your week ban. In the future, try to limit your off-topic racebaiting to one post per thread to avoid future bans.

>>399 Wait, what the fuck did I say that was racebaiting? I make it a point to avoid easymode /pol/ shit, and I have no idea what the fuck you're talking about.

>>399 Wait, was this about the fruit-flavored milk thing? Because I meant that as good-natured ribbing. I was joking. Obviously no one is going to exclude someone from an ethnic category on the basis of dairy drinks, that's fucking retarded.

>>401 Like, the underlying current of the post was self-deprecation, because imagine someone who's dumb enough to actually do that. The idea is, you act ridiculous enough that you can fully express your opinion while allowing the other guy to save face because he's talking to a clown. If this is what got everything I fucking wrote deleted, wow.

>>400 Your ban was applied because you, or a user with the same IP, posted 15+ times in the GamerGate thread about explicitly unrelated race issues even when compared to the rest of the usually-offtopic GG threads. With that said, however, we've been the recipients of numerous spam attacks from nonsense bots (Acid or Codexx are better people to ask on this topic). I'll take you at your word and apologize because it is eminently possible that your IP was used by another user in order to spam the board, and if that is the case you were caught in the crossfire. Are you using a VPN service? I know for a fact that two of our regular spammers use NordVPN.

>>403 Huh. Afaik, I haven't posted in the GG thread for like three days. In fact, I don't remember posting in the new one. I don't know how that would've happened. Also, I don't know know what I would've said that would've been racebait, unless it was anti-Pooh shit, and I always try to make it clear that shit's about the government, not the people. I will neither confirm nor deny that I use a VPN, but it's not NoordVPN.

>>403 Were these 15+ posts last night or earlier?

>>403 Also, thanks for trying to explain all this shit. I appreciate the effort.

>>405 I wasn't paying attention to the timestamps, only the volume of the posts, but they were relatively high up there. I do apologize that your history was nuked; it's very easy to see an entire thread's worth of spam, assume that that ID is a bad actor, and delete by IP. It was the wrong call this time and that's on me, and I'm sorry.

>>408 Yeah, I am almost sure I didn't post anything in any GG thread in the past two days. This is seriously weirding me out, because one of the things I did post was a rebuttal to something that I think has a lot of "push" behind it, if you know what I mean. Is there any kind of archive-scraper for 8moe? I'd like to get a couple of those posts back.

>>409 We don't currently have archives up, and don't plan to run our own for the foreseeable future. I am working on a scraper you can run locally to snatch files and posts, and that will be released soon. Your best chance is if anybody archived those threads. You can do a search on archive.today and see if that's the case, but people haven't been as active with archiving as they were in the past. I have been concerned with this occurring for some time, and believe the site would benefit from a grace period where posts could be reinstated. For now, here's what's being done about it: >delete by IP in thread Limits the scope of delete by IP. Coming in LynxChan 2.5. >Post retention/reinstatement period We can see if Stephen is interested. If not, we can cook up an add-on for it. Will take some time. >Dedicated /v/ meta thread The former Hoppe boards have a dedicated meta thread and I think that's a good idea. I'll talk to the BOs of the biggest boards and try getting them onboard. It seems like the whole thing is a series of misunderstandings following an itchy trigger finger by globals who have been on-alert for Dolphinspam. Regardless, it shouldn't have happened and you have my apologies. Please let us know if there's anything else we can do to make things right and prevent something like this in the future.

There was heavy use of Delete by IP during the recent spam raids. The spam was done using posts scraped from cuck/r9k/ to blend into the board better as random offtopic text, so a misfire was eventually inevitable. I sincerely apologize for the trouble.

>>394 >>399 >>403 >>408 Wait, is Mark a fucking gvol? What happened to him being nothing more than a BO?

>>430 No, Mark is not a gvol. We do have several gvols on staff, so mistakes may happen from time to time.

>>431 So one of Marks mods is a gvol? In what context does someone with gvol access delete by IP on Mark's board for him for non-spam related issues?

>>432 Looking through the logs it appears that's the case. I suppose it's not that big of a deal but it comes across as a little weird that a selling point of the site was Mark wouldn't be a gvol, but one of Mark's mods is a gvol.

>>432 A few potential reasons. >It could appear to be spam based on snap judgement during the ongoing raid (by far the most likely) >It could be a misclick while deleting other spam posts >It could be a post with numerous open reports that make the above two more likely >It could have been a post with open reports that the mod chose to delete as they went down the list (as a matter of policy this one is to be avoided unless direct global rule infractions are involved) Based on the timing, the suddenness, and the single incident I believe its the first case, and I apologize for it happening. Edit: >it comes across as a little weird that a selling point of the site was Mark wouldn't be a gvol, but one of Mark's mods is a gvol. Since /v/ was the first board and had the first active mods, and because we needed to go live with at least a few trustworthly gvols available across different timezones I accepted some initial overlap. My policy is that the recent (and all future) gvols are more properly independent of any board or boards. Its actually more awkward than you imply because as gvols they technically outrank Mark. But its what we had to do to get the site up fast.

>>438 I'm not offended by someone accidentally deleting a single thread. I just find it funny that a /v/ mod is a gvol while the /v/ BO isn't. Just seems like a bit of an inconsistency all things considered.

>>439 I missed your post anon, but please see my edit above.

>>438 >>440 Yeah that's a fine explanation. You're such a fucking faggot for editing your post instead of just making another post though. You could at least try to not write like a complete fucking reddit nigger now that you're running the spiritual successor to 8chan.

>>441 Sorry. The thread refreshed and your post loaded for me as I was reaching for the submit edit button.

>>411 dw about it

>>393 /v/ moderation is STILL fucked 3 years later