>>8449 >I think the only hint here is that you have no argument and like to run away from anyone who shits on the easily-disprovable LTV. Holy based.

>>8452 >I think the only hint here is that you have no argument and like to run away from anyone who shits on the easily-disprovable LTV Holy cope lmao. You get BTFO in every one of your shit threads and instead of actually addressing the arguments made against you, just make new threads using the same talking points. Kill yourself.

>>8415 To be fair, we have a 'special relationship' with /pol/. There are probably other places that are better for garnering converts, but there's probably nowhere that is better than /leftypol/ to 'acclimatise' a /pol/ack to leftism. In addition, I see redpilling a fascist as infinitely more valuable than making a left-libertarian mildly less SJW-fied, though that is still a good thing. We have reached out to other places than /pol/ in the past, though usually not in an official capacity, for example reddit, Facebook, and so on. Also, I have now learned that tweet is from 2019 so it is practically ancient history in internet terms. Thank you for your concern however. We do value feedback.

>>8418 >we have a 'special relationship' with /pol/ >I see redpilling a fascist as [...] valuable Can I ask why you are of this opinion? I don't agree and consider /pol/ to be small and increasingly irrelevant -- even if they become relevant - they become relevant in the manner in which we need to have strong numbers in a red army to neutralize them, before they succeed in acting at the behest of the conservation of capital. >infinitely more valuable than making a left-libertarian mildly less SJW-fied Meanwhile, the demographic of "liberal" (in the broadest sense of the term) is by far larger, more relevant, and pertinent to our immediate work: in ridding the proletariat of false consciousness, in countering dominant ideology succinctly, in knowing what arguments to prioritize to the average person (an unconscious liberal) and why that is. This may sound easy, but it's not. It requires deep philosophical, historical, economic, sociological and lately ecological understanding on the part of our side. Liberals rely on modern economics, psychology, sociology, public relations, massmedia... Nazis rely on deprecated anthropology from a century ago and appeals to emotion. Do we want to be influential? Because I think that we could be. We aren't now.

>>8424 I agree that converting liberals is important and if we do so, then awesome, but our website format is offputting to Reddit/Facebook/Twitter type liberals, so we are not the best people to convince them, probably. I also think that fascists are a more immediate danger to the left/to society than the average liberal. If we convert fascists, we might actually stop people from being killed in eg mass shootings. Now, perhaps the people far gone enough to do that stuff could never be convinced, but even so they will be less encouraged without their echo chamber. To sum up, I would like to attract all people possible, but we can't throw away what people like about the site to chase liberals or any group in particular.

>>8427 >Now, perhaps the people far gone enough to do that stuff could never be convinced I'm reasoning like this because the people I grew up around that actually went fascist had those influences in the household (i.e. they were conditioned into these sets of beliefs by significant personal influences in their lives) and so to me they indeed do seem entirely far-gone. This usually isn't the case for people that base their evaluations on liberal presuppositions, especially because Marxism has been explicitly developed as a critique for this, but also because liberalism at least tries to rely on logic, reason, science, even though the manner in which they do is incorrect. >we can't throw away what people like about the site There's so much more (for me at least) to chan culture than being a reaction to /pol/. That's why people often experience nostalgic feelings when encountering /GET/ for the first time (not that I'm putting GET on a pedestal here, but it's a good referential example). I don't see why we couldn't have wide influence if we leveraged our hand well. Look up the history of LulzSec for example. That was an emergent phenomenon of an anonoymous imageboard before /pol/ had ideological hegemony over the political side of chans. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Op_Payback#Operation_Avenge_Assange https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LulzSec Not saying we should directly do things like this, just that maybe we should broaden our prospective horizons of what's possible.

>>8427 >our website format is offputting to Reddit/Facebook/Twitter type liberals Could've fooled me with the constant threads about what literal whos are doing on social media shit.

>>8395 Why have mods become a cloistered, secret cabal that never communicates outside of whenever usebase revolts are inches from happening? Why are you all of a sudden lenient on radlibs and invite neonazis onto our board from a Twitter that was meant to act as outreach to leftists around the web to grow our shriveled community of booklets and nazbols? Why are you letting Graceposter, either an autist reactionary or a fed on a payroll intended to sow discord, derail all OC/draw threads on Bunkerchan with spiteful / condescending artworks involving "her" abusing a prominent mascot of our site? Why do you have "anti-sectarian" as a banner, yet never enforce it? Is not lenient treatment of royalists, fascists, nazis, radlibs and Pol-Potists the most sectarian moderation policy a "left-wing" board could possibly conceive of? t. /leftypol/er of 4 years.

>>8399 I agree we haven't been working hard enough to respond to posts on this board. I apologise and we will try to do better.

>>8399 >Why have mods become a cloistered, secret cabal that never communicates outside of whenever usebase revolts are inches from happening? We have tended to not use this board that much. That is wrong, I apologise. However, many of the posts here cannot meaningfully be responded to and just devolve into yelling at us. >Why are you all of a sudden lenient on radlibs and invite neonazis onto our board from a Twitter that was meant to act as outreach to leftists around the web to grow our shriveled community of booklets and nazbols? That is Coma's twitter, not the leftypol/bunkerchan twitter. However, we have always been open to /pol/ converts or even honest discussion with fascists. >Why are you letting Graceposter, either an autist reactionary or a fed on a payroll intended to sow discord, derail all OC/draw threads on Bunkerchan with spiteful / condescending artworks involving "her" abusing a prominent mascot of our site? Because they like to draw and it's cute I guess. They seem pretty harmless to me, I mean come on, a monarchist in 2020? >Why do you have "anti-sectarian" as a banner, yet never enforce it? We cannot make tankies and anarkids be nice to each other, we try to be 'non sectarian' and not take an official moderation stance. That said we could do more to trim the worst sectarian threads.

>>6663 long live 8/leftpol/ the true vangaurd

>>8410 >devolve into yelling at us. Think of it like Game creators, you fuck up, and people get angry, it takes time and effort to get people to cool their jets.

>>8296 >But now I get regularly hit with bans for making unpopular posts >Yet I get called "schizo" just for being frustrated with the world and seeking to convince others. Holy based.

lmao every time someone makes a complaint without clearly stating what they're getting banned for and using vague bullshit it turns out they're either a nutjob or a racist

>>8655 Sure bud, everyone you seethe about is "muh racist"

>>8344 >midwit

>>8353 I was talking about a different leninhat poster, not the germ-theory denying retard.

>>8379 M8, the big problem we're having is that there are mods voting for Biden and who think that liberal idpol is A-OK. These same mods have ignored reported /pol/-posting until it complaints of said /pol/-shit is explicitly spammed in /gulag/. Meanwhile liberal idpol and sectarian baitposting is left up for days or weeks on end. Then when someone makes a post critical of liberal idpol it gets deleted because the language or terms used aren't 'PC' despite us being a politically incorrect site. Moreover, /b/ is being moderated irrationally, with porn being spoilered by mods for no reason, them deleting content for no given reason and again, ignoring posts of literal /pol/propaganda. Moderation needs to be cleaned up and to write and follow some basic ESTABLISHED rules, which I have suggested and have been utterly ignored >>>/gulag/7986 TL;DR The top of the page in /leftypol/ states "no idpol or sectarianism" yet we don't see this being done consistently or fairly. People have written some fair guides for Global rules, use them please.

This tweet is from 2019 and Coma doesn't even have a twitter anymore apparently. Therefore I'm anchoring this to avoid confusion. >>8384 The mod team is made up of a cross section of ideologies, and yes that includes some element of reformism. Mods can have their own views about the election and whatever else. I would like to point out that we haven't banned everyone who says they're voting for Trump so why should we do the reverse? As for liberal idpol, please see the manifesto, which addresses this topic (in a manner of speaking), here it is; "An important part of /leftypol/’s unique character is our opposition to identity politics. We believe that conflicts between genders, races, sexualities, and so on are distractions from the wider class struggle that are intentionally fanned by the ruling class. This does not mean that oppression based on personal characteristics does not exist, but that it should be approached from an egalitarian perspective which is not personally accusatory and does not assign ‘victim’ and ‘oppressor’ groups. The rights of individuals to live according to their own wishes is a fundamental part of leftism." We try to moderate according to that definition. Yes, we do still disagree sometimes, and no, there is no perfect definition of what is and isn't idpol. >Then when someone makes a post critical of liberal idpol it gets deleted because the language or terms used aren't 'PC' despite us being a politically incorrect site. We protect your right to say 'stupid' and similar things that Reddit doesn't like, as for 'faggot', 'nigger', etc etc, those terms are allowed only at our discretion, if we feel they contribute to a genuinely reactionary post they may well merit its deletion. Communism is politically incorrect but there is nothing inherently brave about screaming racial epithets into the wind. >Moreover, /b/ is being moderated irrationally, with porn being spoilered by mods for no reason, them deleting content for no given reason and again, ignoring posts of literal /pol/propaganda. /b/ is still experimental and we are still deciding what the rules should be. For now we have decided to spoiler porn in OPs. Other stuff is still up in the air.

>>8414 >This tweet is from 2019 and Coma doesn't even have a twitter anymore apparently. Therefore I'm anchoring this to avoid confusion. Wtf that was why I couldn't find it? I just thought he had it "restricted" considering nobody ITT outright said that it was a fabrication. >2019 I apologize, my complaints would've been cut down by 50% probably if I was aware of this.

>>8419 It's fine, I didn't realise either.

>>8414 >nothing inherently brave about screaming racial epithets into the wind. true, but I've had large posts where 'faggot' is barely even 1% of the post and it gets deleted because a vol didn't like criticism of a liberal idpol despite me using legit sources and arguments. >For now we have decided to spoiler porn in OPs. Other stuff is still up in the air. Ok, just give people a heads up ya know, it's really disconcerting to see an effort post disappear while some pro-NATO liar is getting away with literal wikipedia copy-pasta. >We will fill out the global rules section, perhaps with your rules or an edited versio Looking forward to that, ciao

>>>/b/ exists for all your nutting needs.

/b/ now exists so this demand is unneeded. Enjoy.

>>7186 Leftcels & Leftchads laughing at you.

>>7186 Only good coomer is a dead one.

We voted on the filter and I still think it's a good idea. Also, it is rare that a link would happen to have 'PMC' in it. Please use a link shortener in that case. We cannot add spaces to the filter on the current software to eliminate 'filter inside word' issues. That is why IQ is no longer filtered sadly. Answered and anchored.

>>5046 >be mod >don't have a life >don't have a life >don't have a life >don't have a life >don't have a life >don't have a life >don't have a life >don't have a life >don't have a life >don't have a life >don't have a life >don't have a life >don't have a life >don't have a life >don't have a life

>>8287 Pot meet kettle.

>>5042 I'm not even getting banned for slurs, just winning arguments kek

No substantive criticism, anchored.

>>5042 >call someone a nigger >get banned >call someone a kike >get banned >say slur >get banned this never happened.

Why?

Wild idea: send all threads made on /leftypol/ that could easily go on a side board there, close the original and add a "This thread was moved to >>>/*/#####" message. No idea if the software supports it, though.

>>8250 I believe that /GET/ can easily be converted into a /co/-style board considering its roots, plus everyone there is gay and reeks of Tumblr.

>>8294 >/GET/ can easily be converted into a /co/-style board No it can't they're firmly into doing nothing but ERP, shitposting and generally being /b/ on crack and liberalism. >>8238 Fuck off faggot, leave the sideboards alone you cunt.

answered, anchored

>>6587 Screenshots do.

>>6598 As a snowuigghur I have used YYYY-MM-DD in school papers as far back as CY-10. This doesn't trigger me at all.

>>6598 >DD/MM/YYYY confuse gringos How about this: 2020oct24

retvrn to tradition

ISO-8601 is based