I forgot the site uses Cloudflare, not a nice way to get a reminder. >>14514 Most sites use it for reason 2. but I believe there's alternatives to it now. How hard would obfuscating the IP be without CF?

>>55175 >but I believe there's alternatives I only know of basedflare which is neither free nor cheap and I don't trust stability or reliability of anything with "based" in its name. >How hard would obfuscating the IP be without CF? AFAIK the only real way is to route all traffic through a reverse proxy like CF. Though this of secondary importance anyway and more of a bonus side effect. Honestly, from my perspective the cloudflare "issues" people keep mentioning are mainly a matter of tinfoil hat being put on too tight. Unless any of you plan to participate in real life politics there is zero value in eavesdropping on bunch of internet randos shitposting about imaginary women with animal ears. And even then you can just use a vpn with the bypass system like I mentioned before, just have to make sure the browser is configured to confuse fingerprinting.

>>55184 I thought things like Anubis are for DDoS protection, but looking closer it appears it's more for blocking scraping bots than intentional DDoS attacks. I admit I'm not tech savvy enough to know how that works exactly.

>22113 MGE threads have their own mod? Is that Aux from Smug?

>>58044 >Is that Aux from Smug? Nope.

>>58044 It doesn’t matter who the moderator is.

What's the go with malicious profile interpretations in /mge/ for the sake of stirring shit? Inevitable autism? Actual offense?

>>69000 Sir, people are having fun. Calm down. Nobody's got hurt.

>>69012 Honestly just reeks of concern trolling, I can see it becoming a bigger issue if allowed.

>>69016 >a bigger issue Oh yes. People joking about some of the more unsavory MGE profiles. This is a horrible issue, indeed! And the only way to stop it, is total censorship! Because nothing YOU don't like must be allowed on this board! I've seen people like you on another monster-girl board. It all began with people making funny jokes about vampires in greentexts thread. Then some overly-aggressive buffoon came in, spitting rotten garbage out of his mouth towards anybody he didn't like. Unfortunately, the mod team of that board stood for the buffoon, and decided to delete all the joke comments, as well as a couple of those which described vamps negatively but had good points. Fast-forward to October-November period, the mod team got censor-crazy and started deleting perfectly on-topic posts. Meanwhile, right-wing spam that was more often than not off-topic and generally unwelcome, as well as obnoxious posts simply for the sake of starting shit, were allowed to exist. What's with that board now? It's mostly back to pre-censorcrazy period. Except that, there are a few more idiots occasionally posting there. People joking about vampires (and possibly other monster-girls) are not going to nuke the board into oblivion. Obnoxious bastards, on the other hand? They might just as well.

>>69000 Kind of a loaded question. If it's just being silly, it's not a big deal. If it actually is >for the sake of stirring shit then it's already covered by the rules anyway.

>>69020 Welcome to mgt/mge threads, it's been like that for a looong time now. The trick is to learn when you can safely ignore one autist screeching, when to realize that you are reaching the boundary of what's accepted and when to shut up and stop posting I would place the anti-vampire funposting around halfway through the step 1 to 2

And, speaking about troublestarters in /mge/. Just yesterday I've run into a massive shitstorm over whether MGE girls can or can't have sex with more than one man over their life-course. The mods have cleansed most of that since then, but those guys were pretty annoying. Maybe we could do something about them instead? Their shitstorm posting takes up space and kills other conversations, you know.

>>69021 I feel like it's a bit different when it's cherry picking lines out of profiles out of context and using it to push for actual torture and abuse, casual sex, etc. Thinks pretty well understood to be against thread culture, much less actual MGE canon. Just asking since it's behavior that seems to be mostly flying under the radar and honestly smells more like something cooked up by outside groups

>>69022 Everything was alright until the complaining bitches came around! They're like LGBT/BLM activists, ALWAYS demanding that everything they don't like get censored, cancelled, and deleted! And it's always us the decent ones who have to suffer because of their stinkposting. Maybe we start kicking out some of the most ardent naggers instead? They get in our way of having fun!

There's no way in hell I'm the only one that doesn't think that exactly passes for organic, right?

>>69025 Nobody gets kicked out unless they are openly malicious like the only two gentlemen who ended up with permabans. This is an anoynmous imageboard first and foremost and you have to accept autism. That is assuming you are even sincere because your post sounds ridiculous on a chan.

>>69025 thats a lot of projecting youre doing there, tourist

>>69028 Thanks you, admin, the voice of reason >>69025 >They're like LGBT/BLM activists Just say it, they are a bunch of nigger faggots.

I've deployed an improved proxy detection mechanism, so some anons might suddenly be hit with the block. As usual /site/ is exempt from it, so go there to grab a bypass or let me know if a non VPN/proxy/tor IP got blocked too.

Rule 3 seems to be being enforced rather arbitrarily, could I get some clarification? Seems to me some one can fuck with you but telling them to fuck off gets you whacked for derailing.

>>69778 Post number?

>>69784 uhh 69744 - it was a whole chain. I kinda get the namefag thing if naming and shaming isn't a behavior you want to cultivate. But if I responded to, say, 69766 it'd be really no different to what happened before. So you would assume I'd get whacked again for "derailing", despite not instigating anything. Just want some clarification on if that's the go or if there was some other reason for the moderation response.

>>69787 >But if I responded to, say, 69766 it'd be really no different to what happened before. I don't follow.

>>69789 Well lets say I told him to fuck off, in not as many words, it'd likely end up in a back and forth. Namefag thing aside, thats really all I did the first time around I got warned for "derailing". So you'd assume that, all things being equal I'd get warned again (or banned). Meanwhile the instigating post 69744 is still up. I don't really care, I just want to know if when it comes to moderation you look more at the posts that continue shit, rather than start shit. That's what I meant by it seeming arbitrary.

>>69792 >69744 meant 69766

>>69023 While I will admit that it was unfortunate people wanted to try and derail the topic with the idea of casual sex and “XD only Unicorns are virgins!!1!!” despite the lore directly contradicting their claims, I am not going to apologize for mentioning how brothels are more or less boarding schools to be a good housewife or an easy way for monsters to find a spouse. I just wish people would fuck off with bait people shouldn’t be biting.

>>69792 If you told him to fuck off, in that many words, without any further interaction, i wouldn't bat an eye. I intervened harshly this time because i don't want yet another named poster going in back an forths with other people derailing the thread, and i think you did understand that(I kinda get the namefag thing) About 69766, think you are taking it a bit too seriously. To me it seems like a tongue-in-cheek thing, rather than malicious. I don't like getting involved unless strictly necessary. Someone calling someone else a retard once is standard for these kinds of boards. I intervened to prevent a second frenchfag from forming. The best response for those kind of posts is to pass the vibe test, and the second best is to ignore them. If i see it's not a joke, and it's malicious, i will intervene. Hope you understand.

>>69795 Thanks for the clarification, I understand your response. I understand why you'd think I'm taking that post too seriously and perhaps I am. At the end of the day though, I know who posted it, I had a name for him, and I know it wasn't intended as a joke. Obviously, that doesn't mean I have to take the bait, I get it, part and parcel of a chan. I was just wondering what was at the heart of this particular decision.

>>69796 >At the end of the day though, I know who posted it, I had a name for him, That's the thing, that's not who you think it is. The second consequence of these kinds of thing is that people start seeing posters they hate everywhere. Don't let people live rent free in your head.

>>69797 kek, alright then >Don't let people live rent free in your head. I'll leave it to the flayers

>>69795 >a second frenchfag What?

>>69835 Lurk moar.

>>69836 I think that I'm the anon you're referring to; that's why I was asking for more intel. I don't know if this is the place, or if I can ask this, but I would like to know if I messed up since the move to Capy. If yes, can you tell me where (if possible) and what I should not do? (I know that it sounds stupid, but until now I thought that it was all good.) I can guess that this post is part of it but I rather ask now than get ban later because I'm retarded

>>69837 I meant the frog, not the anti-frog

>>69837 I'd hazard a guess that mod was talking about general emergence of the thread persona and the ensuing drama than him being against (You). Your anti- schizo stalking you caused orders of magnitudes more damage than you ever did.

>>69840 I see but I'm uncertain. It could also be me, I fucked up bad. I will wait for his answer

>>69837 As anon >>69840 said, i'm not talking about anything you've done. I'm talking about preventing a situation forming where another person gets harassed because of his posts, meaning, preventing your situation from forming again.

>>69797 But then how will we truly live out the good old days without dumb as fuck meta drama and namefags? /s

>>69856 Understood, thanks a lot. Please tell me if I fuck up again.

Is there any way to find out if somebody's abusing the report function? I believe there's a certain poster who tries to police the board by reporting everything that isn't to his tastes.

>>72191 >reports I don't think anyone actually looks at them, given that they keep piling up and nobody closes them. In our case it's banal to simply follow all the new posts. I guess you are talking about the posts deleted from /mge/ today, you can discuss it here if there is something wrong with with how the mod operates, but from what I'm observing he's doing a good job keeping both shitposting troublemakers and spergs at bay. Or at least better at it than I was. You can also follow the logs https://capybarachan.org/logs.js?boardUri=mg to see if there is something fishy going on.

>>72195 Oh, logs. Thanks a lot, I think I was able to trace a timeline of all those recent flamewars :) but, there are two things I don't quite understand. First, I've found a bunch of unexplained file deletions, such as >>71693 >>69696, what's wrong with them? It's just images deleted, the posts themselves stay. Second, why are bans for mundane reasons like "offtopic" "trolling" "unnecessary politics" etc. permanent while "cp spam" usually has a month-long ban?

>>72206 >I've found a bunch of unexplained file deletions AFAIK it's the local "no off-topic pics" unwritten rule derived from their thread culture. The mod himself can weigh in on this, I don't moderate /mge/ except for very specific circumstances like repeated ban evasion or other shit that affects the whole board >Second, why are bans for mundane reasons like "offtopic" "trolling" "unnecessary politics" etc. permanent Those are not bans, logs show them as "Ban" type but then it says >User REDACTED warned the posters A few times people got permabanned instead of warned by accident (the way you apply warn or ban on LynxChan is... peculiar), but I quickly lifted such accidental bans. Generally it's hard to get banned here, we use warnings to communicate if something is not desired. >while "cp spam" usually has a month-long ban? I don't permaban spammers because it's futile, they are cycling through a seemingly infinite pool of IPs and someone innocent could end up sharing the IP at one point.

>>72208 Far as I know /mge/ has their own mod, right? Does his authority spread over onto other threads (e.g. General Monstergirl Thread)?

>>72210 No, rest of the board goes on as before.

>>72206 >First, I've found a bunch of unexplained file deletions, Off topic images. Stuff like pieces of futurama episodes, which i consider to be avatarfagging in the current situation, and images not to do with monstergirls in general. It's not a hard rule, but >>31197 explains well what the policy more or less it. >Second, why are bans for mundane reasons like "offtopic" "trolling" "unnecessary politics" etc. Like the board owner said, the way you give warnings is by accessing the ban UI, which defaults to a permaban if you forget to change it to a warning because not specifying a duration means "indefinite".

>>72210 Thankfully no.

>>72208 Wait, so all this deletefaggotry is only in the mge thread? I can still funpost on the rest of the board and not have my shit randomly deleted for no reason?

>>72489 >I can still funpost on the rest of the board More or less, I do delete posts but mainly when it's autistic derailing with arguments or unironic /pol/ shizoposting.