[Burichan] [Futaba] [Nice] [Pony]  -  [WT]  [Home] [Manage]
Why are eleven paragraphs of bacon metaphor even necessary to explain one's sexuality.
[Return] [Entire Thread] [Last 50 posts] [Last 100 posts]
Posting mode: Reply
Name
Email
Subject   (reply to 27356)
Message
File []
Embed   Help
Password  (for post and file deletion)
  • Supported file types are: DAT, GIF, JPG, MP3, MP4, PNG, SWF, WEBM
  • Maximum file size allowed is 12500 KB.
  • Images greater than 250x250 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Currently 4731 unique user posts. View catalog

File 144538847577.png - (138.48KB , 960x560 , New canvas.png )
27356 No. 27356 ID: 5aeb2e

Hi;

We need to talk about this spoiler picture. Who is that ant? What is it doing? I don't know.

Well actually I do but a lot of people don't.

Do you think it's time for a more generic spoiler image that means nsfw quests / threads aren't just a field of embarrassed ants? Let me know if you do, and also put your own proposed spoiler images in this thread so the mods can see them.

thank
Expand all images
>>
No. 27357 ID: 5ad4a7

It should probably be something RubyQuest related because a loooooooot of people on this site know about that quest.

Either that, or something without a character at all.
>>
No. 27358 ID: 5aeb2e

I personally think we shouldn't have a character at all. Just some kind of generic, vaguely attractive spoiler images like are on 4chan.
>>
No. 27359 ID: 260951
File 144538876343.png - (11.46KB , 960x560 , nsfw.png )
27359

woah
>>
No. 27360 ID: 025c3c

I'm not sure changing to a different character would matter. There's never going to be a character everyone is happy with.

I don't like the idea of changing it to text, though. I like that it uses a weird bit of tgchan culture and not something generic.
>>
No. 27361 ID: c43722

Since the spoiler image is commonly used to cover both spoilers and NSFW images, how about putting text like "SPOILER OR NSFW IMAGE" in it? That is, unless we can get a separate tickbox and image for NSFW stuff, but I doubt that.
>>
No. 27362 ID: 0fc976

I think the image is a part of this site's character now. Myah myah, different bad.
>>
No. 27363 ID: 5aeb2e
File 144538957016.png - (178.78KB , 960x560 , New canvas.png )
27363

>>
No. 27364 ID: 90f3c0
File 144539057585.png - (22.24KB , 200x200 , spoiler.png )
27364

I agree that it isn't immediately apparent what the image means. Maybe making the text stand out more would help.

On the topic of NSFW images, it would be nice if the rule of spoiler tagging NSFW images could be more strictly enforced. It's a bit awkward recommending that people should read quests when there are muscular teens jizzing all over the main page.

A separate NSFW image would also help, but I don't know how hard that would be to implement.
>>
No. 27365 ID: a788b7

>>27364

'Enforcing' spoiler images inevitably leads to censoring quests entirely because big gay babies cry about them.

This is not a slippery slope fallacy, this is history. It has already happened.

Spoilers on /quest/ will never be an enforced rule again.
>>
No. 27366 ID: bb78f2

>>27359
I think we should have something like this in green courier font on a black background. Like tgchan's main icon, only instead of just an underscore, it should be NSFW or SPOILERS centered on an image.

Since, you know, it could either be NSFW or an image spoiler for a fictional work. So it needs an "or Spoiler" addendum. Hover over mouse to see is also an important addendum. So basically the current image without the ant, pure black, all the text in green courier font. Make sure it's not that shitty smooth anti-alized font either, go old school.

Maybe give it a CRT screen oval effect think too. You know, so it looks cooler.

Hell, honestly, I would like a style like that for the whole site, ala Burichan, Futaba, Nice and Pony.
>>
No. 27367 ID: c9f250

>>27365

That's not what happened.
>>
No. 27369 ID: f56624
File 144541353540.png - (11.43KB , 250x146 , dank spoiler man.png )
27369

disregarding the argument about spoiler politics here, I present my glory be entry into the spoilerzone
>>
No. 27370 ID: 5ad4a7

>>27364
There is no rule saying that NSFW images should be spoilered. It's purely voluntary.
>>
No. 27371 ID: fee819
File 144542402812.jpg - (488.71KB , 716x911 , spoilers.jpg )
27371

My idea is to make the spoiler image much worse than anything likely contained inside the spoiler (see example), and that way the viewer will be conveniently pre-desensitised to the content of the post. And if the content is worse than the spoiler, they should probably be banned.

>>27364

That's a terrible idea.
>>
No. 27374 ID: 88e46e

>>27367
How do you know he's talking about whatever you insist wasn't what happened?
>>
No. 27377 ID: bb78f2
File 144545617038.png - (1.52KB , 348x280 , Spoiler image suggestion.png )
27377

>>27366
Huh, okay, wow, I thought making my idea simply in MSPaint would be bad or really hard, but naw, it's good and easy

Doesn't have a crt filter though :(
>>
No. 27379 ID: 176d3c

>>27370 The rule in question is: "If you think your picture might offend the sensibilities of some viewers, please use a spoiler-image" if you don't think that some people, who might not share your idea of sensibilities, would be offended by genitals on the front page of /quest/, then you're not thinking hard enough. That it is worded as a request to be polite is not a reason to take advantage of the wording to disregard it completely
>>
No. 27380 ID: 90f3c0
File 144547083437.png - (3.94KB , 200x200 , spoilers2.png )
27380

>>27366
Alternate design based on tgchan icon.
>>
No. 27381 ID: 88e46e

>>27379
Ok, but where do you draw the line? Because it really needs to be drawn somewhere, even if it's a blurry line. "Some" viewers means what? Like, to use an extreme examples, if white supremacists are offended by portrayals of non-whites, should all images containing people who are not white be spoilered?

That wasn't a serious example or even a point worth replying to, it's a reason to draw a line. You can object that I was being flippant, but look at political headlines in virtually any Western country for ten minutes and tell me there aren't far too many vocal minorities who get offended at innocuous images for nonsensical reasons. Even if we never get invaded by SJWs and it's only to stop shitposters complaining that hamsters bother them, the rule really should be better defined than "if you think some people might dislike it".

That, plus with certain areas of the site, meaning one-third to one-half of tgchan, being pornographic, it's not far-fetched to think that nudity doesn't bother people on tgchan.
>>
No. 27383 ID: bb78f2

>>27381
Oh my god, so many people don't care about this.
You know what people care about? You know what really matters?
Cool spoiler pictures and ideas about spoiler pictures.

People will flock away from this thread and stop sharing ideas if it turns into a huge debate. I really like the ones in this thread, they're really awesome, and I want to see more. MORE! MORE! I WANT MORE!

What could possibly be said that hasn't already been said? Brom already put down the Brommod Hammer super early, why continue about this stupid point?

>>27380
Haha, that one's funny.
>>
No. 27384 ID: 025c3c

>>27380
That's really the best of the lot, so far.
>>
No. 27386 ID: c43722

Personally, I think the old Jiniki one should have just been reworked to make it more obvious it was covering spoilers as well as adding that it was also used for covering up NSFW stuff. The one that replaced it looks just too plain, like it's a placeholder.
>>
No. 27387 ID: 43f06c

>>27380
PLEASE........................................
>>
No. 27388 ID: be1222

#doublejiniki
>>
No. 27389 ID: 395c02

Due to the nature of the site, you'll have to clear your browser cash to see the new, generic spoiler image currently in place.
>>
No. 27390 ID: 395c02

I for one thought the old spoiler image was fine. Maybe put an "or NSFW" on it I guess but.
>>
No. 27391 ID: aca445

#doublejiniki
>>
No. 27392 ID: bfb318

make it an assortment of cfbs that are randomly cycled through so that it's always unclear if something is a spoiler but i'll be able to see lots of cfbs in thumbnails so it'll be worth

sincerely,
not lawyerdog
>>
No. 27393 ID: 395c02

I think jiniki gives the site more "personality" , like the custom 404 nobody complains about. It could be made more obvious, so let me know and I can see about putting together some more obvious jinikis
>>
No. 27394 ID: 88e46e

jiniki squadron 2k15
>>
No. 27395 ID: c9f250

#doublejiniki
>>
No. 27396 ID: ec0bf5

If people like the image being something with personality but don't want it to just be something from one person's quest, would it work to have a pool of them from different authors that get randomly selected from? Or would that just cause even more drama as to who gets in? I liked the old one but do kind of understand where people are coming from, that it's kind of weird for one person's work to get the spotlight. Regardless, it probably does need to be a bit more clear what sort of content is behind it, because I don't think I've ever actually seen it used for spoilers.
>>
No. 27397 ID: b3dd38

#doublejiniki
but if the function can be made clearer, that would be good
>>
No. 27398 ID: 54bb7f

#doublejiniki
>>
No. 27399 ID: bb78f2

Yeah okay this current one feels all sorts of wrong.
With the ant, I was like "Oooooh, what's the surprise?"
With this, I'm like "This feels clinical. Like a sheet." It's not drawing to the eye, and well like I said it feels wrong.

Basically, I think the spoiler thing has to be switched around until we find one juuuuuust right, to get that ant surprise tingle back. Which means all candidates need to be tried for maybe a day if we're not going back to ant. Sounds like people want the ant back though, which, well he already has the surprise tingle on him.

I want to feel guilty when I mouse over that spoiler. I want my lips to curl like a devil.
>>
No. 27400 ID: 0a7e48

While we're talking about it what's the weird thing on the 404 page

I think for the benefit of new users the 404 page could stand to be made more clear and in fairness to all quest authors not contain any sort of reference to a character or the like

Maybe just have "page not found" and a link back to the home page? I mean, all the arguments here against the old spoiler pic equally apply to the 404 pic, just saying

also the 404 pic has the text within the image and there is no greater crime for accessibility than a page with all the text content inside image files, how am I going to browse the site with Lynx now
>>
No. 27401 ID: fee819
File 144550268943.jpg - (2.37MB , 3000x2718 , skulls.jpg )
27401

All jokes aside, is this really a big deal though?
What's wrong with having a character on the spoiler image, or the 404 page for that matter? That's what the site is about, after all. Nobody is really going to make a big deal that they don't know who those characters are. In my personal opinion, it adds more personality to the site, which would otherwise seem rather drab- just another "-chan."

Also, are we really going to force NSFW censorship? The site is pretty much NSFW to begin with, and you'd be reckless to actually browse it at work or school (although I used to anyway). It's more sensible to simply take the site with the mindset that it's a NSFW site, and don't be a retard by browsing it when it might get you in trouble.

Censorship is only for posts that might actually be offensive or spoil something. The vast majority of this site is rampant furries and shit who spend half their waking hours jacking off over on FA or something, and /draw/ is almost entirely furry porn since its conception.

So yeah, don't. Unless we weren't going to force it anyway, in which case disregard those last two parts.
>>
No. 27402 ID: 39f669

I think the only argument against having Ant Chick in the spoiler image and Glowy Guy in the 404 image is that nobody knows or cares who they are any more. I wouldn't mind if they were updated with more relevant/well known characters.
>>
No. 27404 ID: 0a7e48

>Nobody is really going to make a big deal that they don't know who those characters are.

Except that is literally what happened and someone demanded it be changed on IRC.
>>
No. 27405 ID: fee819

>>27404

Well I obviously meant no "reasonable person" would do it, Cirr, and just because one person has demented ideas doesn't mean we all sit up and hearken them.

If someone said we need to drive on the opposite side of the road purely because they don't know why we use the current one, they'd be shot right then and there - and they'd deserve it.
>>
No. 27406 ID: a788b7

>>27404

People only talked about it because some of the big gay babies were whining that spoilers should be enforced. People weren't bringing it up itself so it probably wasn't a big deal
>>
No. 27407 ID: 88e46e
File 144552786871.png - (2.31KB , 52x38 , new canvas.png )
27407

Hi;

We need to talk about this site theme. Who are these ponies? What are they doing? I don't know.

Well actually I do but a lot of people don't.

Do you think it's time for a more generic way of identifying posters that means shitposters/trolls aren't just anons? I think we should force everyone to get an account before they post, requiring their social security number and credit card number, or equivalent. Let me know if you agree.

thank
>>
No. 27408 ID: ca8ded

>>27401
>Also, are we really going to force NSFW censorship? The site is pretty much NSFW to begin with, and you'd be reckless to actually browse it at work or school

Speaking personally, my feelings aren't so much that the site should be SFW, but more that there should be some sort of basic courtesy to other users of the site. We have porn here, sure, but the site isn't for porn. We're a website devoted to a particular artform, questing, and like other repositories for online art and fiction, some of that will be sfw and some of it will be nsfw and it's all artistically viable.

But most gallery sites have some sort of function whereby people who don't want to be exposed to certain things can make it so that they don't have to, which is fair. There are people who come on here to see quests with cool fantasy/scifi settings, or interesting puzzles, or appealing characters, or funny jokes or et cetera et cetera, and a lot of those people could have their enjoyment of the site negatively impacted by, for example, visiting the front page of /quest/ and being smacked in the eyes by some explicit dragonfucking. Even if said dragonfucking is, in context, a critical part of an excellent story unfolding within that quest. The artist has full rights to include dragonfucking in their quest, it would just be nice of them to obscure it from people who aren't actively seeking it out, because if you're not actively seeking it out (either because you're looking for porn or you want to appreciate what it adds to the rest of the quest) then chances are you'd rather not see it.

Obviously the site is relatively simple and there's no way to quantify things, or to automate it, but there should be some idea that an artist or author, before posting something that's going to be seen by everyone who visits that board, should think for a moment: "Will a lot of people who see this be seriously disturbed, disgusted or otherwise have their day worsened a little if they happen to see this?" And, if yes, they should use the spoiler image function.

My personal standard for when I use the spoiler image is the old softcore/hardcore boundary. Regular nudity I'll show, and on the violence side, someone with visible cuts and scratches and some blood I'll show. When it gets up to visible interlocking genitals, or distinct organs being torn out of someone, then I'll use a spoiler image. I'm not saying that's the standard everyone should use, but it is what I consider to be the boundary of decency towards other people using the site.

As for what spoiler picture to use, I think the Jiniki one was fine, though maybe the text at the top could be clearer.
>>
No. 27409 ID: ca8ded

Oh, also, something that may or may not be important: sometimes, I've used the spoiler image function to delay a reveal, and I've seen it used by others as well, though admittedly not often. Requiring someone to mouseover or click causes a little delay, which can be used to create a "beat" in how they absorb the update. It can be used to add impact, to enhance a visual joke or heighten a dramatic moment. Make it a little more punchy, you know?

So, I don't know if that's actually significant enough to be part of considerations, here, but it's something.
>>
No. 27410 ID: 2eeb65

Maybe there should just be a separate board for NSFW quests?
>>
No. 27411 ID: 88e46e

>>27410
mmmm nah
>>
No. 27412 ID: ca8ded

>>27410

No.
>>
No. 27413 ID: 90f3c0

>>27410
Nope. This is a terrible idea, which would definitely lead to self censorship from authors trying to keep their quests on the main board.

Here's a better idea: just change the text on the check box to read "Spoiler/NSFW Image" This would subtly remind posters that some people would like NSFW images marked, without making anyone feel like they're being asked to censor themselves.


Also the current spoiler image is super bland. Just use the Jiniki image with clearer text.
>>
No. 27414 ID: be0636

>>27413
it's not just /bland/, it's poorly made. some of the text is left-aligned AND off-center. i say we use this thread to post alternatives then at the end of the month use a strawpoll to determine the new spoiler macro
>>
No. 27415 ID: 88e46e

>>27414
Sure, if we change it back to Jiniki until the strawpoll and have Jiniki/clearer Jiniki as an option on the poll.
>>
No. 27416 ID: fe06ff

>>27410
that would be a terrible Idea
>>
No. 27417 ID: bd3227

I vote for older Jiniki covering young Jiniki's eyes.

Double Jiniki.
>>
No. 27418 ID: 0fc976

What about a new image of Jiniki for the spoiler tag?
>>
No. 27419 ID: fe06ff

also I object to mandatory spoilers if I HAVE to use a Jiniki spoiler tag

I don't like being forced to have characters that aren't mine show up in my threads

Also if I'm trying to do a serious scene that happens to have some tasteful nudity, I don't want a silly bug girl picture ruining the effect

I neutral spoiler image works best because it doesn't contrast the content of the thread
>>
No. 27420 ID: a51150

Maybe this would be too much effort for too little reward, but since quest threads can already get custom favicons, why not custom spoiler pictures, too? (Hmm. Might not work on the board index. That may or may not be a problem.)
>>
No. 27421 ID: bd3227

>>27419

What.
>>
No. 27422 ID: 395c02
File 144555972402.png - (36.75KB , 200x200 , spoils.png )
27422

This is actually one of the original ideas I considered, with Jiniki being much less in-your-face, before I was asked to do a color one instead.

>>27419
I guess. But tasteful nudes don't need to be marked right now. And if there's a serious sex scene... well, that would depend. I mean, it's not impossible to ask dylan for something specifically for that thread/scene, I think...

>Multiple spoiler images!
This would require coding, and things that require coding are very, very slow to get done around here. Sorry.

The site policy on what to tag is kind of vague (because it kind of has to be, I think), but in general things beyond basic nudity are what's insisted be tagged. There are currently no plans for a NSFW board or anything like that, as TGchan is pretty much considered a NSFW site.

Come to think of it, didn't someone want the nsfw warning on the main page to be bigger?
>>
No. 27424 ID: 395c02
File 144555978481.png - (57.23KB , 200x200 , spoils2.png )
27424

>#doublejiniki

I aim to please.
>>
No. 27425 ID: bd3227

>>27424

#doublejiniki 2015
>>
No. 27426 ID: 395c02
File 144556047179.png - (30.37KB , 200x200 , spoilerth.png )
27426

while i'm here-- Remember when this was the spoiler image? Gooood tiiiimes...

Anyway, Knowing who this "ant" is shouldn't be required to know what's going on, which is also what I'm hoping to achieve with the different text up there.
>>
No. 27427 ID: 0a7e48

Burn it all down to the ground, ban NSFW quests, ban SFW quests, ban everyone, ban OP gas thread. Vote 1, lock thread, ban mods.

>>27419
You got the neutral spoiler you asked for. What are you still complaining about?? The site url not being changed to lonelyworld.org? The spoiler not containing Oken or Zane? When are you ever going to be happy?
>>
No. 27428 ID: 395c02
File 144556113959.png - (3.08KB , 200x200 , spoiler.png )
27428

(that's this one)

ok i'm done for now
>>
No. 27430 ID: ec0bf5

>>27422
I like this more subtle one. I think it solves a lot of the problems without being a bland text-on-color box with passive aggressive misalignment. The text should be the main thing that catches the eye so it isn't mistaken for a quest image or anything, but there's room for decoration.
>>
No. 27431 ID: 0a7e48

>>27407
Remove pony theme ASAP along with unicorn names, please. It's unfair to the other themes. They don't get autogenerated avatars and names. Mods, please fix.
>>
No. 27432 ID: bd3227

>>27431
Actually. I think the unicorns need more variety.
>>
No. 27433 ID: bb78f2

>>27422
This I like!

Purple is a nice color for a spoiler image.
>>
No. 27434 ID: 88e46e

>>27427
clearly it has to be lonelyworld.okn
>>
No. 27435 ID: f56624
File 144556237653.png - (3.14KB , 256x128 , le petit spoilere.png )
27435

My, how cultured!
>>
No. 27436 ID: 5ad4a7

>>27422
>Come to think of it, didn't someone want the nsfw warning on the main page to be bigger?
There *isn't* one right now. If you go to tgchan.org, you're directed straight to /kusaba/ which has no warning at all.

This is... actually kindof a big problem if you think about it?
>>
No. 27437 ID: 0a7e48

>>27436
Have you BEEN to tgchan.org recently?!
>>
No. 27438 ID: fe06ff

>>27427
>>27434
I do like the current spoilers, my protests were directed at people wanting to change the image BACK to jiniki

which I don't actually have a problem with, unless I am forced to use the jiniki spoilers in my thread.

>>27421
right back atcha!

>>27422
I would say this is the best of the jiniki spoilers, the monochrome, de-saturated colors make it less distracting

>>27377
>>27380
I also feel these are rather good options, as they match the Icon.
>>
No. 27439 ID: 395c02

>>27436

Should we have one on the top of the /quest/ page?
>>
No. 27440 ID: 88e46e
File 144556702070.png - (69.26KB , 1346x644 , tgchandotorg.png )
27440

>>27436
>>
No. 27441 ID: 5ad4a7

>>27437
...yes? I even did so right before writing that post.

>>27439
It should be on top of every board, really, since they all have nsfw content in them. That, or have a little dialogue box people have to go through when first visiting a board, like how 4chan has when you visit its nsfw boards.
>>
No. 27442 ID: 88e46e

>>27441
tgchan.org takes you to the main page, lad.

That's what the screenshot in my earlier post is.
>>
No. 27443 ID: 50614c
File 144558407641.png - (52.91KB , 900x900 , NSFW.png )
27443

>>
No. 27444 ID: 5ad4a7

>>27442
Oh NOW I see the little warning. Hard to believe that was even there before.
>>
No. 27445 ID: ca8ded
File 144560567759.png - (44.30KB , 525x525 , spoilerpossibility.png )
27445

Here's an attempt at a more appealing "neutral" spoiler image. I liked the black background because it makes it stand out from a quest's update images in the majority of cases. The spoiler image should be noticeable and instantly recognizable but not too jarring or obtrusive.
>>
No. 27446 ID: 950bc6

#doublejiniki
>>
No. 27447 ID: 88e46e

#quintuplejiniki
>>
No. 27448 ID: 6f73bb

I prefer the idea of a neutral spoiler, it just looks better and is more fair.
>>
No. 27450 ID: 5514e0

#doublejiniki here, fuck all the haters.
>>
No. 27453 ID: 395c02
File 144564731642.png - (113.72KB , 900x600 , toriel.png )
27453

TRY 3.

HAVE A POLL: http://strawpoll.me/5814949

Since I came on as part of the spoiler stuff of yesteryear, i sorta consider myself the spoiler mod. so, what I do will depend on you, dear people of tgchan!

i'm probably not doing doublejiniki but i guess choosing that will make me teehee a little
>>
No. 27454 ID: 50614c

even though it requires -effort-, i like the idea that every author gets to have a single spoiler image for all their work. it's only applied to threads that they request and obviously are theirs on a per case basis. fanart threads and similar must use a site-generic one; even ___-day threads which are argued to be creations of specific authors. this can be the subdued jiniki even.

it provides that characterized atmosphere for the site which a truly neutral spoiler image lacks, while also limiting the appearance of bias and encouraging authors to make a visual reputation of themselves. it also avoids perpetuating this old boys club attitude propping up a monumental, but past and fractionally representative character specific to one favored author (slinko, weaver, or whomever)
>>
No. 27455 ID: 395c02

Well that flopped almost immediately.

>>27454 It'd be neat! But that much coding is hard to come by around these parts.

...

Perhaps.

We can reach a compromise.

You have something I-- wait. no.

What about a per-thread toggle that allows the spoiler image to be jiniki, or a generic one?

This would allow a serious quest to not have this mysterious ant acting shy when someone's about to get reckd in a ...spoiler...kinda way.
>>
No. 27456 ID: 88e46e

>>27455
How did it flop? Is it because the poll got a result you didn't want or am I not seeing something? Also, from what little I know, it'd probably be easier to have it be a per-person toggle. I base this on the fact that the four site themes are per-person and I only ever remember one quest with a thread-wide theme toggle.
>>
No. 27457 ID: 395c02

>>27456
people insisted I put double jiniki on there, even though I think solving the problem by making it a bigger problem is not going to make some folks happy? and thus everyone who would have voted for a useful option instead voted for the joke option I shouldn't have put there to begin with

so the dumb meme is kinda ruining an attempt to do a proper vote.
>>
No. 27458 ID: 395c02

>>27457
I think it's probably safe to assume that anyone who voted for doublejiniki would have also supported regular jiniki and is probably voting for that because it's the poll's closest equivalent to "I strenuously object to this having been changed in the first place."

I mean, that's just my two cents, of course.
>>
No. 27459 ID: 0fc976

>>27458
Same. You could even count each as two votes for single Jiniki!
>>
No. 27460 ID: 395c02
File 144565658478.png - (63.98KB , 200x200 , spoils2_3.png )
27460

well this is what i'd probably do if i was actually going to use double jiniki, uh... this way literally nobody knows what's going on? wait.

did ... did we just 180 the original intent of this thread?
>>
No. 27461 ID: 65b158

>>27445
>>27443
I like these ones
>>
No. 27464 ID: 5ad4a7

>>27445
Yes, I like this.

The idea of having the spoiler image be something the viewer can choose also appeals to me. Generic vs jiniki? WHY NOT BOTH
>>
No. 27465 ID: 6fd716

Voicing support for putting Jiniki back, the monochrome one ( >>27422 ) seems like a nice compromise.
>>
No. 27466 ID: c9f250

OKAY I SET IT SO SPOILERS DON'T SHOW UP INSIDE QUESTS WHAT DO PEOPLE THINK OF IT LIKE THAT

SHOULD THERE BE MORE OPTIONS

I'LL PROBABLY PUT IN A THING THAT YOU CAN DISABLE SPOILERS IN YOUR BROWSER ENTIRELY
>>
No. 27467 ID: 395c02

>>27466

DYLAN'S IN CHARGE NOW

but that seems like a solid plan, since quests might be too serious for silly spoilers !?
>>
No. 27468 ID: 7e6218
File 144566522648.png - (12.79KB , 512x512 , It's a mystery!.png )
27468

A "pure temptation" option.
>>
No. 27470 ID: a788b7

>>27466

This is basically everything I could want after these the spoiler image could be 7 jinikis as far as I'm concerned
>>
No. 27471 ID: f56624
File 144567285275.png - (10.43KB , 250x146 , serios smoke.png )
27471

>>27467
A more serious toke, for a more serious quest
>>
No. 27472 ID: d15163

>>27466

Uh, actually, like I mentioned earlier, >>27409 , I want to be able to have spoilers inside my quests sometimes.

For example, I think my "puppet dimension" joke in Rokolo Quest has suffered a bit now.
>>
No. 27473 ID: 2f4b71

>>27472
I use the "EXPAND ALL IMAGES" option almost universally, which expands spoilers anyway. I'm not sure how many others read threads that way rather than expanding each image individually.

On that subject: any change of putting the image expansion javascript on the thumbnail too? Middle-click or CTRL-click can still be used to open
the full image as a link in a new tab, but it's a larger UI target than just the filename.
>>
No. 27475 ID: d15163

>>27473

I do use "expand all images" when reading through the archives, but if it's just the latest update of a quest I'm following, I'd expand the images one by one.
>>
No. 27476 ID: a788b7

>>27473

Some people use animations in updates, and if you use 'expand all images' the animation could be at any point by the time you get down to it instead of just starting at the beginning.

>>27472

Theoretically can't you do that with a animation with a one-frame cover image? it won't survive expand all, but neither will a site-based spoiler.
>>
No. 27477 ID: a788b7

Something I considered today at work.

'Spoilers' for porn are sort of a weird holdover from 4chan, would it actually be possible to have separate tags for spoilers and nsfw? I have no idea how modular kusaba is for that sort of thing and how much coding work it'd be.

That way, spoilers could be for actual spoilers, and would work in the classic spoiler fashion. People could spoiler posts that they didn't necessarily want people to see before they clicked them, everyone knows how it works.

Then a separate 'nsfw' tag could exist which would work with the current/proposed spoiler rules - it wouldn't show up on the site's actual frontpage but wouldn't necessarily be spoilered in the thread. If people decide that something is 2hot4tgchan, and it needs to be hidden for the sake of linking the site to outsiders, it wouldn't cause unwanted images to appear inside the actual threads (avoiding the whole jiniki kerfluffle). Then also if possible there could be a 'I don't mind seeing a booby' setting for the site (that would default to off most likely) that would prevent said images from appearing for people who decided to stick around and that they don't care about seeing a booby.

I have no idea how much work it'd be, but it's the best thing I can think of to solve the spoiler issues for as many people as possible???
>>
No. 27478 ID: 12b273

>>27477
The weirdest issue with splitting up the two would be backwards comparability, and what you do with all the posts already tagged.
>>
No. 27479 ID: 91cfcf

>>27477
Yeah but that would require actual work and that's not going to happen in a reasonable timeframe because everyone is busy. Look at what happened when a couple of big gay babies got together on IRC and deleted everything they felt was NSFW from the wiki. It's not been fixed and we have the booru instead, which is totally adequate and not a non-solution at all.
>>
No. 27481 ID: 5ad4a7

>>27478
Backwards compatability can just use the old behavior of having to be clicked on no matter what (spoilers type).
>>
No. 27483 ID: f8b4f5

>>27478
Leave everything that was already spoilered spoilered. If people want to individually report the NSFW ones to be changed over to the NSFW spoiler, they can.

It amazes me how big a deal ''some people'' are making of this. It's such a non-issue. tgchan still doesn't have automatic thread updating, or a list of replies to a post. For questing, those are far more important than not having a bug on your spoiler image.
>>
No. 27486 ID: 12b273

>>27483
That seems the wrong way to grandfather them in. There's probably a lot more spoilers being used to cover nsfw material in art threads than spoilers actually being used for spoilers in quests.

>tgchan still doesn't have automatic thread updating, or a list of replies to a post
That would require actual code work though, not just swapping out a png. :V
>>
No. 27492 ID: 5ad4a7

>>27486
NSFW being spoilered via the spoiler behavior is far less annoying than actual spoilers being more visible.
>>
No. 27493 ID: 1e7be5

What counts as a spoiler image, anyways? Considering that quests don't get released all at once, and most people know not to enter a discussion about a quest they didn't finish reading...

Just who are we not spoiling here?
>>
No. 27498 ID: dd0e59

I for one like the idea of having a picture of a quest character as a spoiler but I'm also for something new. But it doesn't have to be jiniki, it could be Sara from SotW or Ona from Dive or a Astranian.
>>
No. 27501 ID: 5ad4a7

>>27493
Authors have used spoilers in quest updates to ensure a delayed opening of an image or when the last image of an update would be easily visible from the front page and would spoil the tension of reading through the multi-image update.
>>
No. 27502 ID: a88ca6

It would actually be nice if spoilered images and animated gifs were somehow exempt from the "expand all images" option, I think.
>>
No. 27509 ID: 2f4b71

>>27502
That would be annoying, but an "Expand Non-Spoilered" as an additional option would work.
>>
No. 27510 ID: 7cbb58

this deezcourse is getting ridiculous
i like the purple nsfw/spoiler image
>>
No. 27511 ID: 7ccb81

>>27509

Animated pics, though? When I archive binge, I habitually use expand all, but it means that whenever i reach a point where the author used an animated gif, I run into it at some halfway point and the intended effect is ruined.

Worse is when the thing is set to only run once, and firefox won't let me watch it from the beginning again, even if i contract and expand again or open it in a new window.
>>
No. 27512 ID: 5ad4a7

On a related topic, minors aren't allowed on the site, right? Because of all the porn everywhere? This should be more explicitly stated, instead of just the vague warning on the home page.
>>
No. 27513 ID: d78b39

I think we really don't need separate nsfw/spoiler images. As far as this site goes, they're basically interchangable.
A cleaned-up new image could be nice, though.

>>27445
I agree. A bright red spoiler image or a needlessly complex doublejiniki is going to be way more obtrusive than the original image.
It's really easy to differentiate the current black/green/purple image from every other image, so any replacement image should be similar in color and style.
>>
No. 27522 ID: ad936f

I quite like the way things are now, but the gifs playing when expand all is used thing needs to be fixed. Also, i support the enforcement of the tagging NSFW content rule.
>>
No. 27523 ID: 88e46e

>>27522
Okay, but "kanelel" is a curseword in my obscure native language. You're going to have to change your name or start putting it in spoilers.
>>
No. 27524 ID: 5ad4a7

>>27522
>enforcement of the tagging NSFW content rule.
It's not a rule.
>>
No. 27525 ID: f56624

>>27524
Yeah, according to the irc it was made a rule once and it didn't go down too good. Lots of people self-censoring and people getting real trigger-happy with the report buttons or something.
Let's maybe not go down that path again, I'd kinda like to keep the door open for things that are narratively stirring AND physically titillating, rare as those may be.
>>
No. 27527 ID: 2a7417
File 144665279953.png - (17.62KB , 805x159 , 1000 hours in MS paint.png )
27527

>>27524
Why do people keep pretending this isn't written right there in the rules?
http://tgchan.org/kusaba/news.php?p=rules
>>
No. 27528 ID: 88e46e

>>27527
Where does it say "NSFW" there? Your lack of reading comprehension offends me, now spoiler everything you say.
>>
No. 27531 ID: bb78f2

The phrases "If you think" and "might be Offensive" really bring out the subjectivity of that rule and practically makes it into a small request.

It's far different from the blunt "Don't post shock images", where one can highlight the word don't.
>>
No. 27533 ID: 3f9dc0

>>27531
Attempting to rules lawyer this point due to gentle language violates the firmly-worded Rule One.
>>
No. 27534 ID: 5ad4a7

>>27531
Yeah it's pretty much just "don't be a dick" but with regards to spoilering images.
>>
No. 27535 ID: 2eeb65

>>27512
Agreed.
>>
No. 27540 ID: a788b7
File 144684919851.png - (38.04KB , 1276x497 , RULEZ.png )
27540

>>27527

Let it be known that I don't consent to the presence of 'spoiler/nsfw' cover images in any of my quests if I didn't put them there.

Since, you know, that's the same justification for removing reaction images.

>>27533

I feel like 'forcing other people to censor themselves because I don't want to accidentally see a booby' is a huge dick move. Especially on a site that is banning people for being underage to begin with. So, your post is offensive to me, please delete it in accordance with the rule about making sure nobody has to see something that might offend their sensibilities.
>>
No. 27541 ID: ad936f

>>27540
I don't really get how you can call spoilering NSFW content "censorship" when it literally takes the absolute minimum amount of input possible on a computer to reveal it. It's really just common courtesy.
>>
No. 27542 ID: a788b7

>>27541

I don't really get how you can call going into a community and demanding they inconvenience themselves to accommodate your pathological need to not accidentally see a booby anything other than discourteous.

It's a not-worksafe board. Putting up 'NSFW' images all over the front page isn't going to change the message to anyone you link the board to. People will just say 'why are you linking me to a site full of porn' anyway.

It's not a worksafe site to begin with. It never has been. It's fucking hilarious to me how many people (like 4, but still) argue that 'they really like this community so they don't want to go somewhere else to host their quests' while simultaneously saying 'this community should change for the sake of my poor over-clutched pearls." They are completely incompatible statements.
>>
No. 27543 ID: ad936f

>>27542
Ah yes, clicking a check box, the greatest inconvenience known to mankind. I have nothing against NSFW quests, I frequently enjoy NSFW quests. It's just that sometimes I'm in a situation where I'd both like to use this website and not want onlookers to think I'm looking at porn. And for the most part I'm able to, most people on this website tag their porny stuff, I'd just like to be able to count on that more reliably.
>>
No. 27544 ID: 2eeb65

>>27542
"Don't like it, go to China" is rarely a constructive position though.
>>
No. 27545 ID: 741634

>>27543
See, the problem is nobody cares what you want. Nobody cares what I want. Nobody cares what any one person short of Dylan wants. And nobody should. One person wanting a thing is not a valid reason to change a site. If you want something, that's your own problem and it's on you to fulfill that.
>>
No. 27546 ID: a788b7

>>27543

It's more a matter of 'have a bunch of spoiler images scattered around hiding art.'

I don't want to have to expand every image on the board to see it, thumbnails are there to say 'oh hey this looks like it could be neat' and then you expand it. And then you know! But if the image is spoilered that option vanishes. whoops.

Also yes, clicking the checkbox is more effort than I intend to put in. It's too much effort for you to hide threads that you know contain porn when you're going to be looking at the board in a public place, and that's also one click.

>'d both like to use this website and not want onlookers to think I'm looking at porn.

If you're looking at a website with a bunch of images that say 'THIS IMAGE IS NSFW' on it they're going to assume it's a porn site anyway. If they aren't going to look closely enough to notice all the NSFW blocks, they're not looking close enough to notice thumbnail'd porn anyway.
>>
No. 27547 ID: 5ad4a7

>>27543
Maybe don't look at NSFW sites while in places you don't want to be seen looking at NSFW sites?
>>
No. 27548 ID: bb78f2

I like having options
I don't like being forced into an option
Granted, not a quest author, but I sympathize (empathize?).
Regardless, considering the site's origin and its nature as a chan, well, at that point it should be known that these boards can get a bit groady. In the end though, it should still be up for the author to decide on an individual basis since it IS primarily an art site.
>>
No. 27549 ID: 2eeb65

>>27546
>>27547
You know you don't have to expand the spoiler to see the thumbnail, right? You can just hover the mouse over it.

And I think there's quite a difference between showing people a site with some pictures spoilered by "NSFW or spoilers" pics, and a site with dicks and vaginas in full view, isn't there.
>>
No. 27550 ID: a788b7

>>27549

Still more effort than I'm willing to put in, rather just scroll. Especially since:

> I think there's quite a difference between showing people a site with some pictures spoilered by "NSFW or spoilers" pics, and a site with dicks and vaginas in full view, isn't there.

There really, really isn't.
>>
No. 27551 ID: 88e46e

>>27549
Nope.
>>
No. 27558 ID: 5af472

>>27550

I disagree. I think there's a large difference, and that after a while, the difference would increase.
>>
No. 27559 ID: 88e46e

>>27558
Your opinion is not relevant.
>>
No. 27560 ID: a788b7

>>27558

You are incorrect.
>>
No. 27561 ID: ad936f

This thread is so dumb.
>>
No. 27562 ID: 88e46e

>>27561
>people disagree with me
>better call them dumb!
>baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaw
>>
No. 27563 ID: 01c6b7

>>27559

What makes your opinion relevant and mine not?

>>27560

You are incorrect.
>>
No. 27564 ID: a788b7

>>27563

How will it possibly change over time? People seeing NSFW images that have been there for a day will not look at timestamps and know that it is different from NSFW images that have been there for a month.
>>
No. 27565 ID: 01c6b7

>>27564

The difference between new and old is that the new ones are, briefly, on the front pages of the various boards, and will be visible to people who have not deliberately chosen to read that particular quest. There are people who don't want to see certain things and, as they stand, if people use the spoiler system courteously, they don't have to; and there are plenty of quests they can still enjoy. The gap of personal responsibility between "I'll click on this quest and whoops it's something I don't like I just won't read it again" and "I can't even go on this site without seeing something that is distasteful to me" is quite large. If people post that sort of thing freely without using the spoilers, then the chance that something of that nature will be on the front pages is quite high, and people who don't want to see that kind of thing will become leery of browsing through the front pages.

If those people are no longer so willing to browse, they will be less likely to pick up new quests and to suggest for them. Those people who DO want to see that sort of thing will become more active, proportionally. As a result, they will start becoming more common as quest makers and suggesters, which will nudge things along to a further increase in the proportion and extremity of content that is currently spoilered. That will push away another further layer of people who don't like the new level that's been reached, the process repeats, and so on.

To be frank, I'm not concerned with things being "NSFW", just that people are showing some sense of respect for the fact that other people have different tastes from their own. If you know that you're posting something that other people using the site would prefer not to be exposed to, and doing so in a way that you would be springing it on those people while they are trying to look at other things they do enjoy, then you should use the spoiler function.

Because it's polite.

"NSFW" is just a catch-all label for those kinds of things, not an indication of what it is that makes them objectionable. I imagine that any entertainment site is not safe to look at while you're at work.
>>
No. 27567 ID: a788b7

>>27565

tgchan hasn't exactly had problems with growth without forcing spoilers. We have a hide thread feature.

> If you know that you're posting something that other people using the site would prefer not to be exposed to, and doing so in a way that you would be springing it on those people while they are trying to look at other things they do enjoy, then you should use the spoiler function.

There have been people using this site with angry, upset reactions to things like 'characters appearing to be in a relationship.' Like, actual real people have actually thrown fits over unexpectedly being exposed to characters in non-platonic relationships. What makes their offense less genuine than 'I don't want to see a booby?'

People are going to be offended by anything. I think it is better to foster a culture where people shrug and hide something they don't want to see than one where they make it even one half of a step more troublesome for the people who do want to see it to find it.

TGchan has legitimately gotten more complaints from people coming to the site and deciding not to stick around because of seeing talking animals than from coming and seeing dicks. Should we spoiler any picture of a furry? Because that has more of an observable history of being 'damaging to the growth of the community' than any amount of smut.
>>
No. 27568 ID: a788b7

>>27565

Oh, and:

>Those people who DO want to see that sort of thing will become more active, proportionally. As a result, they will start becoming more common as quest makers and suggesters, which will nudge things along to a further increase in the proportion and extremity of content that is currently spoilered. That will push away another further layer of people who don't like the new level that's been reached, the process repeats, and so on.

If this were the case, tgchan would basically be nothing but porn quests by now. Except the proportion of smutty quests has never really increased even without heavy-handed enforcement of spoiler rules.
>>
No. 27569 ID: b49f7c

>>27567
ay, this bob
this bob gets it
>>
No. 27571 ID: ad936f

>>27562
"you are incorrect"
I don't even care that much about this "issue" either way. It seems like this thread has deteriorated to people just stating their opinions without even backing them up with an argument.
>>27567
>>27565
>>27568
... or it did when I made that post.
>>
No. 27572 ID: 967a74

>>27567
>Like, actual real people have actually thrown fits over unexpectedly being exposed to characters in non-platonic relationships.

Well, yes, there will always be someone upset by any particular thing. You can't just dismiss the argument by saying "oh no matter what we do it'll always offend someone", though, because that could excuse any kind of bad manners or discourtesy. I could call you a tremendous cock-snorting faggot scumbag, and answer any accusations of rudeness with "well someone could get offended at anything I might have said". You have to give some consideration to the proportion of people likely to be to have a distaste for any particular thing.

If we assume (without much accuracy, but for purposes of this argument) that people coming to the site are 50% one sex or another, and that of those half again are heterosexual to the point of actively not wanting to see depictions of the genitals of one's own sex in detail, then we can assume that 25% of people coming to the site will feel at least some revulsion, and have their day worsened a little bit, by accidentally being exposed to such an image. If you use spoilers, you prevent that, in exchange for the very mild inconvenience of needing to hover your cursor over an image and then click a link. To be frank, it sounds pretty whiny to complain about what a hassle it is to perform two small actions with your fingers on a mouse, and that people should suck up their issues so that you don't have to.

Hmm. Did I phrase that in a way that could be offensive or provocative? Well, someone could have taken offense no matter how I'd said it.

>If this were the case, tgchan would basically be nothing but porn quests by now. Except the proportion of smutty quests has never really increased even without heavy-handed enforcement of spoiler rules.

Alright, I'll admit that point.

But, that's because porn quests tend to be self-destructive. There was already an explanation as to why that is, elsewhere: >>/questdis/90199

However, even though porn quests don't last long, while they exist they stand a chance of driving people away from the site. The more porn quests there are, the more the effects which drain porn quests of their suggesters, and therefore their ability to keep going, will affect the rest of the site, to a diluted but still present effect. The more easily-visible "NSFW" images there are, the more people will become nervous about linking the site to other people (I myself would love to link this site to some of my friends and family, because I think they would enjoy certain specific quests, but I've felt I can't due to the reaction I anticipate in them if they happen to try browse the rest of the site), and the less keen they'll be to keep coming back and checking up on new quests.

>TGchan has legitimately gotten more complaints from people coming to the site and deciding not to stick around because of seeing talking animals than from coming and seeing dicks.

...

...

yeah but fuck those guys
>>
No. 27573 ID: a788b7

>>27572

>the more people will become nervous about linking the site to other people (I myself would love to link this site to some of my friends and family, because I think they would enjoy certain specific quests, but I've felt I can't due to the reaction I anticipate in them if they happen to try browse the rest of the site)

It's still a site full of porn. If they browse the site they're still going to run into porn even if it's spoiled. Spoilers aren't going to change that.

>yeah but fuck those guys

okay but you see:

>However, even though porn quests don't last long, while they exist they stand a chance of driving people away from the site.

...

yeah but fuck those guys.

see, YOUR OWN ARGUMENT, in THAT VERY SAME POST, is 'people are more likely to be offended by this particular thing and shrink the community, so it should be spoiled.' It has been repeatedly and statistically shown that people coming by tgchan are more likely to be offended by furries than by dicks. By your own argument, if NSFW content should be spoilered all images of furries should DEFINITELY be spoilered.
>>
No. 27574 ID: f56624
File 144757923266.png - (349.26KB , 475x475 , take it down a peg guys cmon.png )
27574

>>
No. 27575 ID: b50be8
File 144757938959.jpg - (64.26KB , 720x540 , Offended.jpg )
27575

>>
No. 27576 ID: 967a74

>>27573
>see, YOUR OWN ARGUMENT, in THAT VERY SAME POST, is 'people are more likely to be offended by this particular thing and shrink the community, so it should be spoiled.' It has been repeatedly and statistically shown that people coming by tgchan are more likely to be offended by furries than by dicks. By your own argument, if NSFW content should be spoilered all images of furries should DEFINITELY be spoilered.

Alright, alright, sorry. I was being flippant with the "fuck those guys" remark. I think I was going for something like "this is basically what you're saying about people who don't like dicks"? But it wasn't a good choice. That sort of thing doesn't transmit well. I was in error and apologize.

But I still think you're mistaken. My actual counterargument to the "furry" argument would be to question your terminology and sources.

First, you say "offended" a lot. My argument isn't based on whether people will be offended, it's based on whether they will be repulsed, disgusted, upset, or otherwise have their otherwise pleasant day made a little less pleasant (or, alternately, their miserable days made more miserable). Saying that someone is "offended" conjures up an image of some sort of entitled, whiny person who loudly objects to things. The people I'm concerned with are those who will just quietly leave because they think they can't find anything they would enjoy here.

Second, I would content that, in all likelihood, the people who object to furries are simply a lot louder than people who object to dicks. So, I would like to see your evidence that there is a proportionally greater number of people turned away by furries than there are people turned away by gratuitous sexuality, violence an whatever else we're proposing to spoiler. My expectation is that there is merely an appearance of such due to how many anti-furries like to loudly proclaim how terrible furries are, while the kind of person turned away by our other category of things are more likely to just be discouraged from trying to enjoy the site.

>It's still a site full of porn. If they browse the site they're still going to run into porn even if it's spoiled. Spoilers aren't going to change that.

Again, as said earlier, I think there's a difference between actively searching and finding porn, and being slapped in the eyeballs with it when you're idly looking over the front page.
>>
No. 27577 ID: a788b7

>>27576

>Second, I would content that, in all likelihood, the people who object to furries are simply a lot louder than people who object to dicks.

That is irrelevant to the point that there has, in fact, been plenty of evidence that (whether to offense, disgust, or whatever else) - there has been a ton more actual, observable evidence of people deciding to not use the site because of furries than because of porn.

You're not only saying 'THINK OF THE CHILDREN!' here (metaphorically, of course), you're saying 'THINK OF THE INVISIBLE CHILDREN!' It's not a stance I can respect or take seriously.

>So, I would like to see your evidence that there is a proportionally greater number of people turned away by furries than there are people turned away by gratuitous sexuality, violence an whatever else we're proposing to spoiler. My expectation is that there is merely an appearance of such due to how many anti-furries like to loudly proclaim how terrible furries are, while the kind of person turned away by our other category of things are more likely to just be discouraged from trying to enjoy the site.

You are the one asserting that the chance of accidentally seeing a tiddy is damaging the site's community and growth. Where are your sources and numbers on that?

>Again, as said earlier, I think there's a difference between actively searching and finding porn, and being slapped in the eyeballs with it when you're idly looking over the front page.

It's amusing to me that when I don't want to deal with the hassle and annoyance of seeing a spoiler image it's a complete non-issue, but they're somehow an insurmountable bulwark against naughty parts for the pearl-clutchers of the world.

And I would argue that somebody who is so disgusted by a dong that they're going to just leave the site and never use it again would very likely be disgusted by a site that is hosting a ton of porn even if it's hidden behind a 'o no its porn' blurb.
>>
No. 27578 ID: 967a74

>>27577
>You're not only saying 'THINK OF THE CHILDREN!' here (metaphorically, of course), you're saying 'THINK OF THE INVISIBLE CHILDREN!' It's not a stance I can respect or take seriously.

First, ok, you're summoning up the "think of the children" image, and all that's associated with it, and dumping that on me? That's either an ad hominem or a straw man of some sort. I never contended the people I'm concerned with are children, or anything like children.

>You are the one asserting that the chance of accidentally seeing a tiddy is damaging the site's community and growth. Where are your sources and numbers on that?

I've been saying "gratuitous sexuality or violence", not "seeing a tiddy". Personally, I think a tit or a limp dick, or in the case of violence a bit of blood - what's generally referred to as "softcore" - stands low enough chance of causing dismay that it's permittable. Detailed depections of sexual activity, or detailed depictions of distinct organs being torn out of someone, for violence, are what I'm talking about. There are other possible extremities, too, of course, but my guideline would be to put out the same sort of stuff that an art gallery would - the site is effectively a kind of art gallery, after all. I don't contend that extreme material should be removed or even put in its own section, just that it shouldn't be put in the metaphorical front room to be seen when people walk in off the metaphorical street.

As for sources and numbers...

>That is irrelevant to the point that there has, in fact, been plenty of evidence that (whether to offense, disgust, or whatever else) - there has been a ton more actual, observable evidence of people deciding to not use the site because of furries than because of porn.

I disagree.

If what you say is true - that furries are more objectionable than explicit sexuality or violence - then every instance of furry across all media would be associated with a massive outcry. Instead, we see furry characters all over the place, in children's cartoon shows and films, in ads for products... or is that too mainstream? Perhaps you'll contend that tgchan has a more specific audience, and we need to worry about them? Well, let's see. Tgchan primarily appeals to a demographic that also likes science fiction, fantasy, comics games... nerd stuff.

Well, I won't bother enumerating all the instances of beastmen and suchlike in fantasy, that's obvious. Not much less so for science fiction. There are plenty of furry comics on the internet that are popular, and in print. Games? Elder Scrolls, Warcraft, those have furries right up front as playable races, so by your reckoning those should never have been very popular... but, oh wait. No.

No, I think the loud declarations of people saying that they can't enjoy something because it has been tainted by the presence of anthropomorphic animals is, actually, a rather small minority.

Perhaps people complaining about furry porn are of more concern, but it's the latter half of that pair that I'd say is the problem, and that only supports my argument.

>And I would argue that somebody who is so disgusted by a dong that they're going to just leave the site and never use it again would very likely be disgusted by a site that is hosting a ton of porn even if it's hidden behind a 'o no its porn' blurb.

I'm not talking about someone going "oh this is disgusting I'm never coming back here"; as you say, that kind of person will leave anyway. Who I'm concerned with is people who get a little bit worn down in their enthusiasm (the way I myself have been when I've seen certain authors be indiscreet with particularly extreme material), losing interest in the site a little faster than the stuff that appeals to them can stock it back up, until eventually they drift away.

I'm also concerned with the principle of basic courtesy.

Like... there's a difference between visiting a nudist colony, and visiting somewhere that guys are getting sucked off out on the street, you know? I'm kind of reaching for a metaphor to make my feelings understandable, here, and that's not a very good one so don't take it too seriously.
>>
No. 27580 ID: a788b7

>>27578

>I disagree.

It doesn't matter if you agree. It's a fact.

>No, I think the loud declarations of people saying that they can't enjoy something because it has been tainted by the presence of anthropomorphic animals is, actually, a rather small minority.

It is an actual, visible thing that has actually happened. The number of people who have said that they have chosen not to use the site because of dicks is vastly smaller. Except for the invisible silent people that you are imagining exist and basing your entire argument on, of course. I guess I shouldn't discount those imaginary people.

>Perhaps people complaining about furry porn are of more concern

No, they were just complaining about the presence of furry characters in quests and on the site.

There were ALSO complaints about a few particular furry porn quests, but those quests already spoiler their images anyway. Whoops.

This isn't about some kind of broad-strokes statement across all of media. this is about actual complaints that actual visitors have actually made about the site and why they decided to either not use it in the first place or abandon using it after attempting to for a period of time. Your attempts to reframe the issue here are completely dishonest, and I'm pretty sure that you're aware of that.

>I'm kind of reaching for a metaphor to make my feelings understandable, here

What makes YOUR feelings more valid than a person who has the same feelings about a talking fox?

>and that's not a very good one so don't take it too seriously.

You have repeatedly attempted to derail arguments into irrelevant semantic discussions (like your bitching about 'I wasn't talking about children' at the beginning of that very post!) with regard to clear (and in that case, directly stated to be!) metaphors. You can eat a million dicks on this front.
>>
No. 27582 ID: d88bc5

Wow this conversation sure went places!

Maybe let's not clutter the spoiler/NSFW picture thread with discussions about whether or not adding a single click of obfuscation eats babies in the hellfire pit of anger and misery or is the last moral bastion of this wicked den of filth and debauchery? This is kind of "new thread" material at this point.

Just an incredibly late observation here. For what it's worth, I'll miss Jiniki but the current spoiler image is perfectly fine. Character references in site level content is so 2009, anyway. Really, there's a lot more that could be done from here. How about the 404 page?
>>
No. 27583 ID: d88bc5

hasty addendum because I hit enter too soon: not seriously suggesting derailing this thread into a discussion about the 404 page please don't crucify me
>>
No. 27584 ID: 0e16cd

>>27443
I quite liked this one since it's nice and obvious at a glance and I love overblown warning signs.
>>
No. 27585 ID: ad936f

I like >>27380 because it doesn't look like the kind of thing someone might put in a quest while also being kinda funny.
>>
No. 27586 ID: 47160d

Why did this turn into a pointless argument about whether furries are destroying the site?
>>
No. 27587 ID: f56624

>>27586
Probably a proxy war carried over from the irc. Quite the hot topic in there, them furries.
>>
No. 27588 ID: a788b7

>>27586

because the argument about forcing people to use spoilers is what kicked this whole topic off in the first place.
>>
No. 28843 ID: 1a98d5

does this
>>
No. 28844 ID: 1a98d5

oh i like this
>>
No. 28845 ID: 9876c4

>>27586
In hindsight, they probably were.
>>
No. 28847 ID: 7c55ee

>>28845
Furries started this site, more or less, so I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. The time for this argument was 2009.
>>
No. 28848 ID: eef56a

>>28845
>>28847

You are responding to a post from over 2 years ago because for some reason somebody decided to use this thread to test strikethrough/color tags without even using 'sage.' You look very silly.
[Return] [Entire Thread] [Last 50 posts] [Last 100 posts]

Delete post []
Password  
Report post
Reason