[ home ] [ pony / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]

/canterlot/ - Canterlot

Site related staff board
Password (For file deletion.)


File: 1441429367283.png (1017.73 KB, 4324x4324, 1:1, princess_celestia_ad_philo….png) ImgOps Google

Canterlot serves as both our moderator board and a site issues board here on Ponyville. You're more than welcome to interact with our staff, and watch how we discuss and handle certain issues on site.

Unlike /cartoon/, /pony/, or any other boards that may follow, Canterlot should remain a fairly serious board. The rules will be enforced much stricter here on Canterlot.

While some generally silliness is expected and encouraged, please also try to keep posting to the other boards.

I hope we'll get to see you around /Canterlot/ now and then! I know our staff ponies will just love spending time with you here in our little staff room.


File: 1512510396706.png (100.02 KB, 1000x799, 1000:799, commission__angel_celestia….png) ImgOps Google

Hello, my little ponies! Here is a list of staff on Ponyville.us. If you have any questions or comments concerning staff members, please use the report system or /canterlot/ to contact them for the time being.

Admins -
!!Celestia - Moony
!!Coco Pommel - Starshine
!!Luna - Dizzy, Abby, Pepp, Savvy, Braze, Chroma, Grace

Sysadmin -
!!Discord - Atticus

Tech admins -
!!Starswirl - Foreground
!!Thorax - Max

Moderators -
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.


File: 1551151290115.png (657.88 KB, 892x720, 223:180, 1174251__safe_screencap_ra….png) ImgOps Google

A lot of us have been busy so it's completely our fault that this hasn't been enforced in awhile, however... we would like to remind you guys that we don't allow silly threads here on /canterlot/.  We'd like this place to be an area for serious site discussion.  All previous silly threads will be locked here on /canterlot/.

If you've got a silly thread that's appropriate to the site (not breaking say, rule #7), post it on /pony/ please!  Or of course if it's a roleplay, on /rp/.
3 posts and 2 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1551317325112.png (735.26 KB, 1350x900, 3:2, Stupid chopsticks.png) ImgOps Google

We usually would (and shall continue doing so), but some of these were pretty old, and didn't have many replies.  Not to mention what was already said in the OP.  Tis a one time thing.


File: 1560632096132.png (224.5 KB, 632x720, 79:90, let us consider.png) ImgOps Google

You had to lock my buddy's thread?
It was properly tagged as NSFW.
Heck, the image itself is not explicit.
1 post omitted. Click reply to view.


The thread was basically to xdiscuss obviously cropped porn.

It could be deflected, but I could predict removal from miles away and was surprised that it did not happen sooner. This is not /ef/.


File: 1560655034920.jpeg (40.89 KB, 500x507, 500:507, derpyderp.jpeg) ImgOps Google

>Do you have MPD?
>obviously cropped porn.
I'm gonna need some proof of that.


File: 1560664172863.png (3.15 KB, 100x100, 1:1, google-img-search.png) ImgOps Google

>I'm gonna need some proof of that.
Click the "Google" image link to do a reverse-image search.


File: 1557270620698.png (134.39 KB, 387x276, 129:92, 4.PNG) ImgOps Google

This site is in desperate need of a filter system.
I know you guys have major aversions to it, but, it's seriously required.
When you have problems with specific users, and we can't seem to get you guys to do anything about them, the only option is to try to ignore them. But, that's impractical. It's hard to ignore posts as a general rule. When someone says something that you disagree with, it isn't easy to ignore them. When they say something mean or dickish or just treat you poorly, and reports do nothing, you respond in kind far too often.

This is leading to fights that don't need to be happening.
It's leading to stress for everyone involved, and it has no reason to be.

Truth be told, I'm  not sure why you guys dislike the idea anyway. There's not really anything wrong with blocking people who treat you poorly out. If it's a fear for what happens to a community that does this, then, I'd point to what's already happening here, because you don't add that.
Again, fights that don't need to be happening, are. It'd be very simple to prevent that.
57 posts and 29 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


I don't really regard it as a "social networking" place, to begin with. It's just a place where I can hang out for a bit. It isn't exactly a complex or strange item, near as I can tell, to block out a particularly bothersome individual within that hangout space.

I'm really having a hard time understanding why you are here, trying to, it seems, convince me to just give up things.
Like, what's the benefit here?
What are you hoping to achieve? Should I just leave the site instead?


File: 1559773364331.png (155.13 KB, 899x888, 899:888, thinking1.png) ImgOps Google

>not social networking
>but a place to hang out

That this is consternating makes me wonder if my brain is broken.

Nevermind, carry on as you were.  Im sure you're fine, don't leave.


Social networking, at least to me, implies creating connections with others on a more substantial level. I would go as far as to claim that seems to be the point of a social networking item.
My perspective for this place is much more loose in that regard. I just want to talk to people with similar interests.

To that end, blocking out a particularly bothersome individual that for whatever reason the administration doesn't want to actually handle, it doesn't hurt that particular reason I use this site.


File: 1552687086447.jpg (194.06 KB, 750x1000, 3:4, bb21226c2a6d0cf9875f374383….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

Hi I got a small problem.

I'm on my phone about 50% of the time I'm here. I use the Quick Reply box because obviously.

I dont know of its my phone or the browser or the site or what, but every time the Quick Reply box pops up, about a quarter of it is cut off from the screen on the right side. It makes it so I cant see the far right side of my posts. Even turning my phone sideways does nothing.

I also can't move the box. Putting my finger on it and trying to move it does nothing but highlight text.

If anyone knows whats causing this or how to fix it that would be great.
8 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.


Oh... Me too, this bugs me too :(


File: 1555477004070.png (141.8 KB, 400x772, 100:193, image 10.png) ImgOps Google



I've looked into this, and I think changing the
$("#quick-reply textarea")
will solve the problem.  (The issue seems to be that
is less wide than its child table.)

Here's a userscript can be used to test this.  It works for me with GreaseMonkey in mobile Firefox.

// ==UserScript==
// @name         Ponyville quickreply fix
// @namespace    http://tampermonkey.net/
// @version      2019-05-30-2245
// @match        http://ponyville.us/*
// @grant        none
// ==/UserScript==

(function() {
Post too long. Click here to view the full text.


File: 1544877900249.png (252.6 KB, 867x724, 867:724, sebastian_drop_b.png) ImgOps Google

Unfortunately, as of late, it seems that there's a lot of trouble going around, and, I've always thought this was the type of thing rule 1 existed to fix.
But, it seems rule 1 either doesn't mean what I thought it does, or simply isn't enforced as a rule.

If it's the first, what constitutes a rule 1 violation?
Would calling someone a jerk, saying they're cruel, or insinuating they're being manipulative for the purpose of hurting another be a violation of rule 1?
Would constant hostile accusatory remarks, such as "you're trying to get me in trouble", or "you just want to make me look dumb", not be a violation of rule 1?

If it's the latter, though, I think that needs to change. I'd say Rule 1 is a large part of why this place has been so pleasant. Making people be polite to one another helps to bring about common understanding and build friendships.
Constant shitflinging such as examples above only give scars and disdain towards other users.
59 posts and 24 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1558057759498.png (209.72 KB, 348x329, 348:329, adorable pinky.PNG) ImgOps Google

That's no problem. I completely understand. I've been having a fairly hectic chunk of days, myself.
Don't worry too much about anything said, either. The only reason it really bothered me is that there wasn't quite enough to it for me to work off of. I really do appreciate honest critique, as it lets me self-reflect to a large degree. Just has a habit of throwing me off a little bit when there's not anything I can latch onto.

Fortunately, I think your particular issue is likely going to be or less solved. Though that does assume I don't get into arguments with anybody else. But, so far, I haven't had that particular issue with anybody else.
So, that should be fewer arguments from me. at the very least, I think I can say with relative certainty that there's not going to be encounters that would end up with such vitriol.

Although, to be quite honest with you, I suspect it'll also have me just post lesson general. I don't really like the usual social "hello, let's hang out" types of threats that seem largely prevalent here. I need something to latch onto, in order to start a conversation. It's hard for me to kind of force my way in, without something to use as an excuse of sorts


File: 1558227063072.jpg (127.3 KB, 636x381, 212:127, 1432182369230-1.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>these are the few places I can really socialize with others
Oh, BTW, you can also visit Iara's board! (https://8ch.net/lounge/)


File: 1558885303893.jpeg (372.51 KB, 1280x1024, 5:4, large (3).jpeg) ImgOps Google

Remember its more a guideline than a rule now, the result of my own challenge to its nonenforcement.

Shameless shilling.


File: 1557272601408.png (72.88 KB, 362x510, 181:255, youareallweirdos.png) ImgOps Google

I would like to formally request that the same stipulations of non-interaction that were placed on me and lost pony be placed on me and Noonim as well.

Will a member of the modstaff discuss this possibility with me?
51 posts and 19 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1557466519904.png (31.89 KB, 363x468, 121:156, I don't know the answer to….png) ImgOps Google

>Why shouldn't I respond in kind?

Because you don't like doing it.  Like it's super straightforward.  You did something that had really very expected outcomes, again, and you can totally just stop doing that.  It's actually incredibly easy.


This whole thing is semantics, and it's not really relevant.

Manley, don't suggest people have disorders, regardless of how totally super okay it is to have disorders.  People don't like it.  You should realize that people don't like it, and you really shouldn't do things people don't like.


File: 1557466567222.png (52 KB, 404x481, 404:481, Maybe he's born with it.png) ImgOps Google


And you know what, as a follow up to that, when someone reacts to something you say with "Wow, that's super rude and I don't like it.", don't then try to justify why it wasn't rude.  Just apologize and stop doing it.


Also locking the thread because the answer is no, we're not considering the proposed request, that's silly.


File: 1556046660311.png (784.46 KB, 1280x720, 16:9, -_S6E1.png) ImgOps Google

>Sailboat, my friend, that's totally uncalled for.

I'd just as soon not see threads about politics on /pony/, but when you have an entire thread devoted to mocking our current President, over an issue which is nothing more than a distraction from actual issues, then yes, I'm going to put things back into perspective.
22 posts and 14 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1556514171628.jpg (225.89 KB, 1000x800, 5:4, 1399335564664.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

Politics on pony isn't really a problem IMHO.  The real problem is the lack of fluffy tails.  We need more fluff!


Regardless of whether or not it was a "dogwhistle" It's still basically bait, if the bitter reaction of people like RS in that thread to other people mocking mistakes authorities make is any indication.


>Threads mocking President Trump are just bait.
Yeah, nobody would want to genuinely express criticism of Trump.  Any such criticism is merely intended to rile up other people. :dash3::dash3::dash3:


File: 1553928074490.png (292.22 KB, 1024x768, 4:3, happypretty4.png) ImgOps Google

Dear Staff,

Manley and i still have not received a response as to whether the staff would consider improving the wording of our special contract, and whether its wording corrected or otherwise will appear clearly on /rules.

Existing wording is awkward, uncertain, and absurd, relying entirely on the modstaff's lengthy determination as to whether a party who follows instructions and ignores an offending party would be permabanned, subject to a finding of malice but not negligence or inadvertence.

a lost pony petitions that the wording be changed to say "the offending party will be immediately permabanned", applicable to either or both parties depending entirely on their own action, as well as having Moony's definition of "engagement" be included.  (Thank you Moons for that clarufication btw).

As the previous thread was derailed by open season attacks on its OP then locked, without any resolution, a lost pony is asking again.

Unless it is the staff's intention to hold both parties ransom for the other's action (which would be unconscionable as one of them is autistic as well as diagnosed with anxiety that has been most triggered since this mandate began), no rational explanation exists as to why these words have not been fixed in the four weeks since this problem has been raised by numerous posters.

Please fix this before more time passes.  I know you are all busy with real life but this is severely impacting my mental health and negatively impacting my employability.
In truth, i was fired from one job last week because of said anxiety and i'm having difficulty concentrating at the other.

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.
37 posts and 17 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1554580439380.jpg (57.19 KB, 540x539, 540:539, tumblr_inline_pfjz4smSXV1v….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

To be honest, it kind of make sense to keep a rule like this there for them mostly because every other option moony left  for them was pretty much thrown  away because  the 2 of them can't seem to stop barking at each other.

of course he's not going to apply it.

Its more of a guideline than a rule  to help
manly and lost  actually self reflect more about there interactions.

the idea of "Should I really engage this person? lets see so far every time I do we both get into trouble and we never seem to agree to disagree, so far having the staff intervene all the time  doesn't seem to work all the time because in reality there's only so much they can do for me, the staff can't really control how I react to lost/manly and I don't want him banned because of my disagreements, I guess for now I should really watch what  I say, or at least try to ignore/disengage with lost/manly and there is plenty of other people to talk  to besides manly/lost"


>pretty much thrown  away because  the 2 of them can't seem to stop barking at each other.

Great job at keeping up with current events.

I'm pretty sick of so many on this site having nothing better to do than make a spectacle of things they have no stake in and don't bother to pay attention to current events about.

I get it.  Im a miserable piece of shit who's not really welcome in these parts.

Since the asshole commenters cant seem to shut their fucking mouths and let me move on, perhaps the mods would do me the courtesy of locking this thread before i either blow up at every last one of you bitter unforgiving motherfuckers who have nothing better to do than talk shit about things that are now firmly in the past (and none of your fucking business) and get myself permabanned that way, or simply decide to fuck off of this shitty site full of shitty cowards who can't seem to put their name om their constant whining and offensive self pity.

Thanks for ruining my day, anon.  Preesh.

I don't know why Moony still wants me here, but if i have to take this shit up the ass from nameless cowards for much longer im simply going to fuck off and never come back.

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)


File: 1554677557323.png (491 B, 104x36, 26:9, Srgbnonlinearity.png) ImgOps Google

Manley and lostpony have actually been getting along pretty well since they got back.

Try not to pay much attention to Fleur or whoever that anon is.  


File: 1551066496458.png (127.44 KB, 252x305, 252:305, 13.PNG) ImgOps Google

So, this probably ought to be a given, but, rules should be visible on the front page where you'd normally find the rules.
46 posts and 27 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1551234267399.jpg (36.89 KB, 216x180, 6:5, snail_heart.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

> Near as I can tell, it's never been about politics, the particular issues, but rather civility.
I gotta agree.  The latest incident involved, oddly enough, epistemology in regards to the nervous systems of gastropods.


File: 1551255413572.jpg (173.56 KB, 1600x1260, 80:63, galapoint1.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

It was actually about empathy.  

In particular, whether it's being exhibited by those discussing which creatures might have it.


File: 1554310072823.png (422.17 KB, 512x512, 1:1, 3513122455fd2d14fd4b357eb9….png) ImgOps Google

>...i agree 100%, we should have put the policy on the frontpage, or in /rules/. it's an ancient policy though, and it didn't cross my mind.
Bump.  We're still missing the link to the political-drama policy on the frontpage and on /rules/.

 No.3826[Reply][Last 50 Posts]

File: 1553186637921.png (178.32 KB, 582x752, 291:376, 411477543.png) ImgOps Google

It seems like my post in the previous thread was lost under all the other posts, so I've decided to to make a new thread on this topic for the modstaff to see.

Recently I was put under new rules pertaining to interacting with another user. The original post is here  >>>/pony/923566 and the thread discussing it is here >>>/canterlot/3564 The exact wording of these new rules was "if either user engages directly OR indirectly with the other user, i.e., making thinly veiled references to the other, an IMMEDIATE permaban shall follow for both users." Because of this, I NEED some clarification on what "engagement" means in this context. Because I am hearing mixed things from different sources. To me "engaging" would include any sort of interaction at all. Including speaking directly to them or even referencing them in any way. This thread is [b[my formal request for a direct, detailed explanation on what "engaging" means[/b]. I have dealt with this kind of vaguely defined nonsense in regards to interacting with other users quite enough under the previous under so-called "political" ban that refused to explain or clarify what was and wasn't "political". This vague ruling caused me much undue stress and frustration and I am hesitant to deal with such a situation again.  

The second part of the ruling I need clarification on is "if either user engages...an IMMEDIATE permaban shall follow for both users." The way this is currently worded, this would seem to state that one party violating the established terms of what "engagement" is will result in both parties being banned, even if the other party does not engage or retaliate in any way. If this is the case, I would like to express that I am in agreement with the sentiment put forth by a few other users that this is completely unfair. I would like to request clarification on this as well.. Do both parties get permabanned if one person "engages" or does "engaging" require a mutual statement and response?

I require this information before I can make my decision on whether or not I will be returning to this website.

On the topic of my returning to the site: Much of this is my own personal opinion on the situation, but I feel like this is a good time to explain my intentionPost too long. Click here to view the full text.
259 posts and 68 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1553756776917.gif (1.37 MB, 498x280, 249:140, 1553634390704.gif) ImgOps Google

Theyre muffier.


Thread is being locked for now. I would urge Manley to create a new thread, and maybe seek help from friends in how exactly he should word it.

If the anon who had an issue with Manley, seen here:  >>4080 could directly message me via email at dizzyneal@hotmail.com or at my discord, Brazie#1755, that would be appreciated. Talking directly would be much preferred to issuing impersonal warnings or painful carpet bans.

I want to be clear that it immensely blows that both parties are hurting each other like this, but there is so much intensity involved that cutting things here is the only course of action I can see helping anyone. The whole staff will discuss what happened here when they can.


The tag is now Abby#1755, sorry for the confusion, anon.

 No.3564[Reply][Last 50 Posts]

File: 1551575683220.png (318.04 KB, 720x720, 1:1, Concerned Celestia.png) ImgOps Google

Please discuss, below. Thank you.
234 posts and 112 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1552934013296.png (162.73 KB, 685x886, 685:886, Capture _2019-03-18-11-19-….png) ImgOps Google

As one of only two people subject to said restriction, a lost pony is specifically NOT burdening mod staff to clarify what was stated clearly in the original ban notice:

"rule breaking incivility"

Seems crystal clear to me.  I know you mean well, Chain, but please do not provoke the staff to tighten my collar further when it is around my neck and not your own.


The way the declaration was phrased was " if either user engages directly OR indirectly with the other user". I NEED some clarification on what "engagement" means in this context. Because I am hearing mixed things from different sources. To me "engaging" would include any sort of interaction at all. Including speaking directly to them or even referencing them in any way. I am formally requesting a direct, detailed explanation on what "engaging" means before I make my decision on returning to this website. I dealt with this kind of vaguely defined nonsense quite enough under your so-called "political" ban that refused to explain what was and wasn't "political". I would also like to state that I am in agreement with the idea that perma-banning both of us if ONE person violates those rules is also unfair and would like to request clarification on that as well.

If you want my honest opinion, these seem like half-hearted measures that don't really address the root of the problem. Telling two users not to "engage" each other or they will be banned doesn't really fix the problem. It's basically just making those users feel unwanted on the website so the staff doesn't have to actually DO anything. No attempt was made to contact either of us directly over this issue, or the mediate an understanding between the two users before this drastic and unfair ruling was placed with no prior discussion. On a more personal level, this ruling is also completely lacking. It only includes one person and not other people who frequently target me with argumentation like Noonim. The way this ruling is worded, I could argue with Noonim 100 more times and I should not get in trouble because he was not included in the original message. Just one other user was. But we all know that's not what the staff wants. I feel like I'd still be punished for things not clearly defined in the scope of this "emergency ban" and that also feels unfair to me.

In all honesty, I do NOT feel welcome on this site anymore and I'm not sure if I want to return. This situation puts me on thin ice for things that are not clearly defined. Not only that, putting me in this situation is going to attract who don't like me and want me gone. They know they only have to push me a little bit to get rid of me forever. They will have their sights on me, it's like blood in the water.Post too long. Click here to view the full text.


File: 1553045534899.png (242.52 KB, 1669x1050, 1669:1050, pinkyscrunchnose.png) ImgOps Google

a lost pony second's Manley's concerns.

I've made sure Manley is aware that this is a very busy week for Moons at work, and we both hope Moons is able to schedule a time to meet with Manley or with both of us in the following week to work out everything Manley needs to feel comfortable posting with us in the future.

a lost pony is ready to help or btfo as desired.  Moons please help us, thank you.


File: 1552092570717.png (1002.88 KB, 1025x532, 1025:532, DMC4 dice.png) ImgOps Google

It's a small thing but can we update the dice rolling feature to include division and multiplications?

I tested it on >>>/test/6153 and there doesn't seem to be an option for multiplications.

It would also be cool if it was able to recognise multiple symbols for the same thing. Given the letter "x" is also used for typing division I included them too.

>For multiplications
* × ⋅ x X

>For division
÷ /

I know dice rolling is rarely used, especially outside of /rp/, but if dice rollers wanted to add other values to their outcome it would be helpful.


File: 1552108011549.png (420.52 KB, 1280x720, 16:9, 1487000213633.png) ImgOps Google

Why stop at multiplication and division?  I say we should allow any primitive recursive function, subject to a cap on execution time.  Hell, maybe allow a Turing-complete language for dice rolls.

(EDIT: This post is mostly a joke.)


I was just thinking basic maths for dice rolls. To turn it into an advance mathematic algorithm thing maybe a bit much.


File: 1445450228775.png (171.89 KB, 640x1247, 640:1247, _1__discord_vector_by_gles….png) ImgOps Google

There used to be a link that led to a list of the tags that could be used on the home page. It's possible that I missed it but is there a link to that list somewhere on the site still?
18 posts and 6 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


With "
" tag.


Ah OK. Thank you.


Moved to >>>/arch/3451.


File: 1551460997200.png (296.6 KB, 1024x1188, 256:297, twilight_sparkle__2_by_vad….png) ImgOps Google

This morning I had a thought that I would like to share.  I'm not suggesting any particular mod actions; this is more just food for thought.

I think a major source of nastiness on this site is treating discussion of a disagreement as some sort of a verbal battle instead of as a shared search for truth and knowledge.  Political topics are especially prone to this, but it happens on other threads as well.  I think threads would go a lot smoother if all participants took responsibility for becoming informed on the topic under discussion and trying to understand others' positions and questioning their own positions, with the ultimate goal of either (1) reaching agreement on the disputed matter after carefully considering evidence and reasoning or (2) coming to the conclusion that both positions have some merit due to factual uncertainties or differently weighing competing values.

I know this can be difficult in practice, but I think even just making a good-faith effort to strive toward this goal would help make things a lot smoother.

Please do not bring any prior drama into this thread.  (If you want to use an example to illustrate a point, don't use something that happened on this site.  Perhaps use a hypothetical instead.)
53 posts and 19 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1551503547543.png (38.24 KB, 189x230, 189:230, 1534190600347.png) ImgOps Google

I asked some stupid question once and Tracer gave me a LMGTFY link and it was fucking hilarious.

What search terms to use can be legitimately important in finding right result, plus if i remember right, it did actually run the search for me too.  (Its the only time i've seen it so cud be rememberinh wrong)  so it's legitimate even if a tad sarcastic.

>It is perfectly reasonable when presented a disagreeable assertion to request that the person putting forth that assertion provide more information.  
>It's also reasonable not to provide more information if you really don't want to!  Like legitimately maybe you don't want to talk about it, that's fine

Hmmm this seems particularly reasonable to a lost pony.

Especially when, for example you're at work and are able to engage on the topic of how sexy dragons are, but don't really have the focus required to explain or lookup basic physiology.  *cough hypothetically.


File: 1551506965096.png (101.43 KB, 296x292, 74:73, 8.png) ImgOps Google

It's definitely sarcastic, but, I've always thought of it as a tad tongue in cheek, than 'rude'.
And like you said, it is fulfilling the rule of question-asking.

I dunno. I guess I'm a tad thicker skinned around it. It's something of an old-internet item, anyway.


File: 1551511396411.jpg (57.42 KB, 1024x749, 1024:749, 1551386928803.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

Perhaps a tad too thick, like dragon scale.

Wheat just started a thread about a very specific topic with no links at all and some are asking questions and others are pulling up links to foster sharing knowledge.  Seems an example of what OP is wishing for.

Previous [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
[ home ] [ pony / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]