No.4164
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.
No.4170
>>4167You never know. 'Sides, now there's two people who want it.
Given where we are, that's a considerable number of the local population
No.4179
File: 1557294927455.png (131.25 KB, 377x311, 377:311, 1.PNG) ImgOps Google
>>4170Three, with >>4168
If anyone else'd like this kind of functionality, definitely post it here. With enough people asking for it, it's a lot harder to say no.
No.4183
File: 1557334813965.png (87.14 KB, 352x298, 176:149, 4.PNG) ImgOps Google
>>4182I don't think filter systems lead to being an echo chamber.
It's usually more to do with the site, than anything like that. Even with something like Twitter, the issue is usually more who you follow, leading to a bubble of content basically, than who you block.
Moreover, in this particular case, I'm not suggesting filtering someone I disagree with. I'm suggesting filtering someone who is needlessly rude and argumentative where I would rather avoid it. From what I've seen, I believe I disagree with a fairly large chunk of the site. But, I don't have issue with that chunk of the site, as they are for the most part polite and courteous.
For myself, a filter'd only be for people who've demonstrated that they have no interest in treating others with respect.
No.4184
File: 1557351746270.png (1.02 MB, 1294x711, 1294:711, TB95.png) ImgOps Google
Too easy to get around. Wouldn't halt people from simply adding a hidden character in their name/changing their name frequently. Proposed filter might work briefly, but don't think it will solve many problems for arguments.
No.4186
File: 1557352662441.png (693.03 KB, 921x743, 921:743, TB100.png) ImgOps Google
>>4185>I rather doubt people'll change their name specifically to bother othersYou're too trusting in other people then.
>it's inconvenientAdding an invisible character isn't any more inconvenient than it is typing a reply.
>might result in self reflection lest they get filtered again.Or the offending party will simply continue, knowing it annoys the other.
No.4187
>>4186Well, at that point you have a case for harassment anyway.
But at the very least, I doubt the particular circumstances around why I want it would result in such an occurrence.
No.4188
File: 1557353229990.jpg (125.58 KB, 1145x759, 1145:759, TB86.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>4187>Well, at that point you have a case for harassment anyway.Then we'd have the argument that if someone is simply replying to you that if that constitutes harassment. You'd have to provide your filters of the person and extensive evidence of them bypassing it and actively seeking you to harass you.
Or, you can tell them to stop talking to you/posting in your thread. (If it's your thread, granted)
Bam, if they continue it's harassment, and worthy of being reported.
Although, it's a fairly small website. So it might be a while before anyone gets to it.
No.4189
>>4188If they are directly changing their name in order for you to see their posts, I think you have a pretty solid case.
After all, they are actively trying to get around your filter at that point. there isn't really much reason otherwise to actively change your name like that, I would say. At the very least, should be able to demonstrate a pattern of it overtime.
but, like I said, this doesn't really apply to the current situation.
No.4190
File: 1557354042307.png (775.57 KB, 989x712, 989:712, TB98.png) ImgOps Google
>>4189Again, you can easily get around a filter by adding an invisible character to the name. I've been doing it to every post here to prove my point. I'm not changing my name, yet bypassing a filter. With no proof on your end besides it possibly being a glitch. So in this case I'd say it wouldn't be clear cut.
And until you express out loud that you no longer wish to talk with that person I don't believe it would constitute harassment from the Mods point of view. But, I'm not them, so I've no say in the matter.
>but, like I said, this doesn't really apply to the current situation.Aye, good luck.
No.4191
>>4190in that case I would suggest they just simply need to forbid the use of such characters. Doesn't seem to be an exceptionally hard thing to do, especially since as far as I can tell the only purpose of watches for nefarious purposes.
No, once again, you can demonstrate a pattern, and besides that, if it is a glitch or rather believe to be a glitch, it will be looked into. At that point, I would assume it's possible to figure out exactly what's going on from the more code minded side of things, in which case it should be very instantly apparent why somebody is adding that character into their name.
But, again, it still works flawlessly when you aren't dealing with people you are evidently so devoted to harassing you.
for two people who simply don't get along, it seems to work fine. I see absolutely no reason to dismiss a solution that works perfectly for a specific issue, because it doesn't work for all issues.
at that point, why have rules at all? Why ban people? I can get by a ban in a single second, using a simple VPN. Literally all it would take is a single click. If we dismiss solutions because some people will go around them, then there is no point in having any rules or regulations on any website. Certainly not image boards, given the complete lack of accounts that would be at least slightly easier to remove.
No.4234
File: 1557467742380.png (127.44 KB, 252x305, 252:305, 13.PNG) ImgOps Google
>>4231
>Because you don't like doing it.
Feel like I should respond to this, as unfortunately I feel it misses the point.
I do dislike doing it, yes.
I dislike nothing being done more.
An eye for an eye is unpleasant ,and doesn't fix anything, but there is at least some form of justice there.
Something happens. One feels better having at least scratched back.
When there's no other way to get any kind of justice, you feel better for at least grabbing at whatever scraps you can.
Part of why I am suggesting filtering users is to essentially circumvent this issue entirely.
You do not need any kind of justice if nothing has been done, essentially. If no harm is present. If you filter someone out, there's nothing to seek any kind of justice for. You, after all, cannot see any slight or insult or rudeness.
If there's not going to be action taken, as seems to be the case from what I had seen, I'd rather circumvent the issue altogether.
No.4235
File: 1557472788722.png (38.15 KB, 317x303, 317:303, Your writings make me angr….png) ImgOps Google
>>4234Personal opinion: You don't need justice. People who seek justice are inherently sadistic people that just enjoy hurting people. The fact that it's apparently a
compulsion for you, that you
cannot prevent yourself from wanting to hurt people, really does not garner sympathy from me.
That said, I'm generally a practical person. I think it's important to acknowledge your nature, bizarre and harmful though it may be, and work around it. Work with it rather than against it.
For the longest time almost the entire staff (perhaps actually the entire staff, I don't have a poll up or something) has been against user filtering on idealistic grounds. "People should be able to control themselves. People should be willing to expose themselves to others. People are able to talk through their problems with others and reach a peaceful conclusion." We didn't want to stifle what seemed like a way to encourage our users to be better people. We're all adults and communication shouldn't be difficult enough to warrant isolation tools.
And in my time on the site I think I've discovered that none of you can be better people. Humanity is disgusting. It's a miracle that we've survived this long. I've lost all faith in the concept of peace or understanding. People just hate everyone they're allowed to by the close members of their tribe and violently leap upon anyone whose social protections have been pushed slightly ajar. You're all so desperate to inflict pain on others that you keep moving the goal posts for what's "justified".
In short, I'm bitter and jaded, due to events both here and elsewhere. I can't disagree with user filtering on the grounds that people are inherently good, or might at some point become good. People are all awful, and if anything might stand in the way of their inherently despicable nature, then maybe it's not such a bad idea. I no longer oppose user filtering.
Again, this has all been personal opinion, I have no idea how the rest of the staff feels, and I certainly won't be the one to demand it be implemented. I can't even really say that I
want it implemented, just that I don't care enough to prevent it if someone else brings it up.
I'm very much here to sweep up the worst messes in the case of an emergency and otherwise I tend to go with the flow and perform the tasks assigned to me. But since you posted this response to something in a locked thread, I assume you wanted to hear my opinion, so there it is.
No.4237
File: 1557512806304.png (257.73 KB, 867x724, 867:724, sebastian_disapproval_b.png) ImgOps Google
>>4235Well that's an incredibly bleak way to look at justice, I'd say. I do not believe it has any sadism about it. Rather, it seems to be rooted mostly in fairness.
When you've had pain inflicted on you, and the guy who did it just walks away without anything happening, without any cost, any punishment, I do not believe it is unreasonable to be upset by that.
Hell, I'd point to pretty much the entire world, frankly. We've got laws and courts for a reason. We punish people who've done something wrong to another. All over the world, regardless of where you go, the concept of justice exists.
Unless you believe that the majority of humanity is "sadistic", I do not see how you can claim people who want justice are "sadistic".
>>4236The site's not supposed to have anyone hurting people. Yet you've constantly done it to me for ages, now. And nothing seems to ever happen.
Sorry if I seem frustrated after having been constantly kicked down with nothing ever coming of it.
You guys act like seeking justice is a bad thing, but, look at the status quo here. Am I to constantly be insulted, put down, and lied about, with no way to stop it? The whole point, I'd say, of justice at the end of the day is forcing empathy to those who have none. If you can't feel for the pain you've caused, and so avoid causing it, maybe some of your own will make you reconsider. Maybe, if you will not avoid causing pain to others, you'll be more careful if it could cause pain to yourself.
Again, this is the whole point of the systems we have in place around the world around law and policing.
Do you guys honestly believe that the majority of humanity are inherently sadistic people?
If so, I'd make the case that bleak outlook is what needs to be looked at. Maybe you guys need to actually make an attempt to understand why people're desiring justice, as opposed to condemning anyone that does.
No.4238
File: 1557515784448.png (29.32 KB, 247x223, 247:223, Nervousness sets in.png) ImgOps Google
>>4237I believe the majority of humanity is sadistic, I apologize if that wasn't clear in my original post.
>>4236Just to be clear here, you've got your own justice driven compulsions. I won't try to compare the two because it isn't really important how they match up.
And as a message to both of you, I'd really prefer you just stop responding to each other. That includes telling about each other in a way that might compel the other to want to respond. Please just walk away, I want to go to bed.
No.4241
File: 1557516395554.png (278.75 KB, 477x342, 53:38, Capture (2).PNG) ImgOps Google
>>4238Sad outlook, I guess.
Like I said, I think you'd be better served trying to understand why so many people hold a desire for justice, as opposed to condemning them all.
I will throw in, at the very least, if you recognize that the majority of humanity holds this desire, it's worth ensuring you take it in to consideration when making judgement on a given situation.
I think it might've been you, though I unfortunately didn't archive the thread, but, last time when I had reported Manley, nothing was done despite a clear rule violation, and when I asked about it, I was told that it looked like things are fine now. Well, I don't care if things "look" fine now, if after the large amount of time it takes for staff to respond to a rule violation, angry people've left or otherwise cooled off, I'm upset that a guy was allowed to insult me with nothing to come of it. I did not agree that things were sorted out, as from my point of view, all that had happened was that enough time passed for the parties involved to get tired. The wounds didn't magically heal up, nobody apologized, the fight just ran out of steam.
>>4239It's not an imagined slight. We've already established this. Your logic doesn't hold up, as had been thoroughly broken down in that thread.
Now, you might not realize it's an insult. Personally, I don't believe that, but, it theoretically could be possible.
But, that's more to do with your own lack of empathy. As evidenced by the getting upset at being called "retarded", as you put it.
Because, under your logic, in order to take that as an insult, you'd have to believe that people with such mental disabilities are subhuman.
And I'd hope you don't actually believe that, right?
No.4242
File: 1557532439878.png (178.66 KB, 1262x1256, 631:628, banshee norn.png) ImgOps Google
Well, this is going to inevitably devolve into Manley and Noomin fighting again.
Just be a goddamn adult and stay out of each other's threads. It's not that hard.
No.4243
File: 1557535458461.png (3.01 MB, 1920x1080, 16:9, cgadine.png) ImgOps Google
>>4242Like I said, I don't think I am observant enough for that.
That, and his behavior doesn't quite happen often enough to form any kind of happened in my mind around such.
And of course, I don't really have the self-control to ignore posts addressed to me that contain arguments or insults or misleading remarks.
Part of why I want to filter system, it's a lot easier to ignore things when you can't see them at all
No.4244
File: 1557600753901.jpg (10 KB, 400x270, 40:27, 2cc73608.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>4243So instead of making an effort to be responsible, you are instead begging the staff to fix
your own hangups.
You don't have "self control"? Get some. Be responsible for your own actions and take two seconds to read who posted something. It isn't the staff's responsibility to fix your problems for you.
No.4245
File: 1557601097783.png (109.71 KB, 987x810, 329:270, 223580__UNOPT__safe_rainbo….png) ImgOps Google
>>4244Basically my opinion on this as well.
Least Manley has seemingly stopped in this thread.
No.4246
File: 1557601130428.png (72.62 KB, 292x198, 146:99, 4 (2).PNG) ImgOps Google
>>4244True. It isn't. It's the staff's responsibility to enforce the rules. But they don't do that. So, here we are.
No.4247
File: 1557602033069.png (206.62 KB, 251x400, 251:400, banshee icon.png) ImgOps Google
>>4245Yeah, that's a plus for sure.
>>4246Don't blame the staff for you not taking responsibility for your actions.
No.4248
File: 1557605320783.png (134.39 KB, 387x276, 129:92, 4.PNG) ImgOps Google
>>4247I'm not. I'm blaming them for never doing anything when Manley blatantly violates the rules, and insults me.
For ages now, nothing's happened whenever he's done this. It's got to the point I don't feel like there's any point in reporting things.
You're right that this'd be easier to deal with if I didn't engage with the guy. But, you know what'd be better? If he didn't fucking break the rules constantly, either. And the only way that's going to happen is if the staff actually does their job.
I'm just really sick of the status quo. I don't really feel like ignoring the guy fixes the issue, either. It's just him getting away with his shit behavior, because staff here for whatever reason have some serious favoritism or pity or some shit when it comes to him.
I know other people've been banned for far less. Yet, he seems to be able to repeatedly do the exact same shit, over and over again, with no consequences, literally spitting in the face of any explanation of wrongdoing.
If you're constantly being robbed by the same guy, saying "Well, why don't you lock the door" is all well and good, but, if the police are never doing anything about the guy robbing you despite knowing that he's robbing you, they aren't doing their job.
No.4253
>>4251Used to have Greasemonkey when I was still on Firefox. Does it work with Brave?
Otherwise, I'll give this a shot.
No.4255
File: 1557629084147.png (119.24 KB, 258x299, 258:299, 3.PNG) ImgOps Google
>>4254Nice! Gave it a go, copied the stuff in, and it seems like it worked. Though it did say "$ is not defined", but, despite that, it seems to still function just fine, so, I guess it's not important.
Thanks
No.4256
>>4255You're welcome!
>Though it did say "$ is not defined", but, despite that, it seems to still function just fine, so, I guess it's not important.Yeah, the Ponyville.us codebase defines the
$
global variable, but Tampermonkey doesn't know about this, so it warns that it is undefined.
No.4257
File: 1557630117015.png (131.25 KB, 377x311, 377:311, 1.PNG) ImgOps Google
>>4256Ah. That'd explain it.
The only coding I've ever done was in Space Station 13, so, I don't really quite understand what that means, but, I've sort of got a rough understanding of the concept.
Though that might mainly because SS13 coding tutorials seemed to be 90% warnings, and so I learned to understand they usually don't matter.
No.4258
>>4256Do you know if there's a way to get it to work on the Android version of brave?
Apparently there's an app, and I've tried fiddling with it, but thus far, haven't had any luck getting it to work.
No.4261
File: 1557708775432.jpg (75.78 KB, 771x1199, 771:1199, Dyl8lEcW0AEuu9-.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>4258After fiddling with the thing for a while, looking up stuff and reading some reviews, it seems that it for whatever reason doesn't really work on Android right now, at least as far as custom inputted scripts.
A real shame. Might have to try to seek alternatives, if I can. Worst case'd be that this isn't an option on my phone, which would be rather unfortunate given that a fair chunk of my posting is on here.
I'll keep looking around, though.
8chan has options for custom scripts built in.
would something like that be possible here? Or is it beyond the possibility for our particular codebase. If I remember correctly, somebody once gave me a filter system for a particularly annoying spammer at one point that seemed to work pretty well. So, given that, I would assume it's possible to run this sort of script on that kind of system.
Is there something I should make a new thread for? It's a little bit of a different concept here.
No.4262
File: 1557711503425.jpg (116.63 KB, 585x900, 13:20, 1495818073041.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>4258Sorry, I'm afraid I don't know anything in that regard. I personally haven't used Brave (although curiously enough, I do have $150 of BAT tokens in my cryptocurrency portfolio).
Have you tried Greasemonkey on Firefox mobile? I think that might work.
No.4264
File: 1557713620990.png (121.54 KB, 316x290, 158:145, 6.PNG) ImgOps Google
>>4262Just finished installing the both of them, but it doesn't seem to want to work. As far as I can tell the script is at least enabled. Are there any modifications I need to make in order for it to work on this, as opposed to tampermonkey?
I should be able to get home in a little bit, anyway, so, hopefully by that point I can take a little bit more of a deeper look into these things. As is, I've mostly been trying to fiddle with things while at work. In a slow day today, so, relatively easy at least.
No.4266
>>4264Apparently on Firefox Android, the "
$
" is really undefined. I edited my post above (with the script) to include the following line:
// @require https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.min.js
This should fix the issue.
No.4268
File: 1557719461150.png (337.92 KB, 1080x1920, 9:16, Screenshot_20190512-224553.png) ImgOps Google
>>4266Looks like it! Interestingly it leaves in place OPs, but that's not necessarily a bad thing as it means I can still participate in thrreads other people are in.
Thanks again!
No.4269
File: 1557820880526.png (86.01 KB, 213x306, 71:102, 2015-08-12 14_22_15-Prague….png) ImgOps Google
It's pretty fucked up that when someone fights back after people insult them other people act like that person is the problem rather than the one making the insults in the first place.
No.4281
File: 1558607856327.png (41.17 KB, 163x203, 163:203, 2015-08-12 14_45_47-Prague….png) ImgOps Google
>>4280an endless cycle of hate
No.4282
>>4281Which'd be ultimately why I've been trying to find some kind of solution, somewhere.
Talking things out didn't work, enforcement of the rules doesn't seem to work, so, I figured a filter might.
So far it's done alright, bar one odd bit anyway. I'd still like to see such an item implemented to the site proper, though
No.4283
File: 1558728500225.jpg (31.42 KB, 564x630, 94:105, happy28.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google
>>4164If there were a filter system and it worked, you wouldn't be able to use it without peeking any more than i could, Nooms.
If you aren't ready for things that frustrate you or hurt your feelings then you aren't ready to post here and need a break first.
Speaking for myself, anyway.
No.4284
>>4282I implemented filtering of mentions now and also an option to filter whole threads (change "
filter_op = false
" for this).
// ==UserScript==
// @name Ponyville user filter
// @namespace http://tampermonkey.net/
// @version 2019-05-24-1930
// @match http://ponyville.us/*
// @grant none
// @require https://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/3.3.1/jquery.min.js
// ==/UserScript==
(function() {
'use strict';
function filterUsers() {
var filter_string = (localStorage.filtered_usernames || "Manley.*").trim();
var filter_op = false;
var filter_mentions = true;
if (filter_string) {
var filtered_user_regex = RegExp(filter_string);
$(".name").filter(function(i,e) {
return filtered_user_regex.test(e.textContent);
}).each(function(index){
if (filter_op) {
$($(this).closest("div.op")).closest("[data-board]").css("display","none");
}
var post_div = $(this).closest("div.reply");
if (!post_div[0]) {return;}
post_div.css("display", "none");
var br = post_div.next()[0];
if (br && br.tagName.toLowerCase()=="br") {$(br).css("display","none");}
if (filter_mentions) {
var post_id = post_div[0].id.replace("reply_","");
$(".mentioned-" + post_id).css("display","none");
$("div.body a[href='" + document.location.pathname + "#" + post_id + "']").each(function(j) {
this.outerHTML = "<s title='filtered'> >>" + post_id + "</s>";
});
}
});
}
}
window.addEventListener('load', function() {
filterUsers();
}, false);
function repeat_periodically(fn_callback, period) {
setTimeout(function() {
fn_callback();
repeat_periodically(fn_callback, period);
}, period);
}
var prev_num_ch = 0;
repeat_periodically(function() {
var num_ch = document.querySelector("div[data-board]").childElementCount;
if (prev_num_ch != num_ch) {
prev_num_ch = num_ch;
filterUsers();
}
}, 1000);
})();
No.4285
>>4283It has been working pretty well so far, by the few times where he's directly reply to me.
I can voice no real complaints at the moment.
Though I do feel chains filter system is probably a little less visible than most. Still, thus far, it seems to do the job perfectly.
No.4289
>>4288I am afraid I lack your patience and self control, then.
It is already hard enough as it is, has recently shown.
As for reporting things, I can assure you, that does absolutely nothing. Frankly, I do not at this point believe they will do anything. Especially after last time.
I will accept that you have different standards than I do, but, I do not see it as vindictiveness. Nor do I see it as retaliation, really, as the unfortunate reality of the situation is that if I were to respond in kind, I would actually get a moderator reaction. As I've seen plenty of times already. Meanwhile, he can initiate things, insult me, and all that sort of deal, and in the rare case where somebody like Mooney does decide to do something, does decide to give a formal warning, it's deleted in a matter of minutes after.
I do not believe it is unreasonable to feel a little bit frustrated in a situation like this, where you are getting constant attacks, and seem to have no out.
As we have seen recently, I do not start these encounters. He can insult me out of the blue, and it's somehow vindictive of me to get upset buy an attack out of nowhere. To be frustrated when staff do absolutely nothing, and yet seem perfectly happy to demand things of me.
If you refuse to accept my calling it a matter of justice, fine. Then simple fairness would do. The current standard is unfair. That's a simple fact as far as I can tell. There's rules for one set of people, and then there's a separate standard help for another user.
No.4290
File: 1559407291142.png (384.56 KB, 1000x1000, 1:1, inquisitive2.png) ImgOps Google
>>4289>dual standardsThis is the reality here, as it is everywhere in life.
Filters will solve this how?
No.4291
>>4290 Filters'll keep most the random out of the blue attacks hidden, basically.
It was by pure coincidence I saw it last time. I imagine there's plenty I've missed. Means I don't have to see the constant abuse, and can instead relax for the most part.
No.4292
>>4291But the hidden abuse will compel you to peek anyway just like you did when filtering me on pchan, just like how i couldn't resist peeking when i tried using them.
You and I are too compulsive to use filters, if we are being honest. Besides its not going to happen here anyway and i think you just post such threads on Canterlot to vent your frustration. Unless im purely projecting but i ask you to consider it for yourself and see if maybe this is true.
No.4293
>>4292I disagree. Seems to be working fine thus far.
Perhaps I have a little more self control than you though, so long as I cant see things, anyway.
Regardless, you're nihilistic attitude isn't exactly going to fix anything. So what's the point? I might as well try something that seems to at least do something.
No.4294
File: 1559594107802.png (40.63 KB, 675x373, 675:373, Capture _2019-06-03-13-32-….png) ImgOps Google
>>4293Seems an odd thing to say.
Whats the point of coming to a social networking place then not looking? Isn't that "meaningless"?
No.4295
>>4294I 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?
No.4296
File: 1559773364331.png (155.13 KB, 899x888, 899:888, thinking1.png) ImgOps Google
>>4295>not social networking>but a place to hang outThat 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.
No.4297
>>4296Social 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.
