The Zarty
ZOOOOOOOOOOOOOTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ZWABAG
[Return] [Thread list] [Index] [Catalog] [Bottom] | Replies: 272 | Views: 10 | Currently viewing: 1
>>4644
The current rules are more wordy than a leftist meme and needlessly specific. Mods are not idiots and know what porn or gore is, there is no need to specify that any further and invite any kind of boundary testing.
The current rules are more wordy than a leftist meme and needlessly specific. Mods are not idiots and know what porn or gore is, there is no need to specify that any further and invite any kind of boundary testing.
>>4644
>If you want to share artistic nudity, perhaps suggest that to ocgemerald, there is could be appropriate.
Zooooot do this.
>If you want to share artistic nudity, perhaps suggest that to ocgemerald, there is could be appropriate.
Zooooot do this.
>>4644
>We don't need "artistic nudity" on the zarty, which we all know will just come down to posting naked drawings
how does "artistic nudity" differ from just "naked drawings", sounds like a distinction without difference to me
>We don't need "artistic nudity" on the zarty, which we all know will just come down to posting naked drawings
how does "artistic nudity" differ from just "naked drawings", sounds like a distinction without difference to me
>>4650
nudity is nudity, if you draw some other girls or men is it suddenly ok to post it?
nudity is nudity, if you draw some other girls or men is it suddenly ok to post it?
>>4632
>>4633
Biology would always stay the same no matter what happens. This is how we are made and always will be, even with the internet and all. It always has been past puberty (14) and always will be.
We already have laws protecting the youth so why limit them further? Let them choose for themselves, we can't force them. Stop infantilizing the youth
>>4633
Biology would always stay the same no matter what happens. This is how we are made and always will be, even with the internet and all. It always has been past puberty (14) and always will be.
We already have laws protecting the youth so why limit them further? Let them choose for themselves, we can't force them. Stop infantilizing the youth
>>4651
youre missing the point here what if i post an image of a jartycuck/chud with a clitty meant to be humerous and not erotic
youre missing the point here what if i post an image of a jartycuck/chud with a clitty meant to be humerous and not erotic
>>4652
If they act stupid then we tell them not to, they'll follow as needed. They aren't retarded, unless they choose to fall into the depth of depravity (gore/p fags), which in case it's all them
If they act stupid then we tell them not to, they'll follow as needed. They aren't retarded, unless they choose to fall into the depth of depravity (gore/p fags), which in case it's all them
>>4651
depends on the content intention, but not here, the point is the dutch-cartoon imageboard allowing nudity, can only result in nudity of the sisters, which is an absolute no
depends on the content intention, but not here, the point is the dutch-cartoon imageboard allowing nudity, can only result in nudity of the sisters, which is an absolute no
>>4649
Artisitic nudity is when the artwork is not made for the sole intention of satiating lust. Old paintings back then had nude women in them, but they were used to emphasize female beauty as most of them were just standing in different poses. Porn is art that makes you horny by emphasizing genitalia or the boobs, it has no deeper meaning and only serves to cause the chemicals in your brain to activate.
Artisitic nudity is when the artwork is not made for the sole intention of satiating lust. Old paintings back then had nude women in them, but they were used to emphasize female beauty as most of them were just standing in different poses. Porn is art that makes you horny by emphasizing genitalia or the boobs, it has no deeper meaning and only serves to cause the chemicals in your brain to activate.
>>4656
We could just specify that artisitic nudity is only allowed for characters above 18, though I think that would allow verafags to start drawing her nude.
We could just specify that artisitic nudity is only allowed for characters above 18, though I think that would allow verafags to start drawing her nude.
>>4660
Nigga I'm an artist I can tell what's tasteful nudity and what's straight up porn.
Artisitic nudity is when genitalia and other female private parts are pushed aside to emphasize the female beauty or something else while porn has the focal point aimed at the private parts.
Though I don't think it should be allowed here due to anonymous imageboard degeneracy. ocgemerald.club is better imo.
Though I still dont
Nigga I'm an artist I can tell what's tasteful nudity and what's straight up porn.
Artisitic nudity is when genitalia and other female private parts are pushed aside to emphasize the female beauty or something else while porn has the focal point aimed at the private parts.
Though I don't think it should be allowed here due to anonymous imageboard degeneracy. ocgemerald.club is better imo.
Though I still dont
>>4661
all nudity is sexual in nature, what do you think makes it attractive or interesting in the first place?
all nudity is sexual in nature, what do you think makes it attractive or interesting in the first place?
clothed drawings can still can be arousing so zoot please ban all the tnd zelling girls they are so OMGSISA please
File:
1784495564724.gif
(6.39 MB, 600x600, 1731440703613.gif)
>ban all depictions of women
>>4663
Yes, i forgot to specify that the paintings of back then had nudity as a set piece, an addition to the whole artwork which isn't the same for art that focuses solely on their nudity.
With artworks involving artistic nudity, the person can choose to ignore all of it and tunnel vision towards the nudity while porn shuts out all the other options and makes the viewer getting horny the main goal of the art. This can be seen in character designs too when people enlarge certain features in their characters to achieve a goonbait artstyle.
Yes, i forgot to specify that the paintings of back then had nudity as a set piece, an addition to the whole artwork which isn't the same for art that focuses solely on their nudity.
With artworks involving artistic nudity, the person can choose to ignore all of it and tunnel vision towards the nudity while porn shuts out all the other options and makes the viewer getting horny the main goal of the art. This can be seen in character designs too when people enlarge certain features in their characters to achieve a goonbait artstyle.
Artistic nudity shouldn't be allowed on site dedicated to underage dutch girls cartoon
File:
1784495564724-1.jpeg
(144.22 KB, 1614x538, proudcotrannypedo.jpg)
File:
1784495564724-2.jpeg
(140.97 KB, 1614x538, connections to co.jpg)
Can these be added to the ziki as spine tingling headers and warnings
>
>
>>4709
By default - no, as an option - yes, and maybe on the other boards too
By default - no, as an option - yes, and maybe on the other boards too
>>4777
Yes, you just need to create a template, look at those: https://soyzellig.party/zelligwiki/index.php/Category:Templates
Yes, you just need to create a template, look at those: https://soyzellig.party/zelligwiki/index.php/Category:Templates
I think vpns should be unbanned again, here my case.
The purpose of the vpn ban is to stop the p spammer from posting more p, however not every vpn is detected in the vpn ban, and we've seen that the spammer posted p after the vpn ban so he has access to the non-detectable vpns, so it has had no effect.
Now this vpn ban does affect our userbase as I can imagine there is a portion of users not willing to post under their home ip, due to the risks involved of using a niche website, the vpn ban does reduce the posting of these users, which isn't good for the livelihood of the website.
Therefore, I think vpns should be unbanned
The purpose of the vpn ban is to stop the p spammer from posting more p, however not every vpn is detected in the vpn ban, and we've seen that the spammer posted p after the vpn ban so he has access to the non-detectable vpns, so it has had no effect.
Now this vpn ban does affect our userbase as I can imagine there is a portion of users not willing to post under their home ip, due to the risks involved of using a niche website, the vpn ban does reduce the posting of these users, which isn't good for the livelihood of the website.
Therefore, I think vpns should be unbanned
>>4933
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing, I noticed a little less faggotry but the same problems arised, I'll unban it later
Yeah, I was thinking the same thing, I noticed a little less faggotry but the same problems arised, I'll unban it later
>>4933
There was no 'p posted after the ban doe, you hallucinated that part
There was no 'p posted after the ban doe, you hallucinated that part
>>4936
ban evasion is one of the founding stones of /qa/ and soyjak culture. you should be ashamed.
ban evasion is one of the founding stones of /qa/ and soyjak culture. you should be ashamed.
>>4628
If we're going by Dutch standard, Cinecheck, the real "artistic sex" such as in R-rated films and full frontal, genital-inclusive "artistic nudity" is 16+ and outright pornography is 18. As we allow mild gore, which falls between permission at 12 and 16, It would be safe to maintain the 18 standard. Depending on the local laws of the server hoster, I wouldn't be opposed to a drop to 16 so as to be more reflective of the work's background and intended audience. A minimum age of 20 is only strictly used in Bahrain at 21, and I doubt most of our users or servers are in Bahrain.
>>4641
As pointed out almost 4 months ago, there were and still are too many ESLeralds. Generally, you don't want semicolons in lists. You aren't coding, and these are not full sentences. Likewise, full stops are to be avoided for this reason.
>No NSFW or sexual content
Cut "too" in the first point or change it to "this includes posts without attachments". The second point should be "mild drawn gore is allowed".
>/q/ - requests and questions about the Zarty and associated websites
There's ambiguity here. "Associated websites" may mean sites which are also administrated by the Zarty's admin or sites within the Soysphere.
>/qa/ - random content not belonging in the other boards
"content which does not belong on other boards" is better. The content isn't in the boards like a container, it is on them like a surface. "Random" is superfluous.
>/zellig/ - IAZ and the zellig community;
Zellig should be capitalized. It's standard for board titles to be capitalized while their shorthands are lowercase.
>/brabant/ - /qa/ but with flags
This conflict's with /brabant/'s presentation. When I click on /brabant/, it tells me it is for "International Politics or something". "international politics and events" may be better, given the format so far.
>No hostile activity
This is an ESLerald, and the comma-parsed list attached to it would be better off as a list as show in the first two items. "No activity antagonistic to the Zarty or its users" then the bulleted list would be better.
>No degeneracy, including, but not limited to
This misses the mark. Your examples of it are split between promotion and engagement. It would be better to say "No engagement in, promotion of, or association with degeneracy including but not limited to" then a bulleted list. Your current sole example is sexual deviancy, but I've seen bans for Satanism, which I think falls under this rule and could be an example.
>No ban evasion
This should include a clause for clarity regarding VPNs.
>No doxxing
"Doxxing" should be defined with the legal definitions of the US and country of the server hoster.
>No illegal content
"Illegal content" should be defined as that which would violate US federal law and that of the country of the server hoster.
>No outside drama
This requires some explanation as it may already fall under Rule 3 and may, if /q/ is also for the Soysphere, include drama related to the Soysphere. Is "outside" off-site or off-sphere?
If we're going by Dutch standard, Cinecheck, the real "artistic sex" such as in R-rated films and full frontal, genital-inclusive "artistic nudity" is 16+ and outright pornography is 18. As we allow mild gore, which falls between permission at 12 and 16, It would be safe to maintain the 18 standard. Depending on the local laws of the server hoster, I wouldn't be opposed to a drop to 16 so as to be more reflective of the work's background and intended audience. A minimum age of 20 is only strictly used in Bahrain at 21, and I doubt most of our users or servers are in Bahrain.
>>4641
As pointed out almost 4 months ago, there were and still are too many ESLeralds. Generally, you don't want semicolons in lists. You aren't coding, and these are not full sentences. Likewise, full stops are to be avoided for this reason.
>No NSFW or sexual content
Cut "too" in the first point or change it to "this includes posts without attachments". The second point should be "mild drawn gore is allowed".
>/q/ - requests and questions about the Zarty and associated websites
There's ambiguity here. "Associated websites" may mean sites which are also administrated by the Zarty's admin or sites within the Soysphere.
>/qa/ - random content not belonging in the other boards
"content which does not belong on other boards" is better. The content isn't in the boards like a container, it is on them like a surface. "Random" is superfluous.
>/zellig/ - IAZ and the zellig community;
Zellig should be capitalized. It's standard for board titles to be capitalized while their shorthands are lowercase.
>/brabant/ - /qa/ but with flags
This conflict's with /brabant/'s presentation. When I click on /brabant/, it tells me it is for "International Politics or something". "international politics and events" may be better, given the format so far.
>No hostile activity
This is an ESLerald, and the comma-parsed list attached to it would be better off as a list as show in the first two items. "No activity antagonistic to the Zarty or its users" then the bulleted list would be better.
>No degeneracy, including, but not limited to
This misses the mark. Your examples of it are split between promotion and engagement. It would be better to say "No engagement in, promotion of, or association with degeneracy including but not limited to" then a bulleted list. Your current sole example is sexual deviancy, but I've seen bans for Satanism, which I think falls under this rule and could be an example.
>No ban evasion
This should include a clause for clarity regarding VPNs.
>No doxxing
"Doxxing" should be defined with the legal definitions of the US and country of the server hoster.
>No illegal content
"Illegal content" should be defined as that which would violate US federal law and that of the country of the server hoster.
>No outside drama
This requires some explanation as it may already fall under Rule 3 and may, if /q/ is also for the Soysphere, include drama related to the Soysphere. Is "outside" off-site or off-sphere?
>>5022
>If we're going by Dutch standard
Thank God we are not.
>Generally, you don't want semicolons in lists
Actually, it's the correct way to end elements of a list and is required if you were ever to publish an article, but I've found Australian government's style manual that says they shouldn't be used because they confuse their citizens, so I will remove them for the sake of all Australians on here.
>Cut "too" in the first point or change it to "this includes posts without attachments".
It's not needed at all because of "content" in the sentence above, I will simply remove it.
>The second point should be "mild drawn gore is allowed".
Yep, less words is better.
>There's ambiguity here.
We are obviously not associated with frootcord websites, If someone comes to such conclusion, that's not my problem.
>"content which does not belong on other boards" is better.
True.
>This conflict's with /brabant/'s presentation.
The description is in conflict with its actual purpose. I've never seen a non-political thread moved out of /brabant/.
>This is an ESLerald
It's not, but I agree it can be phrased better.
>Your examples of it are split between promotion and engagement.
That's because it doesn't matter if someone engages in an activity or "merely" promotes it. It's the same thing.
>Your current sole example is sexual deviancy, but I've seen bans for Satanism, which I think falls under this rule and could be an example.
It does, but it's pointless to try to enumerate every single case of degeneracy, there are simply way too many of them.
>This should include a clause for clarity regarding VPNs.
What's not clear about VPNs?
>"Doxxing" should be defined with the legal definitions of the US and country of the server hoster.
It does not, I know it when I see it, also afaik there is no agreement between american states as for what constitutes doxxing and whether it's legal or not.
>"Illegal content" should be defined as that which would violate US federal law and that of the country of the server hoster.
It should be reworded to "no content forbidden by the rules of hosting provider" because of the reasons above.
>No outside drama
It should be removed, I have no idea why Zoot created it honestly, but I think Rule 3 already covers all the cases it was supposed to cover.
>If we're going by Dutch standard
Thank God we are not.
>Generally, you don't want semicolons in lists
Actually, it's the correct way to end elements of a list and is required if you were ever to publish an article, but I've found Australian government's style manual that says they shouldn't be used because they confuse their citizens, so I will remove them for the sake of all Australians on here.
>Cut "too" in the first point or change it to "this includes posts without attachments".
It's not needed at all because of "content" in the sentence above, I will simply remove it.
>The second point should be "mild drawn gore is allowed".
Yep, less words is better.
>There's ambiguity here.
We are obviously not associated with frootcord websites, If someone comes to such conclusion, that's not my problem.
>"content which does not belong on other boards" is better.
True.
>This conflict's with /brabant/'s presentation.
The description is in conflict with its actual purpose. I've never seen a non-political thread moved out of /brabant/.
>This is an ESLerald
It's not, but I agree it can be phrased better.
>Your examples of it are split between promotion and engagement.
That's because it doesn't matter if someone engages in an activity or "merely" promotes it. It's the same thing.
>Your current sole example is sexual deviancy, but I've seen bans for Satanism, which I think falls under this rule and could be an example.
It does, but it's pointless to try to enumerate every single case of degeneracy, there are simply way too many of them.
>This should include a clause for clarity regarding VPNs.
What's not clear about VPNs?
>"Doxxing" should be defined with the legal definitions of the US and country of the server hoster.
It does not, I know it when I see it, also afaik there is no agreement between american states as for what constitutes doxxing and whether it's legal or not.
>"Illegal content" should be defined as that which would violate US federal law and that of the country of the server hoster.
It should be reworded to "no content forbidden by the rules of hosting provider" because of the reasons above.
>No outside drama
It should be removed, I have no idea why Zoot created it honestly, but I think Rule 3 already covers all the cases it was supposed to cover.
Is there a reason the rules are getting changed? I feel like an explanation is in order for altering the rules, especially when the changes to the rules are only making them stricter. Not to mention the rules are somehow more ambiguous then the first rules we had. If you're going to change the rules at least bother to mention them all instead of half assing it.
>>5028
they aren't changed, just reworded, it's not the same thing
they aren't changed, just reworded, it's not the same thing
>>5028
and the reason is people keep requesting changes, had you read the thread, you would know about that
and the reason is people keep requesting changes, had you read the thread, you would know about that
File:
1784495661901.png
(52.92 KB, 768x719, ClipboardImage.png)
>I AM ADDING FILE APPROV-ACK!
>>5036
>Plenty changed from what we originally had, not to mention the enforcement is stricter and there are more undisclosed rules
what changed is the description of rules, not the actually enforced rules themselves, the goal is to make the description a more accurate representation of reality, there used to be rules that were not stated anywhere, but it's no longer true
>Yeah how about a statement from the administration
SNCA
>Plenty changed from what we originally had, not to mention the enforcement is stricter and there are more undisclosed rules
what changed is the description of rules, not the actually enforced rules themselves, the goal is to make the description a more accurate representation of reality, there used to be rules that were not stated anywhere, but it's no longer true
>Yeah how about a statement from the administration
SNCA
>>5037
>what changed is the description of rules, not the actually enforced rules themselves, the goal is to make the description a more accurate representation of reality, there used to be rules that were not stated anywhere, but it's no longer true
Downright false in every regard.
The rules are stricter with less leeway, drastically so if you remember the early days of the site
The enforcement is also less forgiving and with a lot more false positives (I'd fucking know)
The rule about frogs is gone even though it is still fully enforced
>SNCA
SICA
>what changed is the description of rules, not the actually enforced rules themselves, the goal is to make the description a more accurate representation of reality, there used to be rules that were not stated anywhere, but it's no longer true
Downright false in every regard.
The rules are stricter with less leeway, drastically so if you remember the early days of the site
The enforcement is also less forgiving and with a lot more false positives (I'd fucking know)
The rule about frogs is gone even though it is still fully enforced
>SNCA
SICA
>>5038
>The rules are stricter with less leeway, drastically so if you remember the early days of the site
Not at all, people used to be banned just for saying they want to goon with the sisters, you have no idea what you are talking about.
>The enforcement is also less forgiving and with a lot more false positives (I'd fucking know)
I didn't notice an increase in the number of bans. False positives are not a matter of rules, just of jannies making mistakes, if you find yourself banned in a middle of a raid, just make an appeal.
>The rule about frogs is gone even though it is still fully enforced
True, it disappeared – in August 2024. Also, rule 3.
>The rules are stricter with less leeway, drastically so if you remember the early days of the site
Not at all, people used to be banned just for saying they want to goon with the sisters, you have no idea what you are talking about.
>The enforcement is also less forgiving and with a lot more false positives (I'd fucking know)
I didn't notice an increase in the number of bans. False positives are not a matter of rules, just of jannies making mistakes, if you find yourself banned in a middle of a raid, just make an appeal.
>The rule about frogs is gone even though it is still fully enforced
True, it disappeared – in August 2024. Also, rule 3.
>>5039
>Not at all, people used to be banned just for saying they want to goon with the sisters, you have no idea what you are talking about.
And the bans were more forgiving. If you remember the april first /nsfw/ board, those who actually posted porn were banned by zoot for like a day, that shit wouldn't fly now, literally every ban is permanent. Also just speaking from experience, the kind of shit that used to be posted then would get you perma banned now with no appeal. The moderation was a lot more lax, as moderation on image boards should be. Overbearing moderation isn't conducive to an entertaining environment.
>I didn't notice an increase in the number of bans. False positives are not a matter of rules, just of jannies making mistakes, if you find yourself banned in a middle of a raid, just make an appeal.
You're right that it isn't a matter or rules, it's a matter of enforcement and incompetence. I was banned for saying threatening to rape random women was zarty culture. Ban reason? Well I wasn't even given a reason, but the red text said "least obvious flase flag". This is the kind of thing that would never happen before: banning people for being edgy. And go figure the appeal took a day because whoever's so keen on banning people they don't like isn't as keen on preforming actual administrative duties.
>Not at all, people used to be banned just for saying they want to goon with the sisters, you have no idea what you are talking about.
And the bans were more forgiving. If you remember the april first /nsfw/ board, those who actually posted porn were banned by zoot for like a day, that shit wouldn't fly now, literally every ban is permanent. Also just speaking from experience, the kind of shit that used to be posted then would get you perma banned now with no appeal. The moderation was a lot more lax, as moderation on image boards should be. Overbearing moderation isn't conducive to an entertaining environment.
>I didn't notice an increase in the number of bans. False positives are not a matter of rules, just of jannies making mistakes, if you find yourself banned in a middle of a raid, just make an appeal.
You're right that it isn't a matter or rules, it's a matter of enforcement and incompetence. I was banned for saying threatening to rape random women was zarty culture. Ban reason? Well I wasn't even given a reason, but the red text said "least obvious flase flag". This is the kind of thing that would never happen before: banning people for being edgy. And go figure the appeal took a day because whoever's so keen on banning people they don't like isn't as keen on preforming actual administrative duties.
Post actions
[Return] [Thread list] [Index] [Catalog] [Top] | Replies: 272 | Views: 10 | Currently viewing: 1