Why does the default style use these ugly boxes? They don't look like the normal Dark-style boxes, which blend in nicely with everything else.

>>5972
I'm not sure why that would have changed and honestly I don't remember what they looked like before. Where they a different color? I think all the themes use the same style for the boxs.
Could have something to do with the browser you're using if you're referring the check boxes.

>>5979
Yeah I meant the check boxes and you were right, I tried to see what they look like in 3 different browsers and they weren't the same even after manually chosing Dark.
Is there no way to force the black ones regardless of the browser? The white/grayish ones are really ugly. Not like it matters to me personally because my main browser displays the black ones but yeah.

>>5981
I honestly have no clue how to change what those boxes look like.

>>5961
There aren't many topics that would really benefit from us allowing the use of reaction images. 98% of the time it's just smug_anime_girl.jpg used to make fun of somebody, usually without addressing their opinion at all, just 'here, let me laugh at you'. The other 2% is expressing some emotions like anger or sadness; personally I have a really low opinion of people who can't actually express it in words instead of being lazy and posting some angry looking face and '>mfw'.

>I think it largely depends on how obnoxious they are and weather or not they actually assist in conveying the poster's intended message, or if it's just another >mfw post with some random weird/silly face attached.
Basically this.

> I personally think 4chan-tier reaction images (ie: Pepe

You say this, but meanwhile we have two banners with that fucking frog on them.

>>5965
I don't think anyone has ever complained about them before.

>>5966
thats not a meaningful statistic on a site with literally no good posters

I don't see why they would be a problem?

>>5889
It would go on /ot/, right?

Or /cr/ maybe.

They are far from random, read the news.

Most of the images have now been recovered as I still had most of em. If one or more of the missing images was something you posted and would like to have restored then this would be a good place to post the original image if you still have it.

>>5878

>>5873
Chchchchanges!

>>5871

b-blip?

no thanks, idlechanners are lame
also sage

This might not be a bad idea, While not really advertising to normals, we could get random wanderers that might end up liking the site.

>>5310

>what are they being accused of other than simply not belonging here?
>>5275
>Outsiders keep trying to push their opinions here and stir up shit everywhere

>Moreover, in some cases, such as when they're trying to discuss 3D things, do they belong here in the first place?

50-50. If they'll stop blatantly breaking rules I don't care either way. I don't believe in this whole 'chosen people only' ideology.

>The most obvious case of someone that came here and actually bothered to post in a discussion like that would be someone that actually DOES enjoy the topic, but might not meet TC's standards of 'posting quality', per se.

I really wanted to hear it from your mouth. This is pretty great.
So basically you do agree it's just somebody who is a random /tc/er who just happens to have a different opinion on topic at hand, right? If you do then surely you must understand what I'm talking about by now. Expressing some opinions (which are in no way rulebreaking or even gray zone) automatically gets you marked as dangerous element because it's unfathomable that somebody who eats a choco cornet stating with the wider side could possbily be from /tc/.

Message too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>5315
>On IRC they actually made fun of people who report things like when someone brings up gender or relationships.
That's extremely discouraging. Did TC get female moderators again or something?

>>5316
>I don't believe in this whole 'chosen people only' ideology.
I don't believe that TC regulars are a "chosen people", per se, but I don't really think those that do want to discuss 3D have any place here.

>So basically you do agree it's just somebody who is a random /tc/er who just happens to have a different opinion on topic at hand, right?
Yes. In that thread as well as others, as I said, the term is flung around as an insult to imply that the other party is 'not fit to be here', along lines with the 'secret club' elitism I mentioned earlier. I think labeling them a dangerous element is a bit much. Personally, I always took those outsider attacks as a completely derogatory and ridiculing insult rather than one labeling a threat.

>/tc/ is almost dead and our favorite pasttime is attacking new users. That's just great.
I can't speak for everyone, but so as long as they don't break the rules I have no issues with newcomers.

>Blame every single person who ever shouted 'nazi moderation!'. Mods are supposed to be 'nazi' (what a retarded description it is, though). They are here to enforce the rules.

Message too long. Click here to view the full text.

>>5316
>Blame every single person who ever shouted 'nazi moderation!'. Mods are supposed to be 'nazi' (what a retarded description it is, though). They are here to enforce the rules.
I agree. I told Tohno he should go more strictly by the rules but he said that's Nazi behaviour.

Enforcing the rules is not nazi behaviour, nazi behaviour is when someone deletes threads about topics they don't like. Like when someone on /an/ posts about an anime they dislike or someone on /mai/ has a waifu they dislike and they delete the post. That mod abuse is nazi behaviour, but actually moderating and deleting things that violate the rules is not nazi behaviour.

>>5318
>That's extremely discouraging. Did TC get female moderators again or something?
No, don't worry. And don't be discouraged.

>>5318

>term is flung around as an insult to imply that the other party is 'not fit to be here', along lines with the 'secret club' elitism I mentioned earlier. I think labeling them a dangerous element is a bit much.

The point is the 'sikkrit club' elitist mentality is what causes people to stone people who don't share their one correct sikkrit club worldview. I think 'you don't belong here' is mean literally. You can take it at face value. 'Since you prefer red over blue we don't want you here'. I'm sure some people legitimately believe letting people who don't share their views hang around here will cause some massive userbase shift.

>>5319

>I told Tohno he should go more strictly by the rules but he said that's Nazi behaviour.

Can you even blame him after every mod quit because they just couldn't take it anymore? I don't follow /tc/'s staff closely enough to name all of them but Natsume definitely cracked under pressure and I think the same holds true for hamish.

>Enforcing the rules is not nazi behaviour, nazi behaviour is when someone deletes threads about topics they don't like.

That's what the funposters always said on /fb/, though. That the mods delete shit they don't like.

Message too long. Click here to view the full text.

If people don't like talking about it then they'll stop talking about it.

>>5456

I don't see how this argument is supposed to work, really. If people started to talk about 3DPD should we just let them do as they please because apparently that's what they want?

I don't think this belongs here period, if you want to discuss 4chan you should take it elsewhere.

>>5457
That's a fair point, but one of those threads on /ot/ is about 4chan's "culture" and growing out of it, it just unfortunately turned into discussion about the site itself. The other is much more directly related to 4chan and it's admin leaving and should probably be locked I think.

>>689
Fair enough, I just thought I should put something up, but didn't know what.

It seems like sage posts don't show up on the front page now. Is it just not technically possible to do the same for hidden threads?

>>699
It's possible but I don't know much about javascript. I'll have a look

Man, it's hard to believe it's been 5 years since Fortune Arterial aired.

>>4675
This is tohno-chan. We can't have nice things.

>>4679
Touché.

I see it's snowing again.
It's always very nice.
Thanks.

Thanks for the snow again.

>>5808
It still says Could not create webm thumbnail.

>>5809
That's probably related to Shinden's brilliant idea of giving the board a japanese name.
It will take a while until I can give it a look though.

>>5810
Rename it to nihongo so I can post my webm

>>5811
Kusaba has no way of doing that and creating a tool that does it will probably take as much time as fixing the problem itself. 仕方が無い