/feedbackv/ - Feedback /v/

>>977
Because he's afraid to give /vvv/ any publicity. Think about it: a board that's about vidya but doesn't have nazi moderation? If people found out about it, oy vey oy gevalt, he'd have to shut it down the hard way.

>>1040
Made by former /v/ mods.

>>977
Because it's not only a redundant board (fucking 4th or 5th video games board splitoff I've seen) It's moderation is shit and spams the board everywhere. /vidyagaems/ not only serves the same purpose but it's BETTER.

The moderation is seriously some of the worst hotpockets I've ever seen too.

>>1098
>/vidyagaems/
>better
Not only has there been no post there in a month, it's modded by former /v/ mods. There is no moderation problem on /vvv/, though.
>no deleted threads or banned users
>that means there's hotpockets
You don't even know what that means, do you?

All we really need is /v/ and /svidya/, there's no point to having other boards (unless they cater to specific vidya genres, those are okay too)

>>1103
>all we need is hotpockets and doubleplus hotpockets jr.
Yeah, nah.

>>1107
>le hotpocket bogeyman
I'm surprised you didn't call them cucks, too.

becase goons: >>1093

>>1111
That doesn't make sense. First, the linked thread only shows one shitposter shitposting and that's it. No connection to any group, and no reference to competitor boards or anything like that. In fact, according to the claim, competing boards would be a disadvantage to the shitposter. Conversely, this constant spamming of generic "go to /vvv/" plays straight into his goal (as stated: making every board hate each other), so there's no point to owning that board.

Moreover, the problem with the main boards isn't even mainly post quality, it's moderation. In /pol/, /a/ and /v/ (don't know about others), there are the exact same problems: on-topic threads get bumplocked or deleted, off-topic posts are kept alive without fail. Bans always result in the offending posts getting deleted, sometimes every post from a user will be deleted as well no matter how many were relevant v.s. irrelevant.

In /v/'s case, there are an additional 2 major problems: the mods (especially mark) randomly blogposting with their capcode on in irrelevant threads, and editing posts in part or in full when they don't like them, no matter how relevant they are. For example, a thread about cliches in multiplayer games was edited into a waifu thread by blue_ (as I recall), and subsequently deleted for being offtopic. You can see by the replies that the original topic had nothing to do with waifus and the thread had over 200 replies at deletion time if I'm not mistaken. Also the recent black autism.

Suggesting /v/ isn't SJW-controlled as opposed to /vvv/ is also ludicrous since /vvv/ is all about having as lightweight a moderation as possible while /v/ filters/ed every word that could TRIGGER anyone.

>>1113
>the linked thread only shows one shitposter shitposting
By linked thread do you mean >>>/feedbackv/1093, or do you mean the thread linked in THAT thread, >>>/polpol/6579. Because the latter is not just one shitposter shitposting and there is quite a bit of evidence.

Not to mention there are threads on /vvv/ explicitly welcoming a partnership with /liberty/ and /am/, the other two boards mentioned.

>>1117
The polpol thread. If there's any evidence at all beside the one shitposter, I must have missed it. /vvv/, /liberty/ and /am/ have planned to crosspost between these boards to increase their traffic, that's why there's the welcoming thread.

>>1122
Considering none of these are contingent with the spammer's behavior, that 3 out of these 5 threads aren't related to outside actions, and that of the last 2, 1 of them has unfavorable opinions in the thread, it's clear that if you had a point, it's nowhere to be seen here. You're just like the SJW going "hurrr gamergate is about harassing womyn, look at this post I made where it says I want to rape myself!" at this point.

>>1126
>it's clear that if you had a point, it's nowhere to be seen here.
There's a thread explicitly laying out a plan to replace /v/, including a requirement to shill the board at least once a day.

For maximum irony, people from /vvv/ are trying to claim the shilling is a falseflagging campaign by Mark himself over here >>1082

>>1141
>thread says to do X
>someone does Y
>omg X == Y no falseflag here also if I post 20 images, I'm sure at least one of them will stick!!11
Fuck off anytime (or make a point).

>>1156
>thread saying to do X
>people are doing X
>we swear we are not doing X it's people trying to false flag us
Stop playing stupid anytime

>>1158
You're acting precisely like the SJW.
>State goal of GG is to put a stop to vidya journo corruption, et al.
>Use emails, research and information dissemination to broadcast the message
>They're harassing womyn! Goobergabber's stated goal is harrassing womyn! Muh megaphone-chan!

Or, in the way you'd put it,
>thread saying to do X
>people are doing X
>we swear we are not doing X it's people trying to false flag us

GG confirmed for movement about harassing womyn!

>>1159
Or, alternatively, as I actually put it
>thread on /vvv/ saying to shill /vvv/
>people are shilling /vvv/
>claim that you are not shilling /vvv/ and it's just a conspiracy to make /vvv/ look bad

>>1122
>>1160
>people always shill their boards on other more popular boards (like /svidya/ did)
>/vvv/ asks people to not be obnoxious when doing it
>crossposts with other smaller boards to mutually increase their rankings
It really looks like nothing at all.

>>1160
That is also what the SJW say when people point out that GG isn't what they pretend it is. Please take a closer look at your claims and what you're posting.

>>1162
Your GG example goes
>GG says to do X
>GG does X
>everyone claims GG does Y and not X
when I am saying
>/vvv/ says to do X
>/vvv/ does X
>/vvv/ claims they are not doing X and someone else is doing it
You are changing the last step. This isn't complicated.

you faggots really take this shit seriously, huh?

>>1163
I'm sure if you repeat enough time, the fabric of reality will tear and your dream will become truth.

>>1172
Your example would only hold true if the /vvv/ thread laying out a plan to replace /v/, including a requirement for board members to, quote, "Try to make at least one shill post a day", was a false flag to begin with.

I don't know why I'm still trying to have this conversation because you are a moron.

>>1177
Your point would only be true if the spammer instead made OC, spread OC, wasn't obnoxious, waited for the opportunity to chime in, and worked to spread the ideology of the board. Oh look, the spammer actually doesn't follow any of the vvv points!
I also love how you completely dropped the other 4 threads you posted about and yet still insist that it's definitely a concerted effort by vvv to shill their board. No falseflag happening here, no siree.

I don't know why I'm still trying to have this conversation because you are SJW.

>>1178
I know it's hard to tell, because my IP keeps changing, but I didn't make the original post with the five threads, don't know what happened to him.

>because you are SJW
Well now you're just desperate, I haven't said anything remotely political

>>1179
It's not the politics, it's the insistence that things are what you say they are, not what facts show that they are.

>>1178
Also
>And yet still insist that it's definitely a concerted effort by vvv to shill their board
>by vvv to shill their board
>their
Are you trying to pretend you aren't /vvv/? Your ID hasn't changed, you are shilling it. You're being pretty obnoxious, too, and aren't creating OC, and didn't wait for the opportunity to chime in.

>>1181
I haven't shilled it. Again, just like the SJW, you just invent situations that never happened, even when the proof of events is right there for everyone to see. Bye.

>>1182
>I haven't shilled it
>except for contributing half the posts in the thread defending it
You'll respond to this, too.