User:Anonymous327: Difference between revisions
Anonymous327 (talk | contribs) Created page with " I changed my mind regarding 7chan's rating, it is of my belief that the antimatter rating should only be used for websites that: 1) have/had no redeeming qualities, and 2) are pedophillic or otherwise pose a threat to completely innocent people's safety. 7chan's /i/ board and its attempt at spawning an original imageboard culture could be considered redeeming qualities, and, on top of that, the SFW boards are generally iron and not desecrated by pedophiles. If we compar..." |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I changed my mind regarding 7chan's rating, it is of my belief that the antimatter rating should only be used for websites that: 1) have/had no redeeming qualities, and 2) are pedophillic or otherwise pose a threat to completely innocent people's safety. 7chan's /i/ board and its attempt at spawning an original imageboard culture could be considered redeeming qualities, and, on top of that, the SFW boards are generally iron and not desecrated by pedophiles. If we compare 7chan to, say, 12chan, a website that was in its essence pedophillic, we would inevitably see a drop in "quality" (whatever is left thereof), which would be confusing since they both share the same rating. Therefore, I've increased 7chan's rating to vantablack. Brimstone would work too, since I don't see much of a difference between the two (vantablack is more easy on the eyes for me). Sorry for the delayed (and misplaced) response, I'm getting a CAPTCHA notification without there being an actual CAPTCHA to solve. | I changed my mind regarding 7chan's rating, it is of my belief that the antimatter rating should only be used for websites that: 1) have/had no redeeming qualities, and 2) are pedophillic or otherwise pose a threat to completely innocent people's safety. 7chan's /i/ board and its attempt at spawning an original imageboard culture could be considered redeeming qualities, and, on top of that, the SFW boards are generally iron and not desecrated by pedophiles. If we compare 7chan to, say, 12chan, a website that was in its essence pedophillic, we would inevitably see a drop in "quality" (whatever is left thereof), which would be confusing since they both share the same rating. Therefore, I've increased 7chan's rating to vantablack. Brimstone would work too, since I don't see much of a difference between the two (vantablack is more easy on the eyes for me). Sorry for the delayed (and misplaced) response, I'm getting a CAPTCHA notification without there being an actual CAPTCHA to solve. | ||
someone give this man an autoapprove | |||
Latest revision as of 17:51, 16 February 2026
I changed my mind regarding 7chan's rating, it is of my belief that the antimatter rating should only be used for websites that: 1) have/had no redeeming qualities, and 2) are pedophillic or otherwise pose a threat to completely innocent people's safety. 7chan's /i/ board and its attempt at spawning an original imageboard culture could be considered redeeming qualities, and, on top of that, the SFW boards are generally iron and not desecrated by pedophiles. If we compare 7chan to, say, 12chan, a website that was in its essence pedophillic, we would inevitably see a drop in "quality" (whatever is left thereof), which would be confusing since they both share the same rating. Therefore, I've increased 7chan's rating to vantablack. Brimstone would work too, since I don't see much of a difference between the two (vantablack is more easy on the eyes for me). Sorry for the delayed (and misplaced) response, I'm getting a CAPTCHA notification without there being an actual CAPTCHA to solve.
someone give this man an autoapprove
