Meta @Chudittical is a namefag offsiter xitter cord user and a furry GOONER 📽️📽️📽️📽️📽️

[Soygoy]

Did you not read my thread on xim

dude these niggas don't fucking read man
GEG

 

[Brainstorm]

Did you not read my thread on xim

xhe didn’t because volk was his boyfriend

 

[SoytanEnthusiast]

jartycucks

There are no jarty users on this site.

meximutts

Why is being Mexican so bad exactly?

 

[SoytanEnthusiast]

Did you not read my thread on xim

And how is that damning evidence?

 

[Soygoy]

"Oops! We ran into some problems." should be a catchphrase

 

[Fagon]

We still have jartycucks and irl meximutts though

>oh, you want to ban furry porn addicts? Well what about the mexicans on the site?
???

 

[Xiuhcoyotl]

We still have jartycucks and irl meximutts though

I know this scalienigger isn't talking

 

[Brainstorm]

There are no jarty users on this site.

Why is being Mexican so bad exactly?

>t. Soytan profile pic

 

[Xiuhcoyotl]

And how is that damning evidence?

Did you not see where he likes literal cartoon show about children

 

[SoytanEnthusiast]

>t. Soytan profile pic

 

[Neutralplier]

right direction. Users like Chud just make the site look bad and I think banning users like Chud and volker is the right decision as it just generates good PR for the site by banning and making fun of degenerates.

i think the disagreeable part is how flexible banning users who we can say are "degenerates" can be
but i also think that in a like minded space like that of this sites userbase it can work in favor of the site
aswell

the question becomes is there a way we can ban users who are "degenerates" in a way that is rigid enough to specify what qualifies as it, in an attempt to curb their lowering of the quality of the site.
if there isnt one however then should this "degeneracy" clause be acted upon quickly or acted on only if punishment by set rules is due.

 

[Brainstorm]

>oh, you want to ban furry porn addicts? Well what about the mexicans on the site?
???

my blanket term for /pol/ larpers

 

[Brainstorm]

What’s wrong with it little nigga?

I know this scalienigger isn't talking

 

[Neutralplier]

i think the disagreeable part is how flexible banning users who we can say are "degenerates" can be
but i also think that in a like minded space like that of this sites userbase it can work in favor of the site
aswell

the question becomes is there a way we can ban users who are "degenerates" in a way that is rigid enough to specify what qualifies as it, in an attempt to curb their lowering of the quality of the site.
if there isnt one however then should this "degeneracy" clause be acted upon quickly or acted on only if punishment by set rules is due.

so do you think we should ban "degenerates" when its agreed upon that they are degenerates or should we expect them to only be banned if they break any rules?

 

[Fagon]

my blanket term for /pol/ larpers

that's also retarded

 

[Brainstorm]

that's also retarded

Wdym retarded, the only /pol/ users are natsoc meximutts and self hating europeans

 

[SoytanEnthusiast]

>you want the furry porn gooners to get banned? What about the a10 aryans on the site?

 

[Fagon]

Wdym retarded, the only /pol/ users are natsoc meximutts and self hating europeans

saying they need to be b& too if you ban weird furry gooners is retarded.

 

[Xiuhcoyotl]

What’s wrong with it little nigga?

Please take a deep reflection of yourself before posting

 

[Brainstorm]

It’s balanced though

saying they need to be b& too if you ban weird furry gooners is retarded.