Hello /leftypol/ users. This is a thread to post ordinances, i.e. ad hoc rules voted on by the modocracy, which are not covered explicitly by the rules in rules.html, though most are arguably applications or clarifications of actions prohibited by the existing rules. Any posts violating these ordinances will be removed, and possibly banned at the mods discretion. This post will be periodically updated to reflect new ordinances, or to remove old ones.
- H*z is banned. Any mention of, depiction of, video, audio, or image (including memes) of, or related to, the individual known as Adam Tahir (more commonly known as Haz Al-Din), including associated projects such as the media collective "Infrared", or the US-based "American Communist Party" founded in 2024, etc. are BANNED.
- No non O.C. Wojaks, Pepes, or Groypers. Any Wojaks, pepes, groypers, etc. which are not /leftypol/ original content are considered spam.
- The Wojakifcation/wojak script is banned. This is a bit of javascript, commonly used on bunkerchan, which takes a post one is replying to and posts a greentext version of it in a pre-made wojak template, which is used as a reaction image.
- 'Real Proletarian' rhetoric which implies a large percentage of wage workers are not proletarians is banned - per modocracy vote passed on 2024-12-25
- For original posts outside of /siberia/, "coomer bait" images which are sexual, sexualizing, or appeal to the prurient interest in any way are BANNED and will be spoilered or removed. - per modocracy vote passed on 2025-01-02
- Evading original post word minimum outside /siberia/ is BANNED. - per modocracy vote passed on 2025-01-02
- Incel posts are banned site wide (i.e. incel talking points and making 9999 threads complaining about women, saying all women are bourgeoise/sluts/etc.) - per modocracy vote passed on 2025-01-02
- "Feral" furry porn (i.e. drawn or cartoon pornography depicting a character that is a four-legged animal, or to a significant degree non-anthropomorphic) is BANNED, and will be spoilered or removed at the moderator's discretion - per modocracy vote passed on 2025-01-11
- Climate change denial, especially to the extent of excessive doomerism and BP shill tier takes, is banned - per modocracy vote passed on 2025-01-11
>>38493I assume it's because it's mostly petty internet drama that's been beaten into the ground. It's kind of a shame, because I do think there's a lot to be said about people
like Haz and movements
like the ACP beyond said petty internet drama, and he just so happens to make for a good example.
>>37647 (OP)
>'Real Proletarian' rhetoric which implies a large percentage of wage workers are not proletarians is banned - per modocracy vote passed on 2024-12-25This is silly. Hopefully you only ban "rhetoric" like magacom retards saying women are bourgeois or that living in a developed country automatically makes you bourgeois and living in a poor country automatically makes you proletarian, and not actual analysis, like Engels explicitly saying home-owners are neither proletarian nor part of the haute bourgeoisie.
>>37647Before banning people for making soyjaks - CHECK THE FUCKING CONTEXT AND THE IMAGE.
IF THE SOYJAK IS LEFTYPOL ORIGINAL CONTENT, THEN YOU SHOULDIN'T FUCKING BAN IT. BECAUSE THAT'S THE ENTIRE POINT OF THE QUALITY CONTROL PROPOSAL - TO FOSTER ORIGINAL CONTENT.
>>38552I PROPOSED IT HERE FIRST
>>37636 IN THE FIRST PLACE FOR THAT VERY REASON.
>>38561Fine, I uploaded three of the edits on lefty.pictures
even though they're contextual.
>>38530>>38533Every person selling their labor power in the developed world: a politically emancipated proletarian! Is it a bit too hard of a fact to cope with that the responsible employee - good democratic citizen - is middle class, and a worthless audience? That the proletariat, the propertyless reserveless wage worker, is a minority?
You can go on and treat well-earning office employees that behave as respectable democratic citizens as politically spoiled proletarians, whatever, but enshrining this in a rule to ban anyone not doing so is ridiculous. I don't think that has much to do with the reality of class, and is not in line with how Marx nor Engels used the term either.
>>37647Are you going to post this thread on the main board too or just hiding it away on this subforum.
1. Immensely silly to ban discussion of a person and/or party. Just inane
2. Why? Was there ever really a problem with this and wasn't the whole chudjak thing a good example of leftypol culture reversing memes? Do we think the userbase will suddenly become reactionary if they see a picture of a wojack? Reasoning here would be nice.
3. Good.
4. Immensely silly rule. Will ensure that Marxist/Anti imperialism discussions are hobbled. Not a surprise as all western leftist debate addicts end up making ideological proscriptions but disappointing from leftypol.
5. Fine
6. Don't know what this means but ok
7. Sounds good on paper but the sort of vague rule that will lead to mods interpretation ruling the day
>>39060The beatrix potter range? Again this seems excessively broad.
Surely we could copy a anti-zoo rule from a furry site that has this figured out rather than trying to reinvent the wheel.
>>39065Most erotic fanart of zootopia is either on-model or only exaggerates proportions.
You'd be being obtuse to put judy hopps or my little pony stuff in "non-anthropomorpic" just for being feral. Sapience matters a lot here.
>>39067The etymology is flawed but yeah furries call designs that don't significantly change the physiology of the animal being anthropomorphized "feral." A lot of furry etymology is confusing, like calling scalies or avians furries, because the "fur" in furry isn't referring to literal fur anymore, the term was cemented before anyone thought too hard about that.
The rule has deeply flawed wording because it either makes no exception regarding sophonts, or does not make clear that such an exception is present, like basically any other site with nsfw furry art would.
Hello, this is a request to unanchor the 2nd magacom thread with special permissions from a mod
Im trying to turn it into a place for serious discussion instead of shitposting and trolling
https://leftypol.org/leftypol/res/2112790.html>>37647>>39138i did some cursory internet searching and could not find any source for feral pornography being illegal or legally questionably, with the exception of jurisdictions that restrict or prohibit pornography in general.
>>39139is there any source for this?
and have any members of the sites administration given a rationale for these virtue signaling ordinances?
i can understand keeping content that may be illegal in some places off the site in order to prevent it from being blocked or taken down, and this is not a porn site, however it is a site which allows porn, so what is the purpose of passing these incredibly niche and specific restrictions if not simply for the sake of signaling the arbiters own virtue?
Unique IPs: 31