>>3851
just to clarify the reason it specifically state "in any form" instead of no "lgbt topics" or "person" because in my eyes it appears easy to fudge the rules. keep in mind my examples are doghshit but it is what comes to mind. with "no lgbt people" you can argue a song is not a person or a tumblr cartoon like helavaboss is not a gay person, with "no lgbt topics", define topics, is a meme a topic? what if i want to celebrate Lili Elbe's art, the artist is trans, sure and you can ban that but actually not really because the artist paints landscapes and its not like anyone will google the artists name to crosscheck. you can't extrapolate anything from "in any form". let's say theres a problem, like an anon contacts the staff via email, or /meta/ or whatever, about how he wants to discuss the game catherine, but there is a trans character named erika, and he doesn't want to be banned for discussing the game. well as long as he doesn't discuss the character at all then where's the problem? if "in any form" is hard to understand there is nothing banworthy or wrong with actually asking the staff or community. i just see it as a means of reducing headaches of people bickering the specifics or weaseling there way in. no, means no. in any form, mean in any form it comes in.
>This is a more complete reflection of 22chan's historical positionany attempt to change or alter the anti-lgbt rule will remove the historical implication. the previous admin was worried of the "slippery slope" that if you make one change or excuse, then more will come untill 22chan becomes something that it never was. any changes or excuses will make newcomers think that 22chan doesn't "want lgbt that isn't annoying" or something of the sort instead of downright banning it. back in the day the rule was added partially because a group of people who enjoyed furfags, trannies, ect, was makimg threads of that type on 22chan and also because it was a suggestion of the users,
https://web.archive.org/web/20190605003222/https://22chan.org/sg/2.html thread 96 being one example of a user based suggestion.
i'm slightly paraphrasing here but the previous admin went as far as to state that he didn't want "no gay ass niggas" posting on his site, and that this means "memes, people, the movement" and if anyone had a problem they could "go back to 4chan"
no gay funposting, no shitposting, no ironically gayposting. not the people, none of it. i can understand if a certain rule can be clarified and re explained in a way to be more clear, without losing the original intention, but some of them cannot be altered in my opinion.
>>3849 if there are posts in this thread that actually breaks the rules of 22chan, or any board specified rules, you should report it using the email or something.
>>>/meta/42/
there is a thread on /meta/ for moderation requests.
if it doesn't break the rules, you can make a thread on /meta/ about something you dislike. making a post asking for something to be deleted that cannot be moderated as if the 22chan staff are personal watchdogs is retarded.