2019-01-14: Both newly scraped images and full images are available again after making a deal with Cloudflare to disable caching. This gives us time to research alternative methods of serving full images. Donations would still help in case of image storage failure and we still need a new scraper.
The server is stable, but the scraper is at its final limits due to crippling resource use and cloudflare limits, so /gif/ and /wsg/ images are paused. Let's solve this: help build a new scraper. More details here.
Ghostposting is under extreme vetting by new moderators to mitigate spam. Crackspamming or responding to any is a bannable offense.
There has been a lot of arguing over whether or not the Dreamcast should be considered retro or not, and I have realized that both sides of the argument have very valid points. The Dreamcast fans are right in saying the gens are not a good way to say if something is retro or not, because retro means old and gens tend to overlap. Everyone else is right in saying that it's a slippery slop, if we make the Dreamcast retro it shows that the mods are willing to change the rules as far as what is retro and up next is the PS2 which was discontinued in 2013.
It has made me realize that the way /vr/ defines retro is wrong. Not only should it be about age and not gen, but it should also define when something becomes retro.
I say retro should not be defined by gen or when a console came out, but how old a specific game is. I purpose that all games that are 15 years old or older should be retro. Even though this wont make Dreamcast retro immediately, but it will set it up to become retro in the very near future (thus making it a good compromise). It will also stop any arguing about making other consoles retro after the Dreamcast becomes retro. I feel 15 is a good amount of time. 10 isn't old enough my 14 year old nephew has nostalgic memories of playing games that are 10 years old, and 20 is too old we want to try and keep most of what is already considered retro on /vr/ retro.
Sometimes, during a debate, some /pol/lacks (not just /pol/lacks, but they seem to be most fond of it) will take it upon themselves to spam links, pictures, infographics and quotes all over the place. How do you tackle this? I'm not saying there's anything wrong with it, as if you could complain about "too much evidence", but the problem is there's no way to read every single one, fact check it and look for criticisms, and then address it before the thread is pruned, there's simply too much. The even bigger problem is that the person you were debating will now just link to the post that's relevant to what he's saying and claim to have won, knowing full well there's no way you can address every single one without accepting them at face value.
How do you deal with people who do this? Do you just let it be?
As you know, there have been a lot of people using tripcodes just to shitpost. You should make it that after a trip has been banned a few times, the trip becomes unusable therefore increasing the quality of the posts of each board. Anon won't be complaining about shitposting tripfags and contributing tripfags get attention for their quality posts, it's a win-win situation really.