File: 404.swf-(360 KB, 550x400, Other)
[_] Regarding swfchan Brang buck snocks 06/19/15(Fri)09:45:56 No.2817977
Here's the admins response:
>I've noticed, though I'm not sure how effective it would be for the admin of a filtered site to
ask for the filter to be removed. On the other hand if they get a bunch of requests from
different users of /f/ all asking for swfchan to be whitelisted again it would probably have a
higher chance that they listen. I'll at least try sending them a message.
>Here's the form if more people want to help (click "Submit Feedback" at the top):
http://www.4chan.org/feedback
>Nothing will probably happen if they only get my message about it.
tl;dr
JUST DO IT, /f/AG
and write a feedback
>> [_] Anonymous 06/19/15(Fri)09:48:58 No.2817983
>>2817977
I don't understand why it's being filtered in the first place. What happened?
>> [_] Anonymous 06/19/15(Fri)10:00:29 No.2817987
What? Why is it filtered?
>> [_] Anonymous 06/19/15(Fri)10:06:31 No.2817988
What's being filtered?
>> [_] Anonymous 06/19/15(Fri)10:08:18 No.2817990
sent ;)
>> [_] Anonymous 06/19/15(Fri)10:08:54 No.2817991
explain please
>> [_] Anonymous 06/19/15(Fri)10:09:18 No.2817992
>>2817988>>2817991
links to swfchan
>> [_] Brang buck snocks 06/19/15(Fri)10:14:37 No.2817994
Don't know why.
It just fell through the spam filter for its url structure and the amount of postings probably.
Currently all links to swfchan com, swfchan net or swfchan org are unable to post unless there's
no "." between domain and com.
Spamfilter prevents post. I don't think they did it on purpose. Just nobody cares about /f/ as
usual.
Probably the only way to whitelist it again is if every active IP on /f/ went there complaining.
And then it's still unknown if somebody gonna do something about it.
To give Mootle his due, sending him an email and explaining stuff was way easier back then.
>> [_] Squares are my friends 06/19/15(Fri)10:21:31 No.2817995
Done, but the latest publicly reviewed complaint is from 11/17/14 18:08.
Do they even look at the feedback anymore?
>> [_] Anonymous 06/19/15(Fri)10:32:25 No.2818000
>>2817994
>unless there's no "."
are you sure? I noticed this with other lniks too, that should be good (imgur?!) and just
removing the dot did NOT work, it choked on the actual domain name string.
Mangling the name, not the punctuation, allowed it past, but of course the URL will be wrong
then... pain in the fucking ass.
>>2817995
No, apparently not.
Why should they? Moot is kill and Gates is Bill, this is how it rolls now.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/19/15(Fri)11:25:05 No.2818026
>>2817994
they most certainly did do it on purpose. The whole reason companies are interested in big sites
like 4chan is in order to get all the goyim into a handful of easily controlled and monitored
websites. They dont want anons going to bad goy websites and dispersing, this is why 4chin blocks
most sites under the false pretense of "spam". It's like when a faggot admin bans you for
"trolling" when in reality you were just disagreeing with them or something similar. WAKE UP
SHEEPLE.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/19/15(Fri)11:46:58 No.2818036
>>2818026
calm down /pol/
>> [_] Anonymous 06/19/15(Fri)11:53:08 No.2818038
Amazing, 4chan has finally gotten someone half competent to write new spam filters.
Can't fool them with half-width/full-width or invisible/alternative unicode characters anymore.
>> [_] Anonymous 06/19/15(Fri)12:33:35 No.2818051
>>2818038
>> [_] Anonymous 06/19/15(Fri)12:34:35 No.2818052
>>2818051
huh, they actually fixed it
so is blankposting dead for good?
>> [_] Squares are my friends 06/19/15(Fri)12:44:59 No.2818055
>> [_] Anonymous 06/19/15(Fri)12:46:37 No.2818056
>> [_] Anonymous 06/19/15(Fri)12:47:30 No.2818057
>>2818052
Blankposting has nothing to do with spamfilter.
