/fit/ - Fitness, Health, and Feels

>>139016

test

>>139704

lol if I was insecure I would delete+ban your whining. That's very possibly someone testing out a proxy or some special setup as they prepare the next wave of spam---maybe not even targeting this board. However, this board is a target of regular spam as strange as it sounds.

What do you want me to do anyways, pin your post on my fridge so nobody can "hide" it? Keep posting it, dude. Nobody gives a shit. Make an entire thread for it if you want. All I'm going to do in that situation is check your post history to make sure you're not spamming and then anchor it if you aren't because we still only need one meta thread 95% of the time. And then if multiple IPs take that as their cue to make whining meta threads all at the same time, I may consider that spam if it reaches a certain threshold.

see this thread: >>139697

I don't care. He's not a spammer, but he made yet another meta thread so it gets anchored. If he posted it in this thread, it would stay on page one. here's another secret: you can get your /fit/ alternative board officially listed in the community links or even in the Board announcement bar if you just ask me (and the list doesn't get too long) instead of acting like you have to instigate some sort of bitter e-rebellion, but let's be honest here, nearly everyone in this thread is too dumb to ask for specific things.

>>139714

>>everyone is dumb but me

I didn't quite say that, but it's true that I consider a lot of people dumb, which is fine with me, because I don't obsess over it long. I've seen how smart people act. They're a very different beast from the average person.

>>why does everyone hate me

I'm not stuck on this question. Is there a reason you think I am? I'm quite comfortable having you and everyone else hate me. (Although, that's not the plan. It's just that whatever happens happens.)

What is this shit?

>>140022

I'm assuming it's spam. There are no other posts by the IP hash and the name field was filled out—presumably because it was posted by someone who never used an imageboard before. I've seen this before, except last time they assumed an email address was required. It links to a youtube video with less than 1000 views and Russian language title. These are signs of drive by spamming by a human operated ad agency in a third world country—not to mention the wording of the subject line for the thread. Just in case, the thread is going to be locked for now, and if nobody objects, delete+ban will occur later today.

>>140490

It should be obvious, but this isn't the dark web. I do not know or care if the file contained a hidden message, but I have no desire to begin checking every file that is posted on this board for secrets even if it's a joke or it just so happens to be the case that critical information is usually automatically stripped by the board's software. If it can't be viewed in a casual, straightforward manner in a web browser, it has no business being on /fit/. The poster who indicated his file should be opened in 7zip was banned for 1 hour this time, because I find it unlikely there were bad intentions. However, if any similar post is made by him again or any indication is made that this is a growing trend, it will be nothing but permanent bans and deletions from here on out.

I don't really want to censor much discussion, but if it can't be said out in the open, maybe you should keep it to yourself.

The accepted way to "hide" things on this website is to use spoilers.

>>140516

>What the fuck happened to the info images thread and why can I not go through it despite it remaining up?

This is a well known bug. The 8chan software stack occasionally glitches and 404s active threads for those who are not logged in as a moderator.

>Did the new Board Owner fuck everything up with their 'improvements' already?

No, I had no intentional involvement in temporarily 404ing that thread. As far as I know, nothing in particular is required for the thread to become glitched like that, but because it's a bug anything is possible and I (or even you) may have triggered it by so much as refreshing the catalog.

If you had taken a moment to read the 404 page, you would have seen this:

>If your board has threads that 404, read this:

>1. Sign in as a Board Volunteer or a Board Owner. If you are just a user, there is a public mod.php account with the following credentials:

>Username: Anyone

>Password: 0

When you login with the Anyone username, you will be able to view any thread that becomes glitched like that. However, this was a simple matter for me to fix, as all I had to do was anchor and unanchor the thread and it became viewable by regular users again. If something of this sort happens again in the future, I encourage you to post about it in this thread where I will take notice sooner. I may not immediately notice a thread is 404ing, as they simply do not 404 from a glitch for users who are logged in.

If the thread had really been deleted or gone truly missing, there is a link to an archived version of it on this page:

https://8ch.net/fit/threads.html

but unless someone goes to the trouble of archiving the links to all the full size images only thumbnails will be available for parts of the thread.

I say we make a new /fit/ to escape our BO's evil clutches.

>>140859

is that a picture jesus levitating a barbell and doing pullups on it?

>>141127

I don't normally delete things outright unless they are spam. I've been using anchors so that discussion can continue and my decision can be reversed in theory.

I'm guilty of not acting quickly on the matter, but I was also curious about how /fit/ would respond to the bait and didn't consider it an emergency. In the meantime, not one report was received nor any complaints in this thread. I understand the lack of reports or complaints isn't explicit approval, but it is funny watching so many chomp down and even bump the thread. I've been eyeing that thread and considering doing something, but first and foremost I've been trying to view it from all angles to make a good judgment. Clearly that person is misguided (or trolling). Currently, I don't consider it my job to save the board from all attempts to bait, nor do I consider it my job to prevent misguided people from making threads and posting even if they seek help with profoundly misguided tasks. If I did, I would be anchoring much more than threads by transgender people.

That thread is still treading a fine line though. If it were asking for advice on how to "transition" sexually, I think that's unrelated to /fit/ enough to be straightforwardly considered off-topic and deserving of an anchor at minimum. The OP says

>Trying to lose weight/bulk up/man up

with the added attention whoring addition that she's a "transboy". The post seems to be asking for advice on how to gain muscle and lose fat while stating that a "transition" is happening through administration of testosterone and surgery. It is true that the thread has no value when stripped of meaningless additions. Trying to lose weight and bulk up is more or less the goal of the whole board, and nothing of significance has changed on how to approach that problem by stating that the poster herself is a "transboy".

The low signal-to-noise ratio of the post would appear to stem from an egocentric approach to posting. That is to say "The world is about me, myself, and I. What special fitness program is appropriate for my special little self who cannot possibly fathom that I am not extra special and that the same exercise and dieting techniques that work for everyone else do in fact apply to me? What special fitness program says me, me, me without forcing me to investigate what others are doing? Oh yeah, did I mention all these special things that I am and what I'm going through? This is also my blog---not just a desperate plea for attention. Did I mention that I am extremely impatient and don't have the time to see what other people are up to and how they solve the exact same problems I have?" Unfortunately, that is not enough to warrant my involvement, as this is also the approach to life for most people (including myself). I am pessimistic about the result of policing the board to only allow threads by people who don't have their heads up their respective ego's ass; very few people would be left.

I did some more thinking, and a test I could use came to me:

It should be the case that

An individual thread of a particular category is allowable. → A general of that category is allowable.

However, intuitively it should then also be the case that

A general thread of a particular category is allowable. ↛ An individual thread of that category is allowable.

So the test is thus:

Would I want to allow a general version of the thread in question?

I already considered that the consequence of permitting the thread might mean more and more transgender posts in the future, so I was not looking forward to the situation where I had to quell the growth of a rising trend to sustain normality. Anything can be considered spam if it gets out of hand with obnoxious repetition of many OPs with the same pattern so as to take on the appearance of a raid. Ultimately, I don't think we need to make space for a "Transgender /fit/ General", and in the future such posts should go to the QTDDTOT thread. So in other words, I now have decided to anchor the thread. Of course, this also raises the question of "What should be allowable as a general?" I think one perspective on generals is that they are a compromise between being strictly on the topic of health and fitness and diverging into other areas that /fit/izens often want to talk about. Ideally, there would be so many interesting health and fitness posts and activity that very little compromise would be needed to keep a minimum amount of people engaged with a minimum amount of activity. Before I have said even a "/fit/ Video Games General" would be allowable, so I think the pattern I want to follow is usually going to be allowing the types of interests that many people on this website or the main demographic of /fit/ would tend to be interested in. I think size of the group interested in transgender topics is marginal enough to not warrant any such compromise.

I do not consider "Help me sexually transition" a topic that /fit/ needs in order to serve its main demographic, but I don't want this to be a place where people can't ever ask for help with their problems or seek objective advice, so if someone were to make a thread genuinely asking "Is it healthy to transition sexually?" or "What are the health consequences of being transgender?" or even "Is it a good idea to have a sex change?" that would be fine. After all, intuitively I wouldn't stop fat people from asking similar questions about obesity.

>>141133

>it is funny watching so many chomp down and even bump the thread

I think that's more to do with the fact that the board is slow, at least feels slower than a year or two ago (purely subjective, I may be blowing stats out my ass). So hungry shitposters happily partake in aforementioned faggotry.

>I am pessimistic about the result of policing the board to only allow threads by people who don't have their heads up their respective ego's ass; very few people would be left.

Agree, /fit/ audience tends to be more egotistical through self-selection not meant as a dig

Instead of framing your policy as "X,Y,Z threads are allowed on /fit/" why not ask "does a thread about W harm or detract from /fit/'s charter/purpose?"

>I've been using anchors so that discussion can continue and my decision can be reversed in theory.

>I now have decided to anchor the thread.

Could you explain, for the mere mortals, what "anchoring" does? It's not mentioned in https://8ch.net/faq.html

>>141378

>Instead of framing your policy as "X,Y,Z threads are allowed on /fit/"

I think there's always going to be dark corners where policy reveals itself as arbitrary, so a list of X, Y, and Z is just there to fuel intuition. After all, you're dealing with a live person (me) and his disposition regarding certain activities—not merely programmatic rules a computer could follow.

>why not ask "does a thread about W harm or detract from /fit/'s charter/purpose?"

Are you wondering why I don't publicly ask that question before taking moderation action or why I am not asking myself that question?

For the first interpretation, I would say because most of these actions are to anchor (or bumplock)—which can be harmlessly reversed if people decide to speak up about a thread being anchored. If I anchor something and you don't like it, you could see it as being prompted to say something about it in this thread. It is possible for me to reverse decisions and even to become more lenient. Of course, for that to happen, you have to at least say which thread shouldn't be anchored and why.

For the second interpretation, I do try to look at things from multiple perspectives, but I like to mention specifics so people can hopefully follow the pattern of what I am doing—which is also why I prefer there to be some level of consistency in my actions. I don't want what I do next to be a complete surprise. I see the rules as a way of getting to know me and what to expect from me (as a moderator). It's not fun if you are potential poster and you are on edge wondering whether or not your thread will just be deleted outright by someone being overzealous with censorship, but I tend to think it's probably inevitable that I will occasionally need to make judgments on the fly without precedent—like the transgender thread. There was no explicit policy about transgender threads, but behind /fit/'s charter/purpose are actual people that come here—some as regulars. I didn't think they would appreciate the board going in that direction. There's a part of me that does not care if a transgender thread appears in this board as long as I still get to read and interact with the threads I'm interested in and the signal to noise ratio doesn't crash, but that's the thing. The interesting threads can go away if the relationship with the main crowd of /fit/ is not maintained and I start sending signals that another crowd is desired, so some decisions may be based on wanting to maintain just enough status quo for the "interesting crowd" to stick around. The posters make the board what it is, and the board can morph into something completely different if they are exchanged for another group.

>Could you explain, for the mere mortals, what "anchoring" does?

I find myself skeptical that you have been coming here since a year or two ago and yet you don't know what it means for a thread to be anchored. I'll explain anyways. It means the thread cannot be "bumped", but discussion can continue in the thread until it "falls off" the catalog. Normally when a post is made in a thread, the thread is "bumped" by placing it on the top of page 1 in the catalog unless the thread is bumplocked (or "anchored"). The catalog of threads has limited space, so when the catalog is full and a new thread is made, the bottom most thread is deleted automatically, and anchored threads tend reach the bottom and get deleted sooner (because they can't be bumped). Btw, /fit/'s catalog hasn't run out of space yet, so nothing has been automatically deleted in this way in quite some time. I like using anchors much, much more than deletions or bans, because I'm not very interested in full blown censorship. I only care so much about what you guys post about and prefer to be a poster more often than a moderator. My favorite things to delete are spam.

>>141386

>Are you wondering why I don't publicly ask that question before taking moderation action or why I am not asking myself that question?

Nah, no need to turn this place into reddit :^) I was just nitpicking on your formal logic description of the "test".

I think you basically have the right approach:

>I like using anchors much, much more than deletions or bans, because I'm not very interested in full blown censorship. I only care so much about what you guys post about and prefer to be a poster more often than a moderator. My favorite things to delete are spam.

>It [anchoring] means the thread cannot be "bumped", but discussion can continue in the thread until it "falls off" the catalog.

Thanks for explaining, was an honest question. I know bumping, saging, catalog limits, sliding threads, etc. but "bumplocking" mechanics never occurred to me (never been a mod/board owner). thinking back tho it explains a few threads I've been in…

>>141584

I don't mind meta discussion or even posts that criticize me, but more than one meta thread is not needed on this board and additional threads just clutter the catalog.

>>141972

I don't give a fuck about board drama since all of 8chan is already dead now but nigger that is not a gecko.

Do not post, request, or link to any content that is illegal in the United States of America and do not create boards with the purpose of posting or spreading such content.

It has come to my attention that a ban appeal for a post from a French IP address was made. The post broke 8chan's global rule which is shaped by the laws and culture of the United States of America. Under no circumstance will any such appeal ever be granted unless it is shown that the post was actually legal without any shadow of a doubt. An extreme bias for not investigating evidence of its legality should normally be expected, and evidence of legality is absolutely not enough to allow continued posting of anything remotely similar to what aroused suspicion enough to cause a ban. Such evidence is only suitable for the one appeal allotted to banned posters, and continued behavior that arouses suspicion will result in another ban where the appeal is ignored.

However, suspicion of having posted child porn or any real picture or remotely realistic and obscene depiction of an underage person (underage according to the laws of the United States of America) will always result in a ban for which the one allotted appeal will always be ignored and any evidence to the contrary will be universally ignored. The reason is simple: I am not in the business of determining if your porn or obscene depictions are legal or not and I am not interested in promoting a board culture that posts obscene pictures of persons who are of questionable age. While /fit/ may not be safe for work, it's not a board centered around porn, so this is not supposed to be a problem here. If the person pictured appears to be underage and the picture appears obscene, it will always be treated the same as a person being certainly underage and the picture being certainly obscene. This is a touchy subject by design, and even if you were to post an obscene picture of a well-known person who "everyone knows was of proper age but he/she looked young", you will be banned and your entire post deleted without hesitation, because it is considered enticing others to post obscene pictures of actual underage persons and you can't expect me to even know who your favorite child-like, but still adult, well-known person is.

Please understand that while /fit/ wishes to promote a kind of international culture with the use of flags associated with posts, you aren't wanted here if you are not familiar enough with the context of what is legal in the United States of America. There isn't necessarily some grudge against you and what your own culture and country considers legal, righteous, or neutral, but neither /fit/ nor 8chan is able or willing to cater to your needs. This message is posted for the benefit and understanding of the banned poster and all would-be posters on /fit/. Please use this information well, and I advise that nobody reply to this post without a really good reason. Any sincere questions should be addressed to the 8chan administration, because this is regarding the global rules:

☞ https://8ch.net/faq.html#what-is-the-best-way-to-contact-the-8chan-administration

If anyone sees a post which is suspected of breaking global rules, I suggest you click the right-pointing triangle (‣) in the top-left corner of the post, and then click "Global report" in the subsequently appearing menu at a minimum. You may also choose "Report" secondarily which is a local report mainly seen by me, the board owner of /fit/, but please always notify the global administration of 8chan for posts breaking global rules first as they are a larger, more vigilant team than the administration of /fit/.

See the following links for further information:

☞ https://8ch.net/faq.html#are-there-any-global-rules-regarding-content

☞ https://8ch.net/globalrule.html

☞ https://8ch.net/obscenity.html

☞ https://8ch.net/dost.html

>>142796

R-ron?

>>142796

After reading this post, how many of you thought pedophile discussion threads were wanted on this board provided that the post attachments were strictly legal—perhaps even youtube embeds? If you thought so, leave now and never come back.

/fit/ will not ever cater to pedophile discussion or interests in any format whatsoever.

Legality is important, but it is not enough to make any threads centered around ogling the underage acceptable on this board. Not even philosophical discussion is wanted—meaning you won't skirt around this by having a pedophile thread composed of 100% text either. I can't imagine why someone would be so desperate to talk about these things that they come to /fit/ to do so, but do us all a favor and remove yourself from this place if the pedophile spaghetti is just spilling out of your pockets uncontrollably.

All pedophiles should just leave and never come back.

>>143099

What warranted this second post? Why are you sperging out so hard? You got one ban appeal and this is what it does to you? I'm just want to know what you're trying to accomplish with this post.

I don't need to read your wall of text just to get "no pedo discussion on this board" out of it, which would be fucking obvious since this is /fit/.

I don't know what animal crawled up your ass, but no one cares about your moral crusade, pedoshit or otherwise. Just do your job and please make yourself as least visible as necessary..

>>143099

Pedophilia is not a crime you little manlet fag.

I would like to be hotpocket

Why was http://liamrosen.com/fitness.html removed from the sticky?

>>144369

Why was it added to the sticky in the first place? I removed it when I was in the mode of changing things because I wasn't impressed by it and didn't think it would be missed. I'll add it back if you explicitly ask for it to be added. I'm not inherently against it, but I did think of it as odd associating /fit/ with this random guru. Although, /fit/ does have many gurus, but they hang around only as long as they are memed. One day, even Starting Strength will be lost and forgotten.

>>144372

>I wasn't impressed by it and didn't think it would be missed

It's not meant to impress, it's the sticky for newfaggots.

Jesus fucking christ I can't believe I have to explain this to the BO of /fit/

>One day, even Starting Strength will be lost and forgotten.

It just never stops with you does it

>>144414

>It's not meant to impress,

What I meant by that was it didn't impress me in the context of helping newfaggots, as in from my perspective it seemed to be wrong on many points and to be unhelpful to someone just starting out. That's just like my opinion though, man. I only have the privilege of twiddling with the knobs on this board. I don't really have a bone to pick with Liam Rosen's guide or any other links that /fit/ wants in the sticky. I simply removed it without asking, because I can try such a thing and it's straightforward to put it back. Almost anything generally helpful and fitness related could go in the sticky, but there has to be an explicit request—not just "Why is this link missing?". Also, I probably would deny requests to link to most commercial products or programs, because I don't think the sticky is for egregious* shilling. Simple Science Fitness is kind of a gray area to me where I allow it as long as they offer so much information for free, but it should probably be removed if they become more biased towards paid membership.

*I was going to say no shilling, period, but I don't know if that's too strict. For example, would I be okay with a reference to a generally useful book for beginners, such as Starting Strength, in the sticky? Maybe, but even that much I am cautious about doing without trying to imagine the consequences and limitations. Would I link to an Amazon page for a book? Absolutely not. I cut my teeth on Strength Training Anatomy, by Frédéric Delavier, btw.

WHERE THE FUCK ARE THE DEALS?

WHERE ARE ALL THE CHRISTMAS SPECIALS?

WHERE'S MUH CHEAP PROTEINS?

test

dyud

Is BO kill? did he not make it? There's double posts galore and not a janitor in sight. to be fair i noticed the site has been pretty shitty last few days

>>147135

I'm fine. All you see and experience before you is consciousness. Indeed, even the rocks and pebbles live and breath as you and I, because their true nature is the infinite emptiness which fills all things and constructs them out of nothing.

>Everything that appears in the three realms comes from the mind.

>But if they don't define it, what do they mean by mind?

>You ask. That's your mind. I answer. That's my mind. If I had no mind how could I answer? If you had no mind, how could you ask? That which asks is your mind.

>>147164

>Is BO kill?

We can only hope

>>147135

The board is chock full of ultra low quality posts right now. I don't think it's moderated whatsoever actually, not for the last couple weeks at least.

Seems like nothing is going on here. honestly I'd be willing to claim the board as BO and try to un-shit this place up.

there are literally 375 threads in the catalog right now. a board this slow only gets hurt by having so many threads up. dozens of threads have a single or no replies. about a quarter have 5 replies or less, and about half have 10 replies or less. there are a lot of shitposts that are basically useless.

right now the board isn't up for claiming, but it sure seems like the BO hasn't been here for a bit. I think we should cut the board catalog down drastically to maybe 50 threads or less. there are a couple duplicates and spam posts in the catalog as well. maybe decreasing the number of allowable thread creations in an hour or day might help. seems like a lot of threads are just a single question that should be in QTDDTOT, if they were they wouldn't fill up the board and the questions might actually get answered because the likelihood of someone finding the single question in the catalog is very low.

>eat 3-4 eggs a day, a piece of fruit, carrots or lightly salted nuts as a snack, a cup of cottage cheese

>jog 2 miles on trails

>check weight today

>went up from 223 to 227

… is it normal to gain weight after you cut out the junk food from your diet and start exercising? Am I doing something wrong?

>>147587

Dont know about your question specifically, but body composition is more important than weight.

Since muscle is heavier than fat, it's expected that you'll gain weight while appearing leaner if you've been lifting.

>>147614

Nevermind, I’ve been 2 mile speed walks and jogs for a couple weeks, and like I said, I changed my diet and even though I’m not seeing a lot of results yet on my weight, I took my resting BPM today and found they were down by 7 beats. I dropped from 90 to 83 so that’s a pretty big deal. Looks like I just need to be patient with it.

Also, I’ve got a 25 pound kettlebell and didn’t know if there were any decent daily exercises I could do with that.

>>147622

Kettlebell swings are the ultimate kettlebell exercise. 25 lbs is a bit light to start with unless you're really weak, but it'll do. You can also do kettlebell snatches and kettlebell clean and presses. You can get Pavel's entire "Enter the Kettlebell" video on YouTube. It's pretty good at covering the basics of kettlebell safety and the basic lifts I mentioned. I think it also covers Turkish getups.

>>147632

Gotcha, I’ll check him out and look up the proper way to do those exercises, and I’m pretty darn weak at the moment, but hopefully I won’t be this weak for long.

I appreciate the help!

>>147542

I know. I checked again today and the board isn't up for claiming, meaning that the BO has logged in in the last two weeks. but it seems like they haven't been here in longer than that anyway which really stinks. Why would he log in if he doesn't want anything to do with the board anymore?

>>147587

a couple pounds either way could just be water weight, too. I wouldn't worry about it, what matters is how you feel physically.

>>147981

I logged in to delete spam

If an important meta discussion topic arises or you have a question, consider posting in one of the main stickies or making a new thread if absolutely necessary.