From what I understand - any siren discussion must be utterly relevant to Friendship is Magic and that specific episode/circumstance of Starswirl's banishment. Once it veers in to Barbie its banned.

>>166 While discussion of the sirens that are in FiM are allowed, any discussion of EQG is not. >>167 is largely correct.

>>168 So you ban a mare that's literally in the show from being posted or mentioned period but allow discussion of the fish slut trio when there's essentially no difference?

>>187 The sirens had a somewhat relevant appearance in the S7 finale. Any possible discussion must be about FiM. The EQG characters themselves however are banned to the same extent as Sunset and the rest of EQG.

>>188 So since you completely dodged acknowledging what I just posted I'll rephrase it. Why are you banning the posting and discussion of Sunset Shimmer when she is in the show? Is it the requirement of certain contextual information that can only be known through watching EqG to have a proper discussion? In that case how can you refer to the sirens by their names or even call them "sirens" for that matter? They were never talked about by any character directly in the show, just shown. You can't justify it by using information from their comic either because the same would naturally apply to Sunset given that she also appears in the comics. Sunset is a part of FiM proven by her appearance in FiM. Why is this character from FiM banned?

>>191 From what I gather, "within the context of the show" sunset shimmer is an unnamed yellow background unicorn that appears for two frames. Would you be able to discuss her without bringing up any aspect of EqG (which means basically her entire canon characterisation)? Meanwhile the sirens can meaningfully be discussed in the context of the show (as the minor antagonists of the S7 finale). You can actually discuss their role there without bringing up any aspect of EqG.

>>191 >Why are you banning the posting and discussion of Sunset Shimmer when she is in the show? Because she is by all accounts an EQG character, who only had an insignificant cameo in the background of a handful of frames. >Is it the requirement of certain contextual information that can only be known through watching EqG to have a proper discussion? That is one aspect of it. >In that case how can you refer to the sirens by their names or even call them "sirens" for that matter? "Siren" is a name of a mythical creature/species originating from Greek mythology. The sirens are what they are. The specific character names however originate solely from EQG >Why is this character from FiM banned? It is not a FiM character.

>>194 >Would you be able to discuss her without bringing up any aspect of EqG Did you forget what show this is? We wouldn't have characters like Derpy, Lyra, or Bon Bon if nobody was willing to spawn discussion about unnamed background ponies. >>195 >Because she is by all accounts an EQG character The sirens are EQG characters. This is an irrelevant point given your previous stance; being a FiM character is additive and a matter of answering the binary question of "Is this character in FiM?" There aren't grey areas on this subject. Sunset is in FiM. >>195 >"Siren" is a name of a mythical creature/species originating from Greek mythology. The sirens are what they are. How do you know? That's never said in the show. Calling these strange fish dragons "sirens" is something that originated in EqG as much as their actual names. >It is not a FiM character. This is wrong. She is factually present in Friendship is Magic.

>>196 >We wouldn't have characters like Derpy, Lyra, or Bon Bon if nobody was willing to spawn discussion about unnamed background ponies. But they did not originate within EQG. And because I know you'll bring it up, I am speaking here in regards to g4. >>196 >The sirens are EQG characters. The sirens as a species are not though. I would compare their presence in FiM as somewhat similar to the Wendigos, though far less significant. As stated previously, the EQG characters and their derivatives are not welcome here. >being a FiM character is additive and a matter of answering the binary question of "Is this character in FiM?" And the answer to that question would be no for Sunset, not in any significant way. >How do you know? That's never said in the show. Because that is the appearance they have in FiM. They look like sirens.

>>196 >We wouldn't have characters like Derpy, Lyra, or Bon Bon if nobody was willing to spawn discussion about unnamed background ponies. I mean you can make up your own headcanons, but do you really think people will actually do that for someone like Sunset rather than borrowing elements from EqG? If EqG didn't exist, and there really was a random orange unicorn cameo in the finale for some reason, I'm pretty sure she wouldn't be banned and you'd be free to make up whatever headcanons you wanted. Unfortunately, this isn't the case.

>Barbiefags already talking about raiding this place in various one off threads or generals They already ruined /mlp/ they can’t let us have this?

>>217 Link?

Why is posting this PONY not allowed? >muh fallacy of origins She is not a human, she has hooves, she IS a PONY. Saying she's bad because she came from EqG is the same as saying the entirety of FiM is bad because it was advertising a line of brushable dolls for little girls. Things have a nature of evolving over time, and even a pony sitting on a bench in a funny way could inspire so much, but it wouldn't have happened if there wasn't the freedom to explore these ideas. There is no justification for this, other than hating this mare. On this site dedicated to ponies, I feel that's strongly off-message.

>>226 It is EQG in it's entirety that is banned. Therefore all EQG characters, regardless of shape, are banned from here. See the above discussion.

>>227 >all EQG characters, regardless of shape, are banned from here. So THAT'S why the sirens are allowed. Seriously, why do you not allow me to even post a single image of Shimmer for the purpose of my argument? Is it that it forces you to confront the fact that she IS a pony?

>>228 >So THAT'S why the sirens are allowed. Unnamed fish-things that look like sirens from mythology are allowed in context of S7 finale, yes. Stop raping keyboard for a moment and read the previous posts ITT. >not allow me to even post a single image of Shimmer >Shimmer Answered your own question, really.

>>230 If you only count Hasbro's FiM as being canon, "Derpy" is not the name of this pegasus. Would you ban someone for calling her Derpy?

>>231 Orly?

>>231 I don't understand why people keep jumping to the conclusion that "EqG is banned" = "everything non-FiM is banned". If hypothetically EqG has invented the name "Derpy" and used it consistently, while FiM kept her as Ditzy, then and only then would your argument make sense.

>>232 So now we're counting merch as canon?

>>234 I guess

>>233 That conclusion keeps being jumped to because being a super-puritan about a pony having to appear in the canon show makes it seem like that's all you care about. >>235 Notice how this one uses the EqG logo while the one I posted uses the original FiM one?

>>236 >being a super-puritan about a pony having to appear in the canon show Read >>227 It's not about who appears or doesn't appear in FiM (mostly). It's about who was created for EqG. Derpy was created for FiM, therefore not for EqG, therefore she is allowed. Sunset was created for EqG, and has 2 frames in FiM, therefore is banned. The Sirens seem to be interesting because they are characters in EqG, but they appear in a completely different shape and with a completely different backstory in FiM. It's not "here's a cameo of this EqG character" as with Sunset. It's "here's this entirely new mythological species to feature in the show, with no references or prerequisite knowledge of the other franchises". Hence it looks like the rules separate "the sirens as depicted in FiM lore" vs. "the sirens as EqG characters". The alternative would be to not separate them, and then the sirens would likely be banned outright due to being characters created specifically for, and therefore coming from, EqG.

>>237 What about Flash Sentry? He's a character created for EqG, but with separate appearances and even a speaking role in FiM. Would he be banned for being made for EqG?

>>236 Notice how in my example the name and image of Shimmer are trademarked under EQG which was registered in 2014, 3 years AFTER the original show premiered, as a different media from it? https://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?v1=7&ti=1,7&SAB1=&BOOL1=all%20of%20these&FLD1=Keyword%20Anywhere%20%28GKEY%29&GRP1=AND%20with%20next%20set&SAB2=Equestria%20Girls&BOOL2=as%20a%20phrase&FLD2=Keyword%20Anywhere%20%28GKEY%29&CNT=25&PID=DlN-htQzNzpSB_AEvXofTMCo4yyig&SEQ=20210830194906&SID=3

>>238 He has no consistence outside the EQG context, so my guess would be yes.

>>237 This is not true. The sirens are factually the same between the two with no contradictions in backstory or shape. EqG left the backstory vague in a picture book claiming Starswirl banished them; it's forgotten by history in general that the Pillars even existed as a team, so this is in line with Shadow Play. The depiction of the sirens in the battle in RR is also dubious given that they literally weren't real.

>>241 >EqG left the backstory vague Then how do you know it's the same Sirens that appear in S7?

>>239 If you're talking about trademarks, why did you link to a copyright database?

>Deleting pictures relevant to the discussion Just admit you're a despotic faggot who gets off on messing with people online.

>>243 https://trademarks.justia.com/858/05/equestria-85805634.html >First Use Anywhere Date 2013-09-01 My bad. TWO years after MLP:FIM firmly established it's cast of characters.

>>244 If you want to keep any semblance of credibility, how about having some self awareness and admitting that it's you, in fact, who is an obnoxious faggot who gets off on messing with people online?

>All this discussion The rules regarding EQG have been made clear, they will not be changed. There already exists many places for the discussion of EQG. So if that's what you are interesting in discussing I would recommend you go to one of them. >>244 >Deleting pictures relevant to the discussion They were in violation of global rule 2.

>Has entire internet to post barbie >Obsessively cries about one site

>>249 Sunset is a pony.

>>250 He >>249 is right, you know.

>>238 I would guess it should be the same as the sirens - if you're talking about the S4 finale and specifically want to mention the guard introducing the Maretonian fags at the start, that sounds like it would probably be allowed. But in FiM he's literally just a completely random background guard that's arguably far less important even than whatever unnamed guard announces the Crystal Empire's return in S3. Anything beyond that is about the EqG counterpart, and would therefore be banned. Might be worth clarifying with the staff, but to me this logically seems exactly like the sirens. >>241 The point is that FiM introduces some plot-relevant characters of a new species. EqG happens to feature characters which are canonically the same ones within EqG lore, but basically have nothing to do with the FiM appearance - different species, different characterisation entirely, there's pretty much nothing in common. I haven't watched any EqG but if you're saying they never even physically transformed into fish forms during EqG that just strengthens my argument. Ultimately, it's possible to discuss the S7 finale plot device without any reference to EqG. If EqG didn't exist, the S7 finale could still work completely unchanged. In contrast it's not possible to discuss Sunset without any reference to EqG, because within FiM she only exists as literally just a reference to EqG, a cameo. If EqG didn't exist, her cameo in FiM couldn't exist either. Besides, she canonically appears in pony form within EqG, so there's no separation by character or species or anything else. There's no "FiM Sunset" as opposed to "EqG Sunset" which could be discussed separately; she ONLY exists within the context of EqG.

The Shimmernigger literally cried to his general on 4chan over this argument. And they say EQG fans arent complete cancer.

>>255 Kek

>>255 They said they don't care though, because Shimfag is so much of a faggot even they cannot sand him.

I've said I don't personally mind pony Sunset, but I see the wisdom in a blanket ban as the barbiefags attempt a nose under the tent strategy.

Hoh missed this shitfest You made the right call board owner