gg, CoalGuys, and Toradora (15)

1 Name: Random Anime Otaku : 2008-11-01 15:55 ID:F2G3fOic

I was just curious if anyone in the know can confirm or deny that CoalGuys are in fact gg operating under a different name for the sake of completing ToraDora. I could sit myself down and compare the translator choices between the two fansubs but that would take time. It would also require me to actually watch the latest episodes -- which ruins my plan to not watch more Toradora until the entire season has aired.

2 Name: Random Anime Otaku : 2008-11-01 20:23 ID:Heaven


3 Name: Random Anime Otaku : 2008-11-01 20:55 ID:F2G3fOic

Why the sage? It's a fair question: they appear out of nowhere and their very first episode as a fansub group is Toradora episode 5 -- which is right where gg left off with their completion of episode 4.

4 Name: Random Anime Otaku : 2008-11-01 21:17 ID:3j+CtC7P

You should work rather than expecting someone else with your place

5 Name: Random Anime Otaku : 2008-11-01 21:55 ID:F2G3fOic

I can do it myself, it's just a question of asking kind helpful people out first. I won't be able to get around to it for 1-2 weeks in which time I'm going to have to download CoalSubs subs on blind faith while the seeds are still healthy. And in these times of limited bandwidth that's never a cool thing, to download 400+ MB of data only to discover you have to download it all over again.

6 Name: Random Anime Otaku : 2008-11-01 22:02 ID:Heaven

because sage is polite.
and by "no" i meant "no, they aren't gg", not "no, i refuse to answer your question." i guess that was unclear, sorry.

7 Name: Random Anime Otaku : 2008-11-01 22:30 ID:Heaven

Since when was it impolite to age? But okay, I'll follow your lead. Also, I understood that you meant "No, they are not the same." I was only upset with your sage, not your bluntness, and interpreted the two together as your way of saying, "No, you retard, isn't it obvious?" Hence my "it's a fair question" defense.

8 Name: Random Anime Otaku : 2008-11-02 02:01 ID:3j+CtC7P

That makes sense you have my apologies when assuming you lazed out

9 Name: Random Anime Otaku : 2008-11-02 06:48 ID:Heaven


just out of curiosity, why do you make 10-15 word posts in every single thread as often as possible without being jisakujien? are you trying to earn gaia gold?

10 Name: Random Anime Otaku : 2008-11-02 12:39 ID:3j+CtC7P

Perhaps you are with the odd impression such post must adhere them

11 Name: Random Anime Otaku : 2008-11-02 16:02 ID:Heaven

Thanks! I'll make good use of that, I hope.

12 Name: Random Anime Otaku : 2008-11-02 18:46 ID:9Eb+QkAi

[qq] Toradora - 05 [70DD4D01].mkv
this is what you're looking for (although i'd wait for ggrain if they're still operating, not sure)

13 Name: Random Anime Otaku : 2008-11-02 18:58 ID:Heaven

>i'd wait for ggrain

I never downloaded anything from ggrain (and frankly don't understand the comments accompanying the torrents), is it really necessary to wait? The original gg releases always seemed just fine to me, I don't know what this "grain" is that he's talking about or why gg couldn't remove it themselves in the first place if it were really such a big deal.


Hey, thanks! I don't know how long this will last since he's not exactly being private about it (i.e. visible releases on well-known sites like TT) but if the original C&D comment by gg was just a troll to begin with then I suppose it really shouldn't matter.

14 Name: Random Anime Otaku : 2008-11-02 21:48 ID:3j+CtC7P

Cease and desist letters never stops other upload spread elsewhere

15 Name: Random Anime Otaku : 2008-11-02 23:27 ID:Heaven

No, but my point is fairly simple: if a law-breaker is easier to locate, it follows that the law enforcement will be more likely to pursue him. That is to say, if gg really did receive a C&D for Toradora, then it would be more intelligent of qq to release their episodes under the radar rather than over it. And the steps qq has undertaken so far are the complete opposite one would expect of a TL team trying to be furtive about this.

Why do you reply as though this is not true and your reply is going to make me change my mind about what I said in >>13? Do you fail to understand the point described above? Do you understand it yet for no good reason assume that I don't understand your point (re. the limitations to C&D orders) and appoint yourself Chief Explainateur? Or are you the same person as >>4, >>8, and >>10 and suffer from an OCD which drives you to reply to every potentially-contentious point? If it's the latter, please just let it go: >>12 already answered my original question and then some.

This thread has been closed. You cannot post in this thread any longer.