So I had a thought. Knowing 4chan this might just be abuse-able as all hell and doomed to fail, but I still thought it might be something that could benefit communities like /a/ and /v/, so hear me out.There are plenty of times when a particularly epic thread will appear on a board, and get flooded with requests that a mod sticky it. This could be for a reaction to an amazing episode, or an important bit of information about a new release, or what have you. Sadly, a lot of times these threads either don't get noticed in time, or are deemed unworthy of being stickied, even if only for a day or so.So I was thinking, why not allow the community to be able to sticky something for a day or so based on community consensus. It could work in much the same way the current thread archiving system that various sites use. And likewise, when a thread has outlived it's welcome, votes to unsticky could have the same effect. There could even be a natural decay period where a thread would naturally unsticky after a length of time.Granted I have no idea how hard this would be to implement and I know you have much more important things to work on, but does this idea sound at all viable? It could allow for more quality content creation on some of the more creative boards. Just a thought anyway.
>EpicLost all credibility.Also this is a terrible idea. You could just get a few friends to vote sticky a dumbass thread. If there was a good thread that would deserve a sticky, it would already get bumped a lot.
If it's really necessary just harass the mods on IRC
Would be abused to hell and back.
>4chan>voting systemThis can only end well.It's not a bad idea but I don't think it would work here. Maybe if you needed like a hundred votes and the sticky only laster 20 minutes or something but that seems like a waste of time to implement.
>>2560If you are going to get upset over a single word usage, you may want to rethink your time being wasted here.The problem with bumping a thread is that eventually it reaches autosage. There is no way to avoid this, be it the image limit being reached or what have you. I've seen plenty of threads on /a/ and /m/ that are just new threads created to be a continuation of an existing thread.And don't get me wrong, I don't think the threshold for a thread being stickied should be low. It should take a LOT of effort, much more than it takes to get a thread archived. The point being that if enough people think a thread is awesome, why not sticky it for a day? What's the harm?Really, there should be no more than one or two threads ever stickied at one time. If another thread surpasses the current stickied thread's vote count, unsticky and replace.
>>2522If it's good, it'll be bumped to hell and back. And there's the unofficial 4chan archives. And the 4chan catalog.Bad idea.
I think stickies are only meant for either big events, like the batman shooting sticky, deaths or the e3 threads, or for board-wide events like when Andrew WK visited /mu/. Other than that it seems pointless to have a sticky.
>>2585Yeah... that's the feeling I get too. I don't know, I figure if you put a captcha in the voting system it would be a lot harder to spam votes. Or, tie each vote to an IP. If the sticky threshold is high enough trolls wouldn't bother.>>2592How about 1000 votes for an hour? You'd be surprised how important an hour can be on a faster board.That and you can disqualify any thread started with a trip or something.
Well anyway I thought it was an idea at least worth thinking about. I don't have time to monitor this thread and at the speed this all is going I'm assuming it won't be here when I wake up. Hopefully a mod will look at it and either shoot it down or consider it. Thanks for your time.
>>2623>If you are going to get upset over a single word usage, you may want to rethink your time being wasted here.It pretty much marks you as a /b/tard.>The problem with bumping a thread is that eventually it reaches autosage. There is no way to avoid this, be it the image limit being reached or what have you. I've seen plenty of threads on /a/ and /m/ that are just new threads created to be a continuation of an existing thread.Threads that reach the bump limit that aren't stickied are likely not worth being stickied. If a thread has been continued on in other threads it's very likely to be a general.>And don't get me wrong, I don't think the threshold for a thread being stickied should be low. It should take a LOT of effort, much more than it takes to get a thread archived. The point being that if enough people think a thread is awesome, why not sticky it for a day? What's the harm?After reading some posts here, mods patrol all of the fast boards most of the time, enough that they more likely than not have seen the "epic bread". Threads are autoarchived, so there's no reason to vote for them. The harm comes into the fact that there's probably a lot of people who wouldn't want a thread they don't give a shit about on the top of the board pushing out other threads they would want to post in.>Really, there should be no more than one or two threads ever stickied at one time. If another thread surpasses the current stickied thread's vote count, unsticky and replace.Or have none at all.
Would cause the reverse troll squadron to go into overdrive on /a/.
Easily abusedalso>epicStop posting.
Yes, lets install a voting system based anything on the website who notably rigged an online voting system to form an acrostic. What could possibly go wrong?
