4chan teamwhat ifwhat ifwe got rid of got rid of/b/now I know that moot holds it very dear, but if you get rid of it>cp threads go>invasions that draw negative criticism to 4chan go>it's only newfags there anyway>most of the site's load goes there, so it will become easier and cheaper to host.>dubs shit, retarded memes, inter-board invasions leave>underagers leaveeveryone winsjust an idea
>>5254>/b/ goned>They all go to /v/
>>5394Then you're in the same boat as the rest of us. 90% of the boards on this site suffer from a lack of moderation. "Why not just people to moderate it?" is apparently easier said than done.
>>>911There already is a thread about this.
>>5405/thread
>>5405this...if we dispose of /b/, trolls will stay on 4chan and move to the other boards
While many of us are on the topic of improving /v/, I want to throw a plan I've been sitting on since the /vg/-/v/ split out there. First of all, I believe /v/ needs a simple, overarching ruleset:"Threads need to be at least primarily or secondarily related to vidya to exist on the board."Primarily related to vidya: Things that are directly related to video gaming, namely, Video Games themselves. Secondarily related topics: Something you can justify as being directly related in itself to some kind of videogame.Topic examples:ISPs - Related to how well you can play vidya onlineGame controllers/consoles/etc - How you play vidyaDeep Sea generals - So long as they mention underwater themed-vidya, s'coolSpace Generals - Same as above, so long as space-themed vidya is included in the topic, it relates to those videogamesHistorical period discussions - Relates to videogames set in that periodDiscussions about the story/setting of a videogame - Self explanatory, you're discussing the story of a videogame>But Anon, these rules don't make sense, you still have all the off topic stuff.Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>4187My second idea would take far more effort to implement than a new set of rules, but I think it could bring an interesting change to /v/, at least initially.Basically, it acts as a wordfilter. Anytime someone makes a post with this word, their post goes through, but no one else but the poster himself sees it show up on the thread.While its similar to the idea of hellbanning, the poster himself is never actually banned, he can continue posting in other threads and so long as they do not include any of the words in the filter, they don't show up. So, the poster is never actually punished, they still get their steam out from posting, but nobody besides them feels the impact of their posts.
Reddit obsession on /v/ has to stop. This is really some kind of obsession. There are so many fucking thread related to reddit content every single fucking day, soemwhere it really has to stop. If you call out that shit you get redirected to reddit by some retards. Reddit is a shitty site, but it has pretty much nothing to do with /v/, it has to be fucking ignored. Instead /v/ brings reddit content to its board.This only results in off-topic threads, shitposting etc.It's really ridiculous.
It seems to me like there are a lot of differing viewpoints on /v/. Internet arguing is my hobby. I will take up a devils advocate spot on shitty vidya just to win and I do win. Some people just seem to like posting about video games.My biggest issue with /v/ is empty comments, let us say for instance somebody joins a controversial thread and says a game is fun. The post basically is nothing because there is nothing in the post. A lot of people like this for some reason though, and it seems like some people on /vg/ can talk for hours about absolutely NOTHING. I really don't see the appeal in just accepting discussion because it is vidya.
>>4527Vidya discussion is better than not vidya discussion in all cases, no exceptions.
>>4527>I really don't see the appeal in just accepting discussion because it is vidya.The reason is simple: categorization. That is why we have separate boards rather than having one super-board that could support thousands of threads at once.
Never bothered with /b/ so my experience stems from literally the few hours this board has been up so I'm just wondering: why not add display IDs on every board?Not even talking about forced anonymous either, just that IDs alone might cut down the trolling if people aren't inclined to samefag to egg on people or keep inflammatory arguments alive.
Do it for /v/
/v/ needs IDs, the retards there are unbearable.
I think the only board that doesn't need IDs is /b/. Isn't it supposed to be a RANDOM board, this one place on 4chan where people can do whatever shit they like? I think it kills the whole idea behind /b/ completely.
>>5467I think part of the reason had to do with all the spam shit that goes on /b/. But I barely touch that shithole.>>5410I honestly don't think it's worth it, given the entire point of 4chan and anonymous posting. Well maybe on /v/ because that's been /b/-lite for god knows how many years.
>>5388Yeah, an insignificant level. Youre still free to behave like a shithead between threads, it just means you wont be able to spam or samefag a thread up without being very conspicuous. I bet scripts like 4chan X would add in some function to hide them anyway.Itd make recommendation, questions or certain other communal threads actually better. No need for everyone to adopt temporary trips or risk confusing one another with "No Im Spartacus" acts.
In/q/uisitors are responding to ideas saying things like: Seconded. Frankly, this is pointless, doesn't produce any content, and could eventually become a problem. Pic related.What should be happening? If you agree with something, say why you agree with it. I doubt ideas will be added by the sheer amount of "secondeds" they get.I would hope that posts of that nature would be removed from this board at the very least.Also, moot, the flood detection is crazy here. Please tone the robot down a wee bit.
You're nitpicking.
>>5530True, but still, it seems to be the equivalent of saying "this"But, you're right, it is a bit nit-picky.
Both through curiosity and wondering if there is a reason you've chosen not to do it, but why are solutions such as XXing post numbers and making post numbers "skip" doubles employed rather than having posts link relative to the OP (which has a regular number) as is used by other imageboards?Crossboard/thread linking is still viable if the OP still has a valid post number (>>11111#4, for instance) and it would be a much more effective way of seeing how close a thread is to bumplimit, too.Just my 2c.
>>4514So the system the text boards use then?I imagine the dubs would be rampant for the first few days.
>>5379Pretty much, yes.While doubles would be sort of rampant, attempting to get them would be completely useless in threads since the post number isn't "random" any more.Of course, that doesn't stop threads existing for the sake of attempting to get doubles, but I'd imagine the effort involved in that and the lack of anyone else being able to "contribute" would make that a non-issue.
>>5422I like it.>you have been muted for 8 seconds because your comment was unoriginal. Hmm, goin' all /r9k/ on us /q/?
i propose several anuses
bump, please do this!
I second this. This is a great idea OP, pat on the back.
It just might work.
This...this is genius!
Best post on the board so far.
As someone who has frequented 4chan for many years, mainly on /h/ /tg/ /e/ and /sci/, I've long since come to the conclusion that more than half of the shitposting and metathreads come from people who point out rules violations, or are otherwise trying to play pretend internet police (instead of going about their business at letting the rules violator rot.)The moment someone posts about the rules, they are in effect already shitposting and derailing the thread.If they never did, the thread would have had a significantly larger chance of recovering.In addition, since the rules are not up for debate, it doesn't open up any kind of helpful discussion, it only serves as an exclamation.The most positive quality of that kind of posting is that it reminds people of the existence of rules - but the site does that just fine by itself.I propose that bringing up the rules or trying to police any kind of behaviour on any board but /q/ becomes a serious, bannable offense, taken at least somewhat seriously by the mods. If people want to discuss the rules, they can take that discussion to /q/.While some existing rule or another might already kind of sort of maybe deal with this, I'd like to point out that making mods and janitors actually deal with this shit is half the battle.
>>4462When you ignore the problem, and the problem gets ignored, you have another /b/Threads tend to die quicker if you derail them than if you leave them up. This is mostly only necessary for the most terrible of threads, though- IE: the k-on generals from back in the day on /a/, etc.Again, I'm not saying "stop not letting people derail things!". I'm saying that if mods aren't around to stop the derailing anyway, then derailing shit threads is the next best thing.
>>4508Threads also die if people don't post in them. Threads are not permanent, AND threads don't matter when people don't see them.If you want to minimize shitty threads and metathreads and bad derails, you want to reduce the amount of time it's on page 1.You do not do so by bumping.You do not do so by reducing the chance that the thread is derailed in a fun direction (by just being a pedantic twat pointing out /reported this or Rules Violation Wah Wah that)In fact, by bumping the thread - even if you're trying to put it into autosage - you're ENSURING that that thread stays on page 1 for an extended amount of time and attracts a LOT of attention. Suddenly a lot more people are subjected to the shitthread.There's a significantly longer way to the autosage post limit compared to just waiting for someone to not bump it long enough for it to drop off page 1.It's not even just about the one thread; when you do post in a thread just to be a whining internet policeman vigilante bitch, it also contributes to a negative posting environment; everyone gets pissed off.If you just let something die, then as soon as it drops off page 1, there's almost no chance at all that anyone is going to post in . Just ask moot or whatever.Or, well, i guess not. He's probably busy doing more important stuff. My point still stands.
Sometimes a report is extreme, simply pointing out "we don't do that here" is often enough to set everyone on the straight and narrow again.It's only shitposting when you spam crap or leave no chance to learn the error.I'd like the sagebombs and spam to punching your kid in the face, he doesn't know what he did wrong, just that you're mad at him.If you take the kid and explain WHAT he did wrong, he'll hopefully stop doing that.This is mostly how we deal in /tg/ and it seems to be working alright.
>>5090OP Here.I've been on /tg/ since 2007, and i gotta say i don't agree at all.Now more than ever, we've got people posting in this thread or that thread, trying to police what content is allowed or not allowed."Quest threads aren't /tg/ related" vs. "yes they are""No nakedness on /tg/" vs. "within reason, it's fine."are some of the more legitimate discussions, and my opinion is that the janitors/mods have their opinion about these things - and that there's absolutely nothing to gain from having metadiscussion (shitposting) about it.And beyond that, you talk about sage as if it does something.Saging does nothing.And there's even people hating on things like the large amount of DH threads or WH40K threads, saging the threads and flipping their shit all over the place. Saging does not make a retarded post legitimate somehow, just because you also express some sort of implicit wish for the thread to die. You're still just being a cunt, stepping out of line, when ultimately you have no say on how the board is run, and you have no power to enforce your opinion. You're not a mod. You're not a janitor.You are just a visitor, and you just posted a shitpost. You most likely pissed off the person you replied to, so that's a guaranteed bump. And then if someone else jumps in, that's where the ball starts rolling.Better if you didn't.Not posting in reply, but simply reporting, creates the possibility that the thread might fall off the front page or get deleted.Saging, whining, policing, or announcing you reported something just causes rage and derailment.
>>4248this is against the rules faggotsit has NOTHING to do with pokemon
It's the best line of defense for all other boards on 4chan. By putting a system in place that would automatically ban those that frequently post on /b/ (they're all 15 anyway) from all other boards we could effectively stop a lot of the cancer spreading to other boards. This is a fantastic idea and you would be stupid to not at least consider it.
Moot I want 4chan to leave from /jp/Sincerely your King of /jp/
>>5369Can you stop posting with an avatar on /jp/ ``please''?
Alright, I'm just gonna come out with it.Are we ever going to get a /z/ombie board?If Paper/Origami gets a board, why not the zambie invasion?
because it's a shitty fucking ideait's way too specific
>>5107Not sure if I agree on that one. Unfortunately, /x/ has more or less deteriorated into role playing and simple minded faggotry. Little man-children that want so hard to believe they are special, and not like everyone else. Whereas the zombie subject would be interesting and very /x/ related, the only way half the board would even join in would be if the OP was claiming to be one. /b/ on the other hand is really mostly about porn and steam begging, though I do personally enjoy some of the more recent Dayz threads. So maybe there is something to the /b/ aspect. Hmmm.
There's already a /z/ board, it's a picture of a dick.
>>5246>Not knowing how to bypass the dick and get access to Utopia
/z/ is the best board.
Back in the day when a few other chans were still active I used to browse their history boards quite a bit. I know /k/ and /pol/ have some decent history threads every now and then but I really think we'd benefit from having a board dedicated to it.
>/his/ - Historical revisionismI'd rather not
Wouldn't that turn into a /pol/-infested shithole?Either way, I approve the motion. Maybe some cool could come out of it. I would visit it.
>>5234It really would. There would be daily ''why do you still believe in the Holocaust'' threads.
there is a thread about this here>>2082
>>5162Please, for the love of moot, read the sticky. Especially this line:>Unless we are explicitly accepting board suggestions in a stickied thread, board requests will be ignored.
Does /x/ have ANY of them?Despite how slow the board goes and how few people hang around on it, the post quality is on par with /b/, if not lower, at all times. A decent janitor and forced anon would have really helped after the whole a/eris fiasco too.Why do you hate us so much, mootles? :c
>>5028I think the conspiracies are fine in MODERATION. However, there shouldn't be IT'S HAPPENING threads littering the front page one moment and then NOTHING HAPPENED TINFOILS threads littering it the next.
as a long time /x/phile, I plan on applying to janitor the board. I just hope moot actually assigns a janitor to /x/.
As much as I hate seeing sooo many daily astral projection/demon summoning threads, I can deal with it because it's /x/ related.What really bothers me about the current state of /x/ is all of the religion posts, whether it's some new age spiritualism cult or run of the mill christfags.And I agree with the op that within the past 6 months there has been a substantial increase in illuminati conspiracy tinfoil threads.The sad thing is that there aren't enough good threads left to save /x/. If all the bad posts were removed, there wouldn't be anything left on the board.
Trip-fags are the cancer killing /x/you know it be true
>2007>see an /x/ board on 7chan>oh boy, I should suggest this to moot!>forget to do so>a few days later, /x/ is addedA shame about what happened to it around 2009. It didn't really recover, it seems ;_;
Would it be possible to add an optional comment box to the report field so you could specify for what reason you reported the post? I have found that there were quite a few times where I reported a post for rule violation but that it was probably not quite obvious in what way the post was actually rule-breaking. For example, if I report a post by a tripfag who got banned and is ban evading, it might not be clear to a mod if I simply report a post in which he is not breaking any rules. So a simple dialog asking "What are you reporting this post for?" or something might be helpful.
>>567asked and answered
I would like to request that more stickies are added to tv. For example on the night of airing of popular shows, There should just be one thread stickied for discussion of that particular show. It would remain stickied for maybe the night of,, and the next day. Currently on the night a popular show airs, like Breaking Bad, we get 500 different threads about the exact same thingh. Having a sticky would concentrate these efforts into one thread, creating more discussion and reducing board spam.
+1 to that broham
To further on it, /tv/ needs a rule like /v/'s:>Please refrain from reposting. If possible, try to skim the board for threads pertaining to your topics/info that may have already been posted.That could replace the second rule.
I second this, we also need more mods to remove the waifu shit
>>5167one thing at a time, huh
Alternatively, we could just split /tv/ into two boards for television and film.
What were the recent /sp/ stickies about? I can accept that the music in /b/ is nothing unordinary, but for /sp/ I thought it was a bit rich considering that I assume moderators want to discourage shitposting.
/sp/ is known for having a few off-topic threads during the seasons of sport. It has come to be known as /sp/ culture and is generally accepted as normal in /sp/.However during major sporting events such as Superbowls, World Cups and the Olympics, there is an influx of posters from other boards. especially /b/, who are known for their immature behaviour. During these Olympics there have been lots and lots of on-topic threads, but generally as the Olympics progressed these newcomers got a little bored. Instead of going back to their respective usual boards they stayed around a little bit and there was a huge surge in "shitposting". These surges in "shitposting" and off-topic discussion have made /sp/ come to be known as /b/3.0 in a similar fashion to /v/ becoming known as /b/2.0.Recently a group researching Mars and life outside of Earth, landed a Rover on Mars called Curiosity. As, a previous poster has stated, The rivalry between USA and Europe is extremely fierce, with lots of threads being posted on /sp/ about this rivalry with countries trying to get one up over other countries by stating accomplishments that their respective countries have achieved./Sp/'s mod decided it would be a great idea to post two stickies on /sp/ about USA landing on Mars, although it has been done before, and about Britain not having landed anything on mars succesfully, claiming that Britain were somehow inferior because of this feat. The mod also had "Space Jam" playing on the board throughout./sp/-Sports had two off-topic threads stickied that had absolutley nothing to do with Sports. Thus confirming that mods don't want to discourage shitposting, but in fact, they think its a good thing, which is absolutely unacceptable.
>>5027I don't think anything will be done because I think it was moot himself.
>>5115Yeah, I was going to mention something about Moot rumoured to be behind them, but I didn't have enough room in my post so just missed it out.
>>5027The stickies kept other threads shitposter free for days. And other shitpost threads died quickly. Having two permanent shitpost threads with 4000 responses on the front page is better than having a constant stream of shitposting seeping into other threads.
The only thing /sp/ needs are spoiler tags/images.That's it.
