Bugs you found, and changes I made
Just thought I'd create this thread where you can post any bugs or problems with the site you encounter. And also for me to post any big changes I made.
/qa/ - Questions and Answers
Keeping the community together by giving you a voice
File (): 9C1F5728A0CF459680A019CFF73D8E80-4123023.gif (3.9 MB, 512x512, 2311559.gif)
115 replies and 32 files omitted.
Anonymous
No.7289
>>7285
That's my post. I can confirm it was saged.
I sage on this board a lot, mostly out of habit. I generally sage threads by default unless I consciously find a reason to bump it. It's a habit I brought from trying to maintain quality on 4/pol/ to avoid slide threads that I still have even after all these years.
That's my post. I can confirm it was saged.
I sage on this board a lot, mostly out of habit. I generally sage threads by default unless I consciously find a reason to bump it. It's a habit I brought from trying to maintain quality on 4/pol/ to avoid slide threads that I still have even after all these years.
Anonymous
No.7290
>but why would you sage that thread?
I saved it because it is a general, and since it is a general it will inevitably get bumped, and therefore it does not need my help to bump it. It's just what I do.
I saved it because it is a general, and since it is a general it will inevitably get bumped, and therefore it does not need my help to bump it. It's just what I do.
Anonymous
No.7291
one can copypaste emoji from posts which is good, but one can't search for them in a thread using ctrl+f, for example search :anon and see if this anonfilly emoji is highlighted, it wont be
File (): E03495107E5E6A17E657C140B0BE7CA0-18503.png (18.1 KB, 1200x600, can't post.png)
49 replies and 19 files omitted.
Anonymous
No.7121
File (): 363CD6C20A746F13789DDB79877138FB-107396.jpg (104.9 KB, 1920x1080, Twilight_using_a_CHS_computer_EG.jpeg)
/mlpol/ was offline more than an hour.
Many other sites also were affected by the outage.
Many other sites also were affected by the outage.
File (): 9CEA79F1FED271E539E44FCE54F3B09A-815297.jpg (796.2 KB, 1000x707, mad max.jpg)
Questions That Don't Deserve Their Own Thread.
What are the bump limits for each board?
What are the bump limits for each board?
219 replies and 48 files omitted.
>>7273
The new store was set up through cafepress and unfortunately they flagged almost all of our designs. It looks like all of the shirt designs were finally nixed, so the "clothing" section is just a dead link now. The Broncos copypasta mug is also kill, sadly. Like most modern online services cafepress's moderation process is a nonsensical black box, and they don't give you any real clarification as to why things are flagged, you just get a vague generalized warning about violating their content policy.
I was more or less expecting this to happen with a couple of our products. The mug with Peyton Manning's forehead on it was made from a (presumably) copyrighted photograph, so that one was predictably flagged. The rest of the deletions, though, made absolutely no sense. For instance, the T-shirt with the vaporwave Aryanne on it was deleted, but the mug with the exact same design was not. Another shirt, that was literally just the word "Milpool" hand-drawn by me in MS-Paint, got taken down for reasons I can't even fathom. Nothing in the store had any swastikas or anything overtly fashy on them, so it can't have had anything to do with that. Ironically the design I was the most worried about getting flagged, the steel liquor flask with the black sun on it, was left alone.
Anyway, tl;dr I could try to fight it out with their "content usage team," but I suspect it wouldn't accomplish much and would probably be more trouble than it's worth. My guess is that this stuff isn't even being looked at by a human, it's probably just some image-recognition algorithm that autoflags things. If I opened a complaint ticket it would probably result in our store being scrutinized by a human, which could lead to it getting deleted entirely.
If you have any specific designs you want to try to put on a shirt, feel free to reply with an image and I can make a store item out of it. Just buy it quickly, though, since there is a high likelihood it will get flagged and deleted.
The new store was set up through cafepress and unfortunately they flagged almost all of our designs. It looks like all of the shirt designs were finally nixed, so the "clothing" section is just a dead link now. The Broncos copypasta mug is also kill, sadly. Like most modern online services cafepress's moderation process is a nonsensical black box, and they don't give you any real clarification as to why things are flagged, you just get a vague generalized warning about violating their content policy.
I was more or less expecting this to happen with a couple of our products. The mug with Peyton Manning's forehead on it was made from a (presumably) copyrighted photograph, so that one was predictably flagged. The rest of the deletions, though, made absolutely no sense. For instance, the T-shirt with the vaporwave Aryanne on it was deleted, but the mug with the exact same design was not. Another shirt, that was literally just the word "Milpool" hand-drawn by me in MS-Paint, got taken down for reasons I can't even fathom. Nothing in the store had any swastikas or anything overtly fashy on them, so it can't have had anything to do with that. Ironically the design I was the most worried about getting flagged, the steel liquor flask with the black sun on it, was left alone.
Anyway, tl;dr I could try to fight it out with their "content usage team," but I suspect it wouldn't accomplish much and would probably be more trouble than it's worth. My guess is that this stuff isn't even being looked at by a human, it's probably just some image-recognition algorithm that autoflags things. If I opened a complaint ticket it would probably result in our store being scrutinized by a human, which could lead to it getting deleted entirely.
If you have any specific designs you want to try to put on a shirt, feel free to reply with an image and I can make a store item out of it. Just buy it quickly, though, since there is a high likelihood it will get flagged and deleted.
>>7277
It's quite possible, but if that were the case I would have expected the black sun flask to have been the first thing to go since it's the most obviously questionable thing in the store. The apparently random flagging suggests an algorithm being triggered. Either way, though, the end result is the same: I can put designs up, but there's no guarantee they'll stay up. Going forward, I think I might just make product announcements on the board somewhere 24 hours before something is added, along with a set time when the design will be live. That way, anyone who wants one can grab it quickly before it gets noticed.
It's quite possible, but if that were the case I would have expected the black sun flask to have been the first thing to go since it's the most obviously questionable thing in the store. The apparently random flagging suggests an algorithm being triggered. Either way, though, the end result is the same: I can put designs up, but there's no guarantee they'll stay up. Going forward, I think I might just make product announcements on the board somewhere 24 hours before something is added, along with a set time when the design will be live. That way, anyone who wants one can grab it quickly before it gets noticed.
File (): D6AB880197BFA6CFFFD188FB17A3368F-141942.jpg (138.6 KB, 1464x817, EDA32BD2-2C51-4E8F-802A-1A70B4AC0DA3.jpeg)
What level of interest is there for a weapons and firearms focused board? A /mlk/, if you will.
Also, is there any interest for other topics like history?
The pony-only board idea ended up at 50% in favor and 50% against, so that is another idea which may be brought back.
Also, is there any interest for other topics like history?
The pony-only board idea ended up at 50% in favor and 50% against, so that is another idea which may be brought back.
14 replies and 4 files omitted.
>>7263
You insist you're right and insist we should all know better than to disagree with you, and you clearly don't think highly of those who disagree with you, but I'm not hearing any arguments for your stance.
Reminds me of the libtard. No arguments, just shame-flinging, speaking with the tone of wannabe authority.
You insist you're right and insist we should all know better than to disagree with you, and you clearly don't think highly of those who disagree with you, but I'm not hearing any arguments for your stance.
Reminds me of the libtard. No arguments, just shame-flinging, speaking with the tone of wannabe authority.
>>7262
You always complain when people talk about changes, but you never say a word about the dozens of changes that have been made without any discussion or user input.
And this time it isn't even a regular user starting the conversation. It's a literal admin. Are you implying that the admin is trying to subvert the site by daring to ask for your opinion about something before making a change?
How can you be this paranoid about meta conversations on the designated meta board?
You always complain when people talk about changes, but you never say a word about the dozens of changes that have been made without any discussion or user input.
And this time it isn't even a regular user starting the conversation. It's a literal admin. Are you implying that the admin is trying to subvert the site by daring to ask for your opinion about something before making a change?
How can you be this paranoid about meta conversations on the designated meta board?
>>7263
>I don't know if the faggots bringing the proposal are retarded legit anons or glowniggers
It's a literal admin, ffs.
>this is the worst time to make a /k/ board
Compared to what? What would have been a better time, and why?
>I don't know if the faggots bringing the proposal are retarded legit anons or glowniggers
It's a literal admin, ffs.
>this is the worst time to make a /k/ board
Compared to what? What would have been a better time, and why?
Overall, I think gunposting is a healthy thing to have here, although I'm not sure about a single dedicated gun board.
It's not for fear of glowniggers, fedposting, or any of that stuff, but for the thought that we might not have the userbase/energy to fill it up. (Which is also why I think /kx/ would be more appropriate, but that's just my opinion)
And while I'd normally be an advocate for "Build it, and people will come" approaches, perhaps some testing phases could be beneficial. So far, I've been able to evaluate that there are at least ~5 users who would post to the gun board on at least a weekly basis; 5 users is arguably more than enough for a whole board by alt-chan standards, but it's questionable if they'd stick around after the initial content burst. Perhaps those users could organize a general on /sp/ to prove that they have the necessary commitment to create a board culture. If the general continues to generate memes and conversations after a couple months, it could prove itself to be worthy of a trial board.
If we de make /mlk/, and not make gunposters share their space with any other community, I would say that it should be a board without poster IDs or flags; and that it should have a bump limit of 300 (which is normal for slower boards on 4chan), to promote refreshing of discussions, that way the board won't stagnate into 3-4 generals and new threads will be made periodically.
Imo, I feel like we as an alt-chan have potential to have a much larger userbase and could accommodate multiple new boards if we tried. I'm personally a fan of bringing back /cock/, /vint/, /fitlit/ (I know that discussion was lost to /ub/, but still), /can/, /mo/, /fap/, and more, with the model of hybrid boards ensuring that each board has fresh content, although perhaps that shit sailed back in 2017...
Still, if we used generals on /sp/ to test for interest, perhaps all of those dreams could come true one day. It's just something to think to think about.
It's not for fear of glowniggers, fedposting, or any of that stuff, but for the thought that we might not have the userbase/energy to fill it up. (Which is also why I think /kx/ would be more appropriate, but that's just my opinion)
And while I'd normally be an advocate for "Build it, and people will come" approaches, perhaps some testing phases could be beneficial. So far, I've been able to evaluate that there are at least ~5 users who would post to the gun board on at least a weekly basis; 5 users is arguably more than enough for a whole board by alt-chan standards, but it's questionable if they'd stick around after the initial content burst. Perhaps those users could organize a general on /sp/ to prove that they have the necessary commitment to create a board culture. If the general continues to generate memes and conversations after a couple months, it could prove itself to be worthy of a trial board.
If we de make /mlk/, and not make gunposters share their space with any other community, I would say that it should be a board without poster IDs or flags; and that it should have a bump limit of 300 (which is normal for slower boards on 4chan), to promote refreshing of discussions, that way the board won't stagnate into 3-4 generals and new threads will be made periodically.
Imo, I feel like we as an alt-chan have potential to have a much larger userbase and could accommodate multiple new boards if we tried. I'm personally a fan of bringing back /cock/, /vint/, /fitlit/ (I know that discussion was lost to /ub/, but still), /can/, /mo/, /fap/, and more, with the model of hybrid boards ensuring that each board has fresh content, although perhaps that shit sailed back in 2017...
Still, if we used generals on /sp/ to test for interest, perhaps all of those dreams could come true one day. It's just something to think to think about.
>>7267
>I don't know if the faggots bringing the proposal are retarded legit anons or glowniggers
>It's a literal admin, ffs.
You're right, but that idea comes from others anons making noise in the background.
May the Admin be onboard with them or he is just trying to please them; it is not a good idea at all for reasons already mentioned above.
>I don't know if the faggots bringing the proposal are retarded legit anons or glowniggers
>It's a literal admin, ffs.
You're right, but that idea comes from others anons making noise in the background.
May the Admin be onboard with them or he is just trying to please them; it is not a good idea at all for reasons already mentioned above.
File (): 9375F27AB83B4BBA689423C6468E42BA-89540.jpg (87.4 KB, 833x821, 5E9BD9CEA1EFEE0A27A4B3968B213F17-200101.jpg)
/vx/ has been one of more freuently used boards for along time now. The board throws a wide net, attmpting to formally encompass the topics of /v/ and /x/, and informally encompass the concepts and topics of /tg/, /qst/, and arguably /vint/. While the board has seen lots of use in its days, its wide range of topics might also be to its detriment.
For starters, the concept of /vx/ began a continuation of the theme of the April 2017 prank of combined boards being ironically better than their respective parent boards. /vx/ was proposed in response to demand for players who wanted a place to discuss video games and other players who wanted a place to talk about supernatual things, as a means of giving a space for both. The thing is, while ll of the other boards were based on wordplays or jokes on behalf of the 4cuck staff, /vx/ was just kind of based on wanting to fill two niches with just one board. That was fine, as the /v/ and the /x/ posters didn't really get in eachothers way or argue, but they also didn't really interact in any notable way even f they did overlap. Many of th posters appear to stick to their handful of generals. There haven't been any memes that have emerged based on th concept of the usion of /v/ and /x/, or even /tg/ and /x/, as it appears that the concept of mixing fantasy game magic with actual magic isn't as adhesive as originally intended.
Shortly after it was created, /vx/ was coneptually expanded to include all gaming discussion, including /tg/ discussion and /qst/ style pbp roleplay threads. Those are certainly topics that this site benefits from, as all pony altchans have roleplay boards, and roleplay is banned on /mlp/ while ponies are banned everywhere else on 4chan. The roleplay threads take up the overwhelming majority of the boards posts per day, with discarded threads taking the lion's share of the board's catalog. You could even say traditional games and roleplay is the unofficial main topic of /vx/, despite it not being represented in the board's name. /vx/ certainly has a great volume rp posts, but general roleplay discussion has suffered, in part due to being suffocated by the board's other topics: it doesn't help ease of casual rp discussion when you have to first specify that you're talking about fantasy magic over actual magic, and roleplaying games instead of video games. The threads on the board that are aimed towards /tg/-style discussion don't get very many replies. The flags and IDs don't really contribute to those aspects either.
That aside, roleplay definitely has the potential to be a big thing on this site, and I'm certain that we could do better. All the other pony altchans have prolific roleplay boards, and I'm certain /pol/acks have their on unique roleplay ideas too.
Meta-wise, /vx/ is formally-blue (now red) board where posts have both flags and image IDs, similar to /mlpol/. That coflicts with the concept though, because neither /v/ nor /x/ had those components, neither are they necessary for discussion on either board.
Obviously, the inclusion of flags is a nod to /vint/, our sister board. /vint/ was one of the other April 1st 2017 board that everyone liked, being another board that several Anons demanded to have reinstated on 4chins to no avail. "She" was featured in the /mlpol/-tan comic that many of us bonded over in the /qa/ wars as they spilled into [s4s], having met /mlpol/-tan in the darkness of the deleted zone where they encountered the ravenous /z/. The flags were added to sate Anons who wanted to bring /vint/ back, although the board hasn't really satisfied the feel or appearance of the old /vint/, especially since neither /vint/ nor any of the boards it was effectively combined with featured image IDs.
Now, don't get me wrong, /vx/ is my secon favorite board after /mlpol/. I just really think this site could do
>"So what do you propose, faggot?"
I propose that /vx/, with due anticipation and announcement, should be archived in place of other board(s) that better accomodate its many topics. The boards would be separate and based on ideas that mesh together or have cultural sigificance, such as:
>/vint/ ("international vidya"): our sister board which was in high demand for ressurrecion. It already has its wn memes, and even a cute board-tan. Bringing /vint/ back would satisfy the needfor a place to discuss video games (and random pajeeting), while reaffirming this site's committment to 2017 nostalgia. The board should feature flags, but not poster IDs, in spirit of our sister board.
>/kx/ (maybe "weaponized autism"): A dangerously-based idea that was proposed as an alternative to /vx/ as early as 2017. /kx/ would be a radical and mystic hive of schizoposting, and an original hybrid board that 4chins jannies weren't brave enough to create. It would satisfy the want for /x/-tier supernatural discussion and conspiracy theories, while also providing space for this board's currently-untapped potential for gunposting and prepping. The /x/ side of /vx/ wouldn't really suffer at all from being divorced from the /tg/ and /v/ elements, and the big-schizo energy from the /k/ element of the board could serve as a huge bullet-shaped viagra to supercharge the board's discussion and create its own culture. /kx/ would have neither post IDs nor flags, as anonyity is important to it.
>/hp/ (maybe "Horseplay"?): A roleplay board that the bathhouse threads could migrate to and make their own without smothering video games discussion. A roleplay board serves to benefit a community such as ours as it facilitates creation if OCs and other content, which is why other pony altchans give them their own boards. It could also be the place for /tg/ disussion, or CYOAs. /hp/ would have neither flags nor post IDs, as none of its elements (/mlp/, /tg/, or /qst/) have them.
These are ideas I've considered for a while. I wouldn't expect them to be implemented immeditely, but perhaps you guys might take some time to warm up to the idea for the future?
Thoughts?
For starters, the concept of /vx/ began a continuation of the theme of the April 2017 prank of combined boards being ironically better than their respective parent boards. /vx/ was proposed in response to demand for players who wanted a place to discuss video games and other players who wanted a place to talk about supernatual things, as a means of giving a space for both. The thing is, while ll of the other boards were based on wordplays or jokes on behalf of the 4cuck staff, /vx/ was just kind of based on wanting to fill two niches with just one board. That was fine, as the /v/ and the /x/ posters didn't really get in eachothers way or argue, but they also didn't really interact in any notable way even f they did overlap. Many of th posters appear to stick to their handful of generals. There haven't been any memes that have emerged based on th concept of the usion of /v/ and /x/, or even /tg/ and /x/, as it appears that the concept of mixing fantasy game magic with actual magic isn't as adhesive as originally intended.
Shortly after it was created, /vx/ was coneptually expanded to include all gaming discussion, including /tg/ discussion and /qst/ style pbp roleplay threads. Those are certainly topics that this site benefits from, as all pony altchans have roleplay boards, and roleplay is banned on /mlp/ while ponies are banned everywhere else on 4chan. The roleplay threads take up the overwhelming majority of the boards posts per day, with discarded threads taking the lion's share of the board's catalog. You could even say traditional games and roleplay is the unofficial main topic of /vx/, despite it not being represented in the board's name. /vx/ certainly has a great volume rp posts, but general roleplay discussion has suffered, in part due to being suffocated by the board's other topics: it doesn't help ease of casual rp discussion when you have to first specify that you're talking about fantasy magic over actual magic, and roleplaying games instead of video games. The threads on the board that are aimed towards /tg/-style discussion don't get very many replies. The flags and IDs don't really contribute to those aspects either.
That aside, roleplay definitely has the potential to be a big thing on this site, and I'm certain that we could do better. All the other pony altchans have prolific roleplay boards, and I'm certain /pol/acks have their on unique roleplay ideas too.
Meta-wise, /vx/ is formally-blue (now red) board where posts have both flags and image IDs, similar to /mlpol/. That coflicts with the concept though, because neither /v/ nor /x/ had those components, neither are they necessary for discussion on either board.
Obviously, the inclusion of flags is a nod to /vint/, our sister board. /vint/ was one of the other April 1st 2017 board that everyone liked, being another board that several Anons demanded to have reinstated on 4chins to no avail. "She" was featured in the /mlpol/-tan comic that many of us bonded over in the /qa/ wars as they spilled into [s4s], having met /mlpol/-tan in the darkness of the deleted zone where they encountered the ravenous /z/. The flags were added to sate Anons who wanted to bring /vint/ back, although the board hasn't really satisfied the feel or appearance of the old /vint/, especially since neither /vint/ nor any of the boards it was effectively combined with featured image IDs.
Now, don't get me wrong, /vx/ is my secon favorite board after /mlpol/. I just really think this site could do
>"So what do you propose, faggot?"
I propose that /vx/, with due anticipation and announcement, should be archived in place of other board(s) that better accomodate its many topics. The boards would be separate and based on ideas that mesh together or have cultural sigificance, such as:
>/vint/ ("international vidya"): our sister board which was in high demand for ressurrecion. It already has its wn memes, and even a cute board-tan. Bringing /vint/ back would satisfy the needfor a place to discuss video games (and random pajeeting), while reaffirming this site's committment to 2017 nostalgia. The board should feature flags, but not poster IDs, in spirit of our sister board.
>/kx/ (maybe "weaponized autism"): A dangerously-based idea that was proposed as an alternative to /vx/ as early as 2017. /kx/ would be a radical and mystic hive of schizoposting, and an original hybrid board that 4chins jannies weren't brave enough to create. It would satisfy the want for /x/-tier supernatural discussion and conspiracy theories, while also providing space for this board's currently-untapped potential for gunposting and prepping. The /x/ side of /vx/ wouldn't really suffer at all from being divorced from the /tg/ and /v/ elements, and the big-schizo energy from the /k/ element of the board could serve as a huge bullet-shaped viagra to supercharge the board's discussion and create its own culture. /kx/ would have neither post IDs nor flags, as anonyity is important to it.
>/hp/ (maybe "Horseplay"?): A roleplay board that the bathhouse threads could migrate to and make their own without smothering video games discussion. A roleplay board serves to benefit a community such as ours as it facilitates creation if OCs and other content, which is why other pony altchans give them their own boards. It could also be the place for /tg/ disussion, or CYOAs. /hp/ would have neither flags nor post IDs, as none of its elements (/mlp/, /tg/, or /qst/) have them.
These are ideas I've considered for a while. I wouldn't expect them to be implemented immeditely, but perhaps you guys might take some time to warm up to the idea for the future?
Thoughts?
36 replies and 7 files omitted.
Anonymous
No.7104
>>7103
>Autists don't need any of that.
That argument would be a lot more compelling if those topics actually got sufficient traffic on /vx/. I know that it's not from lack of interest.
>Autists don't need any of that.
That argument would be a lot more compelling if those topics actually got sufficient traffic on /vx/. I know that it's not from lack of interest.
Anonymous
No.7105
>>7101
The point is for the topics on /vx/ to actually get traffic and generate content.
Also I think /kx/ would be a good addition to the board.
The point is for the topics on /vx/ to actually get traffic and generate content.
Also I think /kx/ would be a good addition to the board.
Anonymous
No.7234
File (): 23F38E6B225002CE025E91ECE987AA08-5139897.png (4.9 MB, 4000x3000, 6386260.png)
Bump
Anonymous
No.7244
>>7243
I want a /k/ board too. I know for certain it would immediately be filled-up with content.
I like /kx/, because the idea of weaponizing schizos has so much meme potential.
I want a /k/ board too. I know for certain it would immediately be filled-up with content.
I like /kx/, because the idea of weaponizing schizos has so much meme potential.
File (): AEA4B5F8B917AEE37ED1D22D09601D13-43742.jpg (42.7 KB, 358x198, 901072.jpg)
Has anyone else had the feeling like the bump limits on this site are too high? They're much higher than those of other sites like /pol/ and /mlp/. On /mlpol/ threads stay up for years at a time, and I feel like it's broken the spirit of our old "no generals" policy. Maybe it would be healthier for discussion to have lower bump limits and simply have Anons make new threads when old ones hit their limit, to prevent stagnation.
I think they've been extended twice before since the start of this site on request by some Anons who were in certain long-standing threads, but i feel like that might have been detrimental in the long term.
I think they've been extended twice before since the start of this site on request by some Anons who were in certain long-standing threads, but i feel like that might have been detrimental in the long term.
66 replies and 9 files omitted.
>>7235
The reason historically /vx/ didn't have an Archive was because when the site was using vichan/NPFChan there was no Archive, and threads that slided off the catalog were gone and lost forever. So the high bump limit and catalog size was kept to keep the board canon to its older self when we moved to new codebase.
The reason historically /vx/ didn't have an Archive was because when the site was using vichan/NPFChan there was no Archive, and threads that slided off the catalog were gone and lost forever. So the high bump limit and catalog size was kept to keep the board canon to its older self when we moved to new codebase.
>>7240
>to keep the board canon to its older self
So...you mean it's actually a technical issue, right?
>to keep the board canon to its older self
So...you mean it's actually a technical issue, right?
>>7241
There is no techical limitation that prevents us from changing the bump limit, catalog size etc. in the board config. But many RP treads on /vx/ enjoys and benefits from a high bump limit and changing it would alter the style of the board that it have had since its creation.
There is no techical limitation that prevents us from changing the bump limit, catalog size etc. in the board config. But many RP treads on /vx/ enjoys and benefits from a high bump limit and changing it would alter the style of the board that it have had since its creation.
File (): 8903FBD7F67C806B89E35EDFBE0D04FB-678511.png (662.6 KB, 1024x1120, 958364cd93f70173db2a4840aa927c71.png)
>>7230
Okay, retard.
>>7239
No u.
>>7240
I know that, but that was also kind of a long time ago. Are there any plans to fix it?
>>7242
It wouldn't be a major issue if the threads at the bottom of the catalog slide.
>See, I asked for this back in the day, and I am now recanting that request. Truth is it doesn't actually help roleplay go more smoothly.
That decision was also made when 80-90% of the posts on /mlpol/ were in roleplay threads on /vx/. It's not like that anymore, and I don't think it would be that much trouble to ask roleplayers to make new threads every 500 posts instead of every 1000-2000 posts. I've roleplayed on /vx/ long enough to know that it takes no mental effort to transfer roleplay from one old thread to a fresh one.
>would alter the style of the board that it have had since its creation
I really don't think it would significantly change, but that's just my opinion.
Okay, retard.
>>7239
No u.
>>7240
I know that, but that was also kind of a long time ago. Are there any plans to fix it?
>>7242
It wouldn't be a major issue if the threads at the bottom of the catalog slide.
>See, I asked for this back in the day, and I am now recanting that request. Truth is it doesn't actually help roleplay go more smoothly.
That decision was also made when 80-90% of the posts on /mlpol/ were in roleplay threads on /vx/. It's not like that anymore, and I don't think it would be that much trouble to ask roleplayers to make new threads every 500 posts instead of every 1000-2000 posts. I've roleplayed on /vx/ long enough to know that it takes no mental effort to transfer roleplay from one old thread to a fresh one.
>would alter the style of the board that it have had since its creation
I really don't think it would significantly change, but that's just my opinion.
File (): 8F18206BE22E8EE5282C05BEE427CC19-62071.png (60.6 KB, 800x784, how-to-confuse-a-pony-1.png)
It's about time we have a conversation about this. /vx/ has both flags and IDs, when none of its named elements, /v/ or /x/, or any of its unnamed elements, /tg/ or /qst/, have them.
The obvious answer is a mild reference to our sister board, /vint/, but even /vint/ never had poster IDs. In addition, /vx/ doesn't really serve the role of /int/ in our community.
The obvious answer is a mild reference to our sister board, /vint/, but even /vint/ never had poster IDs. In addition, /vx/ doesn't really serve the role of /int/ in our community.
>flags
The obvious answer is a mild reference to our sister board, /vint/.
>poster IDs
They are useful.
The obvious answer is a mild reference to our sister board, /vint/.
>poster IDs
They are useful.
>>7222
Flags and IDs on /vx/ re enabled or disabled at the whim of OP
>/v/ and /x/ didnt have em
Well golly anon, all our posters from /v/ and /x/ havent said anything thus far
Flags and IDs on /vx/ re enabled or disabled at the whim of OP
>/v/ and /x/ didnt have em
Well golly anon, all our posters from /v/ and /x/ havent said anything thus far
>>7226
>Flags and IDs on /vx/ re enabled or disabled at the whim of OP
No. Only image IDs can be disabled. Flags are post-by-post.
>>7224
I don't really think those elements are useful given the nature of the board, and it doesn't really emulate the feeling of /vint/ either, but that's just my opinion.
I was of the camp that wanted to bring back /vint/ back in 2017, but that's long passed...
>Flags and IDs on /vx/ re enabled or disabled at the whim of OP
No. Only image IDs can be disabled. Flags are post-by-post.
>>7224
I don't really think those elements are useful given the nature of the board, and it doesn't really emulate the feeling of /vint/ either, but that's just my opinion.
I was of the camp that wanted to bring back /vint/ back in 2017, but that's long passed...
File (): 2415CECEB371B8F1E28E791915ECA5FE-72294.jpg (70.6 KB, 1500x857, 61exj56cTgL._AC_SL1500_.jpg)
It's no secret that the small size of this board makes it so that some posters from certain countries may not get to experience a desirable degree of anonymity for being identified by their flags. This problem has intimidated certain non-American posters, including artists and other horse-famous content creators who only came to talk about ponies from being able to post freely. The "don't show my flag" option was implemented years back, but it tends to look out of place, and is inconvenient to use because the poster has to opt into the usage of it in every post, prompting posters to forget between posts and expose their flags.
As a more refined solution, I propose adding an optional "Equestria Flag". It would work essentially like a 4/pol/ memeflag, except with less autism because there would only be one option and the flag makes no statements other than that the poster is a fan of FiM. The flag could be used by posters from rare countries who don't want their usage of this board traced back to them, or by posters who are posting about ponies and don't care to make any political statements on a particular day. More importantly, once a user makes the decision to turn the flag on, the flag would remain there until they turn it off (or their posting password changes, idk), sparing them the hassle of trying
In addition, the idea has been floated around to make it so that OPs could make all flags hidden for non-political threads, like we did with poster IDs. If the above idea is accepted, perhaps that could be implemented by giving OPs the option to make all flags in the threads Equestria flags.
Could this be done? Is it a decent idea? Any thoughts on the matter?
I've been thinking of reccomending this for a while, and I hope it would make it more comfortable for some of our non-American lurkers to post more freely. I think the ability to hide flags is pretty important for the wellbeing of this site, so I hope this is a good idea.
As a more refined solution, I propose adding an optional "Equestria Flag". It would work essentially like a 4/pol/ memeflag, except with less autism because there would only be one option and the flag makes no statements other than that the poster is a fan of FiM. The flag could be used by posters from rare countries who don't want their usage of this board traced back to them, or by posters who are posting about ponies and don't care to make any political statements on a particular day. More importantly, once a user makes the decision to turn the flag on, the flag would remain there until they turn it off (or their posting password changes, idk), sparing them the hassle of trying
In addition, the idea has been floated around to make it so that OPs could make all flags hidden for non-political threads, like we did with poster IDs. If the above idea is accepted, perhaps that could be implemented by giving OPs the option to make all flags in the threads Equestria flags.
Could this be done? Is it a decent idea? Any thoughts on the matter?
I've been thinking of reccomending this for a while, and I hope it would make it more comfortable for some of our non-American lurkers to post more freely. I think the ability to hide flags is pretty important for the wellbeing of this site, so I hope this is a good idea.
Sounds good to me.
>>6587
I dont see any significant long-term issues or avenues for abuse. Id even go so far as suggesting it as something individually enableed in Options (make mine equestria! lol)
I dont see any significant long-term issues or avenues for abuse. Id even go so far as suggesting it as something individually enableed in Options (make mine equestria! lol)
How hard would this be to implement?
I think this site could really benefit from being able to hide flags more extensively/, efficiently, especially with the pony side.
I think this site could really benefit from being able to hide flags more extensively/, efficiently, especially with the pony side.
File (): E2514624BD3271AF011D6EE5F58A08A6-121716.jpg (118.9 KB, 1200x1200, FbW8RnfXwAMLXg4 (1).jpg)
Any feedback on if/when this could be implemented?
File (): E865FF13490BB1D5D4EA4F7E51E862B1-77145.jpg (75.3 KB, 1024x1024, image0-15.jpg)
In this thread, we discuss the future of the "no generals" rule. Whether that be to remove it, re-confirm it, reform it, or clarify it, or decide how it should be enforced.
The No Generals rule is one of the oldest rules on our site, but it's also the least consistently enforced. Very many exceptions to the rule exist on /mlpol/, both explict and de facto. Some Anons have wondered if the no generals rule might be outdated or obsolete, while others have stated that it should be enforced more consistently; some Anons have called for clarity for what constitutes a "general" and why they should be disallowed on this site.
Share your thoughts:
Do you like the current rule? Are you just indifferent to it? Do you think it should be changed? Do you think it's fine as is? Do you want to see it enforced more consistently? Is the rule helpful to our site? Could it be detrimental? Just what is a general? Are generals a bad thing? Do generals diminish content creation, or promote it? What do you think about the current existing generals? Etc.
The No Generals rule is one of the oldest rules on our site, but it's also the least consistently enforced. Very many exceptions to the rule exist on /mlpol/, both explict and de facto. Some Anons have wondered if the no generals rule might be outdated or obsolete, while others have stated that it should be enforced more consistently; some Anons have called for clarity for what constitutes a "general" and why they should be disallowed on this site.
Share your thoughts:
Do you like the current rule? Are you just indifferent to it? Do you think it should be changed? Do you think it's fine as is? Do you want to see it enforced more consistently? Is the rule helpful to our site? Could it be detrimental? Just what is a general? Are generals a bad thing? Do generals diminish content creation, or promote it? What do you think about the current existing generals? Etc.
88 replies and 16 files omitted.
Anonymous
No.7211
Maybe the site is just too small? Petty personal disagreements regularly and easily lead to threads getting derailed.
It's not something that is ever going to change, given the nature of the site.
It's not something that is ever going to change, given the nature of the site.
File (): 2F144C01515F1FAECDCF2085C60EB975-20862235.webm (19.9 MB, Resolution:1920x1080 Length:00:01:10, 6400004__safe_artist-colon-amo_imported+from+derpibooru_applejack_fluttershy_pinkie+pie_rainbow+dash_rarity_twilight+sparkle_alicorn_earth+pony_pegasus_pony_uni.webm) [play once] [loop]
>>7187
>HEY, MODS! WHAT DO YOU THINK?
I think that's the best looking shot of Pinkie's ass I've ever seen on this board.
As to the actual question being discussed, I more or less agree that it would be better if people would just start a new thread for each major news event instead of just dumping it into the Random News thread. That's basically how things worked in the very beginning: happening threads usually included a link to an archived article along with a greentexted summary.
However, my memory might be fuzzy, but I seem to recall that people started complaining about there being too many news threads. People were starting threads about minor events that usually got few if any replies. The Random News thread was created as an all-purpose dumping ground for news events that were interesting enough to merit posting, but not significant or discussion-worthy enough to justify a dedicated thread. It seems like, over time, people just started getting lazy and dumping everything into the Random News Thread.
As to the more general "generals" issue, I honestly never quite understood why we had to have that rule in the first place. From what I recall, it was something that came from the /mlp/ side. /mlp/ anons felt that their board had divided into subcommunities, and everyone just stayed in their neverending threads and never interacted with the broader community. Since that's never been a problem on this site, the no-generals rule has always felt superfluous, so by and large we don't enforce it. Also, as has been brought up ITT, it's hard to define exactly what a "general" is in the first place. We've had the Syria General for nearly as long as the site has existed, and Anonfilly has been here since like fall of 2017 or thereabouts. Nobody has ever complained about those threads existing as far as I'm aware.
In any event, this seems like another issue that ought to be settled directly by the community, rather than by altering the site rules through some arcane parliamentary procedure. One of the founding principles of /mlpol/ was supposed to be that it be largely self-policing; ie, the community sets its own board culture and deals with interlopers by shitposting them into oblivion. It was part of the appeal we made to Hiro, actually, since 4chan staff at the time was saying they didn't want to give us a board because they didn't have anyone who could moderate it; we argued that we didn't need moderation because we could just police ourselves. The whole point of this place is supposed to be that we are a free-speech antithesis to over-moderated spaces like Reddit and Facebook and whatnot, so in general I think we should keep the written rules few and mostly informal. That's just my two cents.
I would personally be glad if people started posting news topics as their own threads instead of just using one big thread to dump the news in, but if people don't want to do it that way I can't really force them.
>>7197
>We weren't always this slow. I remember 2017-2019 when threads got made every day, and not just when I was making them. I want to go back.
This is true and I can sympathize; 2017 was a fun era and I miss it sometimes. Personally, though, I don't think enough people appreciate just how great it really is that this place is even still here. When I volunteered to be a mod, I honestly expected this place to be gone by the end of the summer. We had a lot of energy and a lot of posters in the beginning, but we also started life as a joke, and we were bound to lose momentum the longer it went on. When you consider that MLP isn't even on the air anymore and "bronies" haven't been relevant since 2013 or so, it's pretty impressive that we're still here 5 years after the fact.
>It wasn't always like this. We didn't always have de-facto generals. We weren't always this stagnated. We used to have new threads every day. We used to have random pony threads.
I hate to sound like a broken record, but my response to this issue is the same every time: if you want to see more activity, post more. If you want more of a particular type of content, post more of that type of content.
These meta discussions are fine if people want to get these issues out in the open, but the bottom line is that starting a thread to talk about how the site ought to be this way or that way is going to be far less effective than just posting the kind of content you want to see posted. Frankly I don't think "generals" are the problem; in fact if more of /mlp/'s popular generals had a concurrent thread here we might even get more activity. Here's a couple of things to put it in perspective:
I started the /bale/ thread (Beginning and Low-Effort art) partly in response to the earlier complaint that there isn't enough pony stuff on the main board. It was a successful thread on /mlp/, I liked the idea, and I thought it might encourage more people to create doodles and projects and whatnot. Thus far, I'm the only person who has actually contributed anything to it the SFM pinup art in there is mine. I set aside about six hours of my time every week to run movie night, I've completely lost count of all the image edits and shitposts and whatever I've posted here, and I don't even want to think about how many precious hours I've squandered reading and analyzing horrendous fanfiction so I can post hopefully witty commentary on it. Not trying to guilt-trip anyone, but I put in a fair amount of creative work around here, so if the site's slowing down it certainly isn't my fault.
I was actually in the process of writing green for Sven's prompt thread when I noticed this was getting bumped and I figured I should make a response. So at least for me, this meta-discussion is actually diverting energy away from content. I'm certainly not trying to discourage you guys from starting these meta-discussions about the site, but it might actually be more constructive to take that same energy and put it into actual posting.
>HEY, MODS! WHAT DO YOU THINK?
I think that's the best looking shot of Pinkie's ass I've ever seen on this board.
As to the actual question being discussed, I more or less agree that it would be better if people would just start a new thread for each major news event instead of just dumping it into the Random News thread. That's basically how things worked in the very beginning: happening threads usually included a link to an archived article along with a greentexted summary.
However, my memory might be fuzzy, but I seem to recall that people started complaining about there being too many news threads. People were starting threads about minor events that usually got few if any replies. The Random News thread was created as an all-purpose dumping ground for news events that were interesting enough to merit posting, but not significant or discussion-worthy enough to justify a dedicated thread. It seems like, over time, people just started getting lazy and dumping everything into the Random News Thread.
As to the more general "generals" issue, I honestly never quite understood why we had to have that rule in the first place. From what I recall, it was something that came from the /mlp/ side. /mlp/ anons felt that their board had divided into subcommunities, and everyone just stayed in their neverending threads and never interacted with the broader community. Since that's never been a problem on this site, the no-generals rule has always felt superfluous, so by and large we don't enforce it. Also, as has been brought up ITT, it's hard to define exactly what a "general" is in the first place. We've had the Syria General for nearly as long as the site has existed, and Anonfilly has been here since like fall of 2017 or thereabouts. Nobody has ever complained about those threads existing as far as I'm aware.
In any event, this seems like another issue that ought to be settled directly by the community, rather than by altering the site rules through some arcane parliamentary procedure. One of the founding principles of /mlpol/ was supposed to be that it be largely self-policing; ie, the community sets its own board culture and deals with interlopers by shitposting them into oblivion. It was part of the appeal we made to Hiro, actually, since 4chan staff at the time was saying they didn't want to give us a board because they didn't have anyone who could moderate it; we argued that we didn't need moderation because we could just police ourselves. The whole point of this place is supposed to be that we are a free-speech antithesis to over-moderated spaces like Reddit and Facebook and whatnot, so in general I think we should keep the written rules few and mostly informal. That's just my two cents.
I would personally be glad if people started posting news topics as their own threads instead of just using one big thread to dump the news in, but if people don't want to do it that way I can't really force them.
>>7197
>We weren't always this slow. I remember 2017-2019 when threads got made every day, and not just when I was making them. I want to go back.
This is true and I can sympathize; 2017 was a fun era and I miss it sometimes. Personally, though, I don't think enough people appreciate just how great it really is that this place is even still here. When I volunteered to be a mod, I honestly expected this place to be gone by the end of the summer. We had a lot of energy and a lot of posters in the beginning, but we also started life as a joke, and we were bound to lose momentum the longer it went on. When you consider that MLP isn't even on the air anymore and "bronies" haven't been relevant since 2013 or so, it's pretty impressive that we're still here 5 years after the fact.
>It wasn't always like this. We didn't always have de-facto generals. We weren't always this stagnated. We used to have new threads every day. We used to have random pony threads.
I hate to sound like a broken record, but my response to this issue is the same every time: if you want to see more activity, post more. If you want more of a particular type of content, post more of that type of content.
These meta discussions are fine if people want to get these issues out in the open, but the bottom line is that starting a thread to talk about how the site ought to be this way or that way is going to be far less effective than just posting the kind of content you want to see posted. Frankly I don't think "generals" are the problem; in fact if more of /mlp/'s popular generals had a concurrent thread here we might even get more activity. Here's a couple of things to put it in perspective:
I started the /bale/ thread (Beginning and Low-Effort art) partly in response to the earlier complaint that there isn't enough pony stuff on the main board. It was a successful thread on /mlp/, I liked the idea, and I thought it might encourage more people to create doodles and projects and whatnot. Thus far, I'm the only person who has actually contributed anything to it the SFM pinup art in there is mine. I set aside about six hours of my time every week to run movie night, I've completely lost count of all the image edits and shitposts and whatever I've posted here, and I don't even want to think about how many precious hours I've squandered reading and analyzing horrendous fanfiction so I can post hopefully witty commentary on it. Not trying to guilt-trip anyone, but I put in a fair amount of creative work around here, so if the site's slowing down it certainly isn't my fault.
I was actually in the process of writing green for Sven's prompt thread when I noticed this was getting bumped and I figured I should make a response. So at least for me, this meta-discussion is actually diverting energy away from content. I'm certainly not trying to discourage you guys from starting these meta-discussions about the site, but it might actually be more constructive to take that same energy and put it into actual posting.
Anonymous
No.7213
File (): 3582F653B89C0BB4B4D54DD6ACF37D40-581053.png (567.4 KB, 2126x376, herpmit_crab_by_zicygomar_d486goa-pre.png)
>>7212
>Make content to get activity
That's how I see it as well. This is basically the main problem. I still think that the no generals rule is good but having said that, I mean that in the terms of gardening. If you have to choose between watering a flower or a give it some fertlizer or something else, then the water takes priority.
That's why I don't want shitflinging. I want to discuss this without this taking to much emotional effort and energy or people feeling blamed for stuff.
Even if we enforce some sort of no general rule, it's not gonna solve the site slowness problem. I'd would argue it would improve it sure, however, the biggest problem is the lack of constructive posting of content. In that regard, you defintely have nothing to feel bad about GG because you are one of the people who contribute the most and make this site what it is.
Basically, if we got like a few more GGs this site would really start to tract attention. In fact, if we were to fish with GG's thread as bait on mlp we'd probably catch many people's intrests right now. It is also certainly something that brings me back to this site among other things.
>Make content to get activity
That's how I see it as well. This is basically the main problem. I still think that the no generals rule is good but having said that, I mean that in the terms of gardening. If you have to choose between watering a flower or a give it some fertlizer or something else, then the water takes priority.
That's why I don't want shitflinging. I want to discuss this without this taking to much emotional effort and energy or people feeling blamed for stuff.
Even if we enforce some sort of no general rule, it's not gonna solve the site slowness problem. I'd would argue it would improve it sure, however, the biggest problem is the lack of constructive posting of content. In that regard, you defintely have nothing to feel bad about GG because you are one of the people who contribute the most and make this site what it is.
Basically, if we got like a few more GGs this site would really start to tract attention. In fact, if we were to fish with GG's thread as bait on mlp we'd probably catch many people's intrests right now. It is also certainly something that brings me back to this site among other things.
>>7212
Thanks for the response, Elway.
>happening threads usually included a link to an archived article along with a greentexted summary.
Yeah, Imo, that's the ideal non-general /pol/ thread.
>I seem to recall that people started complaining about there being too many news threads.
I don't remember that, tbh. Back in the early days, I made a lot of the news threads, but I don't recall people complaining about the quantity. It seems bizzare considering that would've been the time when people came from /pol/.
>People were starting threads about minor events that usually got few if any replies.
Hmmm, I guess there's a case to be made that certain kinds of threads would be "not worth our time", although I never really considered those to be a major problem because they'd simply slide to the bottom of the catalog when interest waned.
Although, they also tend to stay on the catalog for a pretty long time due to the relative slow speed of our board. Perhaps some might find that unsightly, but the bottom of the catalog has always been full of dead threads, so I personally don't have a problem with that.
>It seems like, over time, people just started getting lazy and dumping everything into the Random News Thread.
See, I feel like this can't be understated. Overtime, some posters have gradually gotten used to posting things in the generals, perhaps even to the point that making fresh threads even feels awkward for some people.
Imo, that sot of creeping board-wide attitude is potentially a symptom of stagnation, reminiscint of the lower periods of /pol/ and /mlp/ (which is part of why the no generals rule was added in the first place).
>I honestly never quite understood why we had to have that rule in the first place.
Well, that's why this thread exists. To analyze what purpose it serves and consider the impacts it has had on our community.
That's fair, tbh. If you want to know the context, it was because the /mlpol/ constitution was drafted on a shitpost thread on the high-speed memesplosion that was the 4chan /mlpol/ board, not in context of an independent site which would inevitably be many times slower than the original April Fool's joke.
(Not saying we should ignore it just because "Muh founding fathers didn't have AR-13s!"; I'm just reminding people of the historical context.)
>From what I recall, it was something that came from the /mlp/ side. /mlp/ anons felt that their board had divided into subcommunities, and everyone just stayed in their neverending threads and never interacted with the broader community.
Yeah, that was really it. When /mlpol/ was created, /mlp/ was at a historic lowpoint, and the go-to scapegoat for board stagnation was the generalfags who only posted to a few threads (although, to be fair, a lot of them were DB tourists with no interest in the rest of the board). It might have been a hastily-created rule.
I feel like the "no generals" rule might have actually caused us to miss out on some pony content, because for all that's fair, a lot of those pony general threads are actually good and promote content creation while encouraging and attracting content creators. I would say that Anonfilly is an example, in addition to several of the non-cancer /mlp/ gens that are up right now.
>Since that's never been a problem on this site, the no-generals rule has always felt superfluous, so by and large we don't enforce it.
I agree, tbh. Maybe it's due to be amended if nobody really wants it to be enforced.
My only real problem is certain broad-topic threads, like the news thread. I'm not vehemently against generals, and I think a few generals could actually be good for this site, especially pony ones.
>We've had the Syria General for nearly as long as the site has existed, and Anonfilly has been here since like fall of 2017 or thereabouts. Nobody has ever complained about those threads existing as far as I'm aware.
Iirc, when /sg/ moved here, there was a pretty long discussion here on /qa/ about if an exception to the rule should be made, which was pretty broadly agreed upon. That discussion was brought up again when we adopted Anon Filly, with the same conclusion.
Anonfilly and /sg/ are both examples of generals that have been well received by the community, and were given explicit exceptions. Perhaps those exceptions should be extended to other threads, or maybe they shouldn't need threads in the first place.
>In any event, this seems like another issue that ought to be settled directly by the community, rather than by altering the site rules through some arcane parliamentary procedure. One of the founding principles of /mlpol/ was supposed to be that it be largely self-policing; ie, the community sets its own board culture and deals with interlopers by shitposting them into oblivion.
This is a fair assertion. It's also the one I think people are most comfortable with, although with no guarantee of results. I think a couple other anons in the threads have been disappouinted by what they determine to be insufficient staff action, but imo i personally think this is best addressed by the community itself, so long as we're all able to discuss the issue in a civil and productive manner.
On the other note though, I think it's also important for the rules that are important enough to be written to also be clear, since a lot of posters still take care to follow the rules and might be dissuaded if the rules are left vague. Some Anons might have wanted to make generals all this time and refrained from doing so because it was against site policy that they wanted to honor, so maybe the board could benefit from rule #9 being clarified to say that exceptions to the rule exist and what might define those exceptions.
That's just the other side of the argument though. I wouldn't consider any offcial changes to be of top priority.
Thanks for the response, Elway.
>happening threads usually included a link to an archived article along with a greentexted summary.
Yeah, Imo, that's the ideal non-general /pol/ thread.
>I seem to recall that people started complaining about there being too many news threads.
I don't remember that, tbh. Back in the early days, I made a lot of the news threads, but I don't recall people complaining about the quantity. It seems bizzare considering that would've been the time when people came from /pol/.
>People were starting threads about minor events that usually got few if any replies.
Hmmm, I guess there's a case to be made that certain kinds of threads would be "not worth our time", although I never really considered those to be a major problem because they'd simply slide to the bottom of the catalog when interest waned.
Although, they also tend to stay on the catalog for a pretty long time due to the relative slow speed of our board. Perhaps some might find that unsightly, but the bottom of the catalog has always been full of dead threads, so I personally don't have a problem with that.
>It seems like, over time, people just started getting lazy and dumping everything into the Random News Thread.
See, I feel like this can't be understated. Overtime, some posters have gradually gotten used to posting things in the generals, perhaps even to the point that making fresh threads even feels awkward for some people.
Imo, that sot of creeping board-wide attitude is potentially a symptom of stagnation, reminiscint of the lower periods of /pol/ and /mlp/ (which is part of why the no generals rule was added in the first place).
>I honestly never quite understood why we had to have that rule in the first place.
Well, that's why this thread exists. To analyze what purpose it serves and consider the impacts it has had on our community.
That's fair, tbh. If you want to know the context, it was because the /mlpol/ constitution was drafted on a shitpost thread on the high-speed memesplosion that was the 4chan /mlpol/ board, not in context of an independent site which would inevitably be many times slower than the original April Fool's joke.
(Not saying we should ignore it just because "Muh founding fathers didn't have AR-13s!"; I'm just reminding people of the historical context.)
>From what I recall, it was something that came from the /mlp/ side. /mlp/ anons felt that their board had divided into subcommunities, and everyone just stayed in their neverending threads and never interacted with the broader community.
Yeah, that was really it. When /mlpol/ was created, /mlp/ was at a historic lowpoint, and the go-to scapegoat for board stagnation was the generalfags who only posted to a few threads (although, to be fair, a lot of them were DB tourists with no interest in the rest of the board). It might have been a hastily-created rule.
I feel like the "no generals" rule might have actually caused us to miss out on some pony content, because for all that's fair, a lot of those pony general threads are actually good and promote content creation while encouraging and attracting content creators. I would say that Anonfilly is an example, in addition to several of the non-cancer /mlp/ gens that are up right now.
>Since that's never been a problem on this site, the no-generals rule has always felt superfluous, so by and large we don't enforce it.
I agree, tbh. Maybe it's due to be amended if nobody really wants it to be enforced.
My only real problem is certain broad-topic threads, like the news thread. I'm not vehemently against generals, and I think a few generals could actually be good for this site, especially pony ones.
>We've had the Syria General for nearly as long as the site has existed, and Anonfilly has been here since like fall of 2017 or thereabouts. Nobody has ever complained about those threads existing as far as I'm aware.
Iirc, when /sg/ moved here, there was a pretty long discussion here on /qa/ about if an exception to the rule should be made, which was pretty broadly agreed upon. That discussion was brought up again when we adopted Anon Filly, with the same conclusion.
Anonfilly and /sg/ are both examples of generals that have been well received by the community, and were given explicit exceptions. Perhaps those exceptions should be extended to other threads, or maybe they shouldn't need threads in the first place.
>In any event, this seems like another issue that ought to be settled directly by the community, rather than by altering the site rules through some arcane parliamentary procedure. One of the founding principles of /mlpol/ was supposed to be that it be largely self-policing; ie, the community sets its own board culture and deals with interlopers by shitposting them into oblivion.
This is a fair assertion. It's also the one I think people are most comfortable with, although with no guarantee of results. I think a couple other anons in the threads have been disappouinted by what they determine to be insufficient staff action, but imo i personally think this is best addressed by the community itself, so long as we're all able to discuss the issue in a civil and productive manner.
On the other note though, I think it's also important for the rules that are important enough to be written to also be clear, since a lot of posters still take care to follow the rules and might be dissuaded if the rules are left vague. Some Anons might have wanted to make generals all this time and refrained from doing so because it was against site policy that they wanted to honor, so maybe the board could benefit from rule #9 being clarified to say that exceptions to the rule exist and what might define those exceptions.
That's just the other side of the argument though. I wouldn't consider any offcial changes to be of top priority.
Anonymous
No.7215
>>7212
>>7214
>so in general I think we should keep the written rules few and mostly informal
I agree. It's not a top-down system; it's a community-driven system. That's why we have this board to talk about site matters.
>I would personally be glad if people started posting news topics as their own threads instead of just using one big thread to dump the news in, but if people don't want to do it that way I can't really force them.
I agree with this as well. Although certain kinds of generals may perpetuate stagnation, removing them entirely wouldn't necessarily improve the board if those posters do not make their own threads afterwards. You can lead a pony to water, but you can't make her drink.
> Personally, though, I don't think enough people appreciate just how great it really is that this place is even still here.
Perhaps I was a little harsh about that earlier. I'm amazed this practical joke of a board still exists too. I guess I was just frustrated.
>Frankly I don't think "generals" are the problem; in fact if more of /mlp/'s popular generals had a concurrent thread here we might even get more activity.
I agree with this as well. I would welcome most of the /mlp/ generals to move here if they actually wanted to.
>These meta discussions are fine if people want to get these issues out in the open, but the bottom line is that starting a thread to talk about how the site ought to be this way or that way is going to be far less effective than just posting the kind of content you want to see posted.
You're right, tbh. I would just like people to think about these issues a bit more, because some of my past efforts to keep this board alive felt like like lonely, thankless endeavors....
I was pretty autistic on board back in 2017-2018. I was making dozens of posts per day, and in the most autistic cases sockpuppeted and astroturfed entire conversations to keep people engaged. It was cringe in hindsight, but I had a lot of time on my hands back then...
>It was a successful thread on /mlp/, I liked the idea, and I thought it might encourage more people to create doodles and projects and whatnot. Thus far, I'm the only person who has actually contributed anything to it
With this, I can sympathize. It's a demoralizing feeling, but don't let it deter you.
I've got my own community-engagement project I'm working on for the board, which I guess I should launch asap. It had to do with setting up a community-wide roleplaying network, although life's recent events have gotten in the way... Maybe i should make the thread about it anyway though.
>>7214
>so in general I think we should keep the written rules few and mostly informal
I agree. It's not a top-down system; it's a community-driven system. That's why we have this board to talk about site matters.
>I would personally be glad if people started posting news topics as their own threads instead of just using one big thread to dump the news in, but if people don't want to do it that way I can't really force them.
I agree with this as well. Although certain kinds of generals may perpetuate stagnation, removing them entirely wouldn't necessarily improve the board if those posters do not make their own threads afterwards. You can lead a pony to water, but you can't make her drink.
> Personally, though, I don't think enough people appreciate just how great it really is that this place is even still here.
Perhaps I was a little harsh about that earlier. I'm amazed this practical joke of a board still exists too. I guess I was just frustrated.
>Frankly I don't think "generals" are the problem; in fact if more of /mlp/'s popular generals had a concurrent thread here we might even get more activity.
I agree with this as well. I would welcome most of the /mlp/ generals to move here if they actually wanted to.
>These meta discussions are fine if people want to get these issues out in the open, but the bottom line is that starting a thread to talk about how the site ought to be this way or that way is going to be far less effective than just posting the kind of content you want to see posted.
You're right, tbh. I would just like people to think about these issues a bit more, because some of my past efforts to keep this board alive felt like like lonely, thankless endeavors....
I was pretty autistic on board back in 2017-2018. I was making dozens of posts per day, and in the most autistic cases sockpuppeted and astroturfed entire conversations to keep people engaged. It was cringe in hindsight, but I had a lot of time on my hands back then...
>It was a successful thread on /mlp/, I liked the idea, and I thought it might encourage more people to create doodles and projects and whatnot. Thus far, I'm the only person who has actually contributed anything to it
With this, I can sympathize. It's a demoralizing feeling, but don't let it deter you.
I've got my own community-engagement project I'm working on for the board, which I guess I should launch asap. It had to do with setting up a community-wide roleplaying network, although life's recent events have gotten in the way... Maybe i should make the thread about it anyway though.
Anonymous
No.7216
Also, the "post ITT every time you visit" threads are low-effort bait and do nothing for the site beyond 'increasing the post count' while overall decreasing the post count. Seriously, there's no conducive reason for them
File (): 85C40EB53459220E2AEB351B8E16DBE1-1105942.png (1.1 MB, 4388x4463, IMG_9228.png)
Why is it that when site aspects are changed quitely with little-to-no user input there's rarely any controversy, but when a user makes a thread here to voice legitimate concerns and hear the site's opinions or start conversations about potential changes a bunch of users are suddenly on edge about "subversion"?
Legit quastion. We weren't always like this; we used to talk about the present state and future of the site casually without this level of paranoia. How can we fix the increasingly hostile atmosphere on this board?
Legit quastion. We weren't always like this; we used to talk about the present state and future of the site casually without this level of paranoia. How can we fix the increasingly hostile atmosphere on this board?
103 replies and 24 files omitted.
File (): 49BAA14A8E2C6D6D7E5BDAFD5EB60A49-4153.png (4.1 KB, 333x289, 1456761.png)
>>7141
Tbh, I don't make even one tenth as many posts/threads as I used to back in 2017, or even half as many as I did as recently as 2020. I could always get back to it, but I've had so much on my plate in meatspace lately and it feels like I'm tired all of the time...
I was never a huge content creator on 4chan, but i tried to be on /mlpol/ because I wanted to site to stay alive. At some point I was so desperate that I sockpuppeted entire conversations (yeah, it was super cringe in hindsight), or copy-pasted hundreds threads and distilled comments/arguments/jokes from 4chan, but I only ever wanted to get the ball rolling so that other anons would pick it up and I could finally be the lurker I wanted to be... It's a bit selfish, but I'm not the same tireless shitposter I was back in 2017...
If i felt like there were more posters making things themselves, i'd feel encouraged to pick things up, I guess.
I had that west marches pathfinder project I wanted to dedicate to this board, although posters didn't show as much initial interest as I hoped, and life got in the way of planning it... I'm still working on it, but it's slow.
Tbh, I don't make even one tenth as many posts/threads as I used to back in 2017, or even half as many as I did as recently as 2020. I could always get back to it, but I've had so much on my plate in meatspace lately and it feels like I'm tired all of the time...
I was never a huge content creator on 4chan, but i tried to be on /mlpol/ because I wanted to site to stay alive. At some point I was so desperate that I sockpuppeted entire conversations (yeah, it was super cringe in hindsight), or copy-pasted hundreds threads and distilled comments/arguments/jokes from 4chan, but I only ever wanted to get the ball rolling so that other anons would pick it up and I could finally be the lurker I wanted to be... It's a bit selfish, but I'm not the same tireless shitposter I was back in 2017...
If i felt like there were more posters making things themselves, i'd feel encouraged to pick things up, I guess.
I had that west marches pathfinder project I wanted to dedicate to this board, although posters didn't show as much initial interest as I hoped, and life got in the way of planning it... I'm still working on it, but it's slow.
>>7142
It is perfectly understandable. You can't work at full steam all the time, and things have been discouraging as of late. However, I feel you have discounted the userbase too easily. Though they are slow to make more content, they come out of the woodwork when it counts. We just need to stick around for when they do.
It is perfectly understandable. You can't work at full steam all the time, and things have been discouraging as of late. However, I feel you have discounted the userbase too easily. Though they are slow to make more content, they come out of the woodwork when it counts. We just need to stick around for when they do.
Anonymous
No.7145
>>7143
>We just need to stick around for when they do.
At least post some more random ponies in the meantime.
>We just need to stick around for when they do.
At least post some more random ponies in the meantime.
Anonymous
No.7146
>>7143
>keep 'this' up until they 'do'
Assuming that when they 'do', their position has changed,(previously noted as "fuck /pol/, fuck /mlpol/' on the /mlp/ side, and 'fuck /mlp/, fuck /mlpol/' on the /mlp/ side)
what exactly are you waiting for?
Dont answer, it was rhetorical.
>keep 'this' up until they 'do'
Assuming that when they 'do', their position has changed,(previously noted as "fuck /pol/, fuck /mlpol/' on the /mlp/ side, and 'fuck /mlp/, fuck /mlpol/' on the /mlp/ side)
what exactly are you waiting for?
Dont answer, it was rhetorical.
Anonymous
No.7147
File (): 4BCE7780CD3394BE936AC219A4183640-190417.jpg (186.0 KB, 618x960, 8AEB7DEDB9BFF0FDB53603EF8441A286-190399.jpg)
File (): AF49FD97CAAAE403D1D32039BFD7A46C-688626.png (672.5 KB, 1280x1280, AF49FD97CAAAE403D1D32039BFD7A46C-688626.png)
File (): E6472B53D351C3CC182CCA886D0625E6-356561.png (348.2 KB, 1024x1026, GottagetmystuffrightedE6472B53D351C3CC182CCA886D0625E6-356561.png)
Previous [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] Next