[ home / bans / all ] [ qa / jp / cry ] [ spg ] [ f / ec ] [ b / poll ] [ tv / bann ] [ toggle-new / tab ]

/poll/ - Polling and Honesty

use for asking the community

New Reply

Options
Comment
File
Whitelist Token
Spoiler
Password (For file deletion.)
Markup tags exist for bold, itallics, header, spoiler etc. as listed in " [options] > View Formatting "


[Return] [Bottom] [Catalog]

File:__ryuuguu_rena_higurashi_n….jpg (85.81 KB,600x848)

 No.170[Last50 Posts]





[View Responses]





[View Responses]

Discuss your ideas/opinions on splitting up /qa/ to find a place for threads that are "not/qa/" but still may hold interest to some people. poll probably won't matter much compared to the actual arguments presented withing the thread. This thread is an extension of the discussion that began with >>>/qa/33191

 No.171

Would we be having this discussion if >>>/qa/33155 had posted about politics instead of his lack of sex life?

 No.175

>>171
Maybe, since I'd already been thinking on this idea ever since >>>/b/2401. Although I'm sure that a politics thread wouldn't have sparked the necessary discussion to really allow me an opportunity to really bring this up.

 No.176

>>171
Politics threads generally get nuked. It's something pretty much everyone agrees on

 No.177

>>175
>this
By that I mean, my idea of trying to promote the use of /trans/ as a way for people to satiate their antisocial urges, if present, and soften the blow people may feel from their thread being deleted, as it wasn't sent to what will be a completely dead wasteland

 No.178

boards are like an imageboards's fiat currency. creating a bunch of boards may help spike discussion in the short term but ultimately results in a lack of content in the long term

 No.179

http://what-ch.mooo.com/what/res/13815.html
This is a better thread about covid than the one that has been on /qa/ because it discusses potential issues and the conventional problems with the mindset of America

-This is impossible on /qa/ because we do not permit this kind of shit flinging.
-A separate board allows for more unfiltered conversation.

Current /qa/ is headed in direction of stagnation because certain extremists do not see /qa/ as being used for anything other than their ideal scenario for how the board is used.
- This split is already in existance. Ignoring it will only see things degrade from here.

 No.180

I don't see what the problem is with just listing /trans/ and using that for your /b/ instead

 No.181

people talk about politics all the time even in k/qa/, which is unavoidable
why aren't people allowed to blog about being lonely. it's crazy how toxic people are to it...

i get if you dont like it but everyone is so mean

 No.182

>>181
People talk about how lonely they are sometimes too. If you talk about it a little, I don't see a big problem with it. That said, I wouldn't want it to dominate the board like what happened on /r9k/ because that would be depressing. Go lurk that board for a while and you'll see why people push back against it. And it's ridiculous to expect a zero-effort post on the topic like >>>/qa/33155 to not receive any criticism.

 No.183

>>182
i see plenty of low effort posts that don't receive this amount of essays pooping on them, as well as modposting

 No.184

>>183
That happened because the admin posted in the thread and turned it into a debate.

 No.185

From the looks of it the content creators of kissu care more about people attacking what other's see as low quality threads.

Yeah, I'm looking at people's IPs but it allows me to gauge the value of who supports what. And overwelmingly the creators on this site don't care about what others deem as effortless. I would be in that group as well.

 No.186

This is not to say that I don't consider thread creators as creators, but creators of artwork, animation and etc.

 No.188

I feel like using /trans/ as /b/ would interfere with its purpose, to showcase mod action. So I disagree there.
And seeing how few people /qa/ has today, I can't see /b/ gaining enough traction to be attractive to anyone. What's more, it's quite possible people would post "not/qa/" things in /qa/ anyways because there'd be an audience there. Happens on 4chan daily, tens of instances.
>>179
Calling it better is a big leap. It's certainly different, it's certainly got things you won't find in /qa/, but the opposite is true. The first corona thread here was far more informative, had proper sources for goings-on and had much more civil and longer discussion. I know it was carried by one guy, but that's besides the point. /what/'s was not objectively better.

 No.189

>>188
/what/'s is also carried by one guy

 No.190

>>179
Well covid and it's potential issues and the conventional problems with the mindset of America isn't very 2D/random to begin with so that's not a reason to feel inferior about. If they start making better jokes/OC then you can start worrying.
Separate board for personal problems/current events in the long run attracts unfunny people who don't have interest in imageboards except such discussions. Examples /pol/ and /r9k/.
Risks brought by stagnation and change are equivalent and communities need some form of rough unifying ideal or else they fall apart.
>>181
Almost everyone is (even if they surround themselves with people), dwelling on it is pointless, just like sharing it with people you don't even know.
>>183
Not every kind of less-than-ideal post has a stigma of being associated with a type of people already present in imageboards and seen as one of the reasons of their downfall. That's why people overreact.

 No.191

File:please split qa.png (57.38 KB,500x500)


 No.192

File:[HorribleSubs] Murenase! S….jpg (174.55 KB,1280x720)

>>179
If you see that /what/ thread as something to aspire to then I really don't know what to say except I hope kissu fails every time to reach that level. What's wrong with the kissu threads? It's too informative? It's not badass enough to impress teenagers?
The guy started the coronavirus thread with paragraph upon paragraph of things he typed and answered questions, but instead you're praising something that looks identical to any /pol/ or 8gag thread. I think most people on kissu already got tired of discussing it because certain people are attracted to certain boards. Is it really an issue if people don't drop "redpill" twitter screenshots here? Is there a reason why they need to be able to?

I understand there's a internet generation gap between me and most people on kissu, but my understanding has been that people make a conscious decision when they decide to visit kissu and not whichever /jp/ spinoff currently has the most active outrage-of-the-day thread

>>185
>I'm looking at people's IPs
You need to stop doing that, man. Seriously. Judge a post by the post and don't look up reasons to hate or like a post because you looked up the post history like you were on a forum

 No.193

>>192
It's enough for deletions but ban is more serious matter. Fine people can have worse days and baddies might not show any sign of improving.
So in theory it has a merit. Reliability of displayed IPs is entirely different matter though. That and, well, it spoils the fun.

 No.194

Oh, and I also don't see this "stagnation" thing of yours. I think kissu is booming creatively and threads have been going great lately. I really don't know what kind of freshness you're seeking when people are posting things you literally can't experience anywhere else.
I don't think I'm an "extremist" for telling someone that his thread about sex and hookers was lame and didn't belong on kissu. It wasn't as a mod (which I am), but as a user. For me posting or logging in as a mod is a last resort and I don't want my posts to be seen with any special authority. The ideal scenario things go well and I never log in as a mod again

 No.195

>>194
yeah, you'd want everything to work out without any effort. That guy you insulted was literally one of the guys creating the content you speak of.

If you had your way you would have told him to fuck off and never come back. You'd know if you actually looked at who posts on the site instead of living in your dreamworld fantasy land of perfectionism and idealism.

 No.196

And as for a boost in creativity? What do you know, maybe advertising on to the people you hate has brought over a few good posters? Would you know that there are good guys lurking in the trash and that not everything they do is garbage?

 No.197

I fucking hate xenophobes.

 No.198

>>195
The guy you threatened to ban?
>Though, looking at OPs past few posts I'd probably just ban him

 No.199

>>198
not the OP, the one with the NGE blog post

 No.200

>>195
>That guy you insulted
Where did I insult anyone? I don't even know which guy you're talking about. I think you're getting too worked up about this

>If you had your way you would have told him to fuck off and never come back
What limitation was there that prevented me from doing this if that was something I actually wanted to do?

>You'd know if you actually looked at who posts on the site instead of living your dreamworld fantasy land of perfectionism and idealism.
I really don't know what you mean. I'm always here on kissu and IRC if my autistic tendencies aren't eating up my attention in some singular pursuit that grabs me once in a while.
I'm not going to build profiles on anyone unless there's abuse, I think it puts a barrier between us and regular users since you're looking at things from a perspective no one else sees (I.E that I'm replying to a person specifically and not a post)

 No.201

>>200
>>>/qa/33166
You told this guy that what he thought was ok was shit and he should feel bad for it. For what reason is there to encourage a good poster to feel like shit considering he made also made a thread you attribute to high quality

 No.202

>>201
>You told this guy that what he thought was ok was shit
Where?

 No.203

>>202
>This isn't a /jp/ spinoff, 2D images don't excuse r9k posting. There are many things you can talk about that are far more interesting than your lack of romantic conquests
The poster responded in earnest to the OP and is therefore also caught up with the accusations that his intention was to be an r9k poster, when I'm certain he was just trying to help.

 No.204

the question of what is a /r9k/ poster is another thing

 No.205

>>201
>You told this guy that what he thought was ok was shit and he should feel bad for it.
If you want a lot more of that, make a new board for politics and other "non/qa/" subjects.

 No.206

>>203
I think you're reading into things that aren't there. I said the thread was not interesting and that a random 2D image doesn't excuse r9k posting.
It's true that I shouldn't assume people know what r9k or pol9k means, though

 No.207

>>205
poor interpretation of the concept. My problem is that the community will resort to this already for topics that don't fit their pov of what /qa/ is so there needs to be a fix.

 No.208

And looking back, yeah I regret saying that. Sorry to that guy. It's just a subject that has taken over so many damn boards and someone recently voiced concern over kissu attracting exactly that king of thing
I really don't want kissu to go down the /jp/ spinoff path..

 No.209

>>206
I'm holding up high standards, be careful of who you get caught up in moderation and the signals you're sending to others. When you end up moderating the admin as if he's a peasant who made a grave error( >>>/qa/33093 ), something is wrong. I made a mistake in weather you were mod or not because I'm always in the mod UI. That's basically my reaction as if it were done from a position of authority.

My position stands though since there's a problem with people who don't accept outsiders from jp boards on the basis of impurity or contamination by 4chan.

 No.210

>>208
my issue is that the boards in question have posters who are of a different culture but messed with by the atechan&co groups and that the things you hate about them are really the lack of control over them.

 No.211

Some posters here like GNFOS or conventional spinoff lack of moderation, but if they're not here then they're somewhere else.

It's the 4chan pol paradox. Do you delete it and send the good users to 8ch where they get extremized or do you keep them and try to keep things in control?

 No.212

>>211
No, that's not the /pol/ paradox. The /pol/ problem is that it brings in too much money from retards that will buy passes and can't into adblock

 No.213

>>209
>moderation
It wasn't intended to be moderation, though. If I want any authority applied to my post (which I don't) I'd put on a mod code thingie

>>209
>When you end up moderating the admin as if he's a peasant who made a grave error
Didn't you write a message not to take deletions personally...
I saw a post with a spoiler so I removed it because I didn't know I could add functioning spoiler tags to a post. If you post a spoiler in the future and it's not properly hidden I'll do it again and I expect the same treatment

 No.214

>>213
>so I removed it
oh I mean edited it

 No.215

>>213
Yeah, but everyone is going to take moderation personally because no one wants to be moderated. It's there as an escape clause in case like 4chans `use of 4chan is a privilege not a right`. You didn't make a delete either. Edits of people's posts carry a different weight because you're changing their intended meaning of the post and not removing it.

my problem is that I see that there's a divide between posters fear of becoming a norm board and the fact that norms are already posting here and produce good content. I see it in you and the guy who mentioned it. I don't want to cater to any paranoia other than my own. It's a mirror of real world politics and I don't like the way the real world is.

 No.216

>>215
in essence what you intended to do was a warning, but we don't have that feature so I understand the intention but the meaning comes off wrong.

 No.218

File:0441.jpg (21.02 KB,512x341)

>>215
I don't really care about the "norm" thing, I think 4/qa/ taught everyone that crazy people are the most dangerous.
But there's a fine line when it comes to sex and relationship talk because like politics it gets people emotional

 No.219

Robots aren't norms, that's just a lie /jp/ tells themselves.

 No.220

A word about norms. /r9k/, with their culture of endless self-pity about virginity and rage against the norms and femoids, are hardly normal. The reason /jp/ tell themselves that /r9k/ are the real norms is so they can complain about the norms without noticing they're acting just like subhuman /r9k/. /jp/ would like to think that /r9k/'s norms are a corruption of norms by norm newfags. In reality, /jp/ and /r9k/ are twins, birthday February 20, 2008. "Normalfag" as far as I can tell originates in some dumb pasta from /b/ which could be interpreted either way. Neither interpretation is the correct one; both are equally valid and equally retarded. Don't use the word or any of its derivatives unless you want to be misunderstood.

 No.221

>>194
You're not an "extremist" for doing that but it's still not awfully fun.
I agree with you in that this thread including serious responses was a bad content. Did your complaint make it better? You see each post generates similar posts by encouraging lurkers to act like what they see. At some point people thought that whining would solve the problems but it only brought in further whining. It doesn't work the way they imagined, they thought when newfags will come of age they will discourage what regular users didn't want on board. In reality they discourage what they themselves don't like, not what's actually detrimental. It's an aggravating self perpetuating loop with no escape.

Or you can disregard what I wrote and think of imageboards as a improvised comedy show and everything should become clear.

 No.222

>>219
not in the meaning of リア充 however they do aspire to normalfag goals, only fail at them and endlessly whine about it
this is not a way for Anonymous to live

 No.224

I'll probably do this but not right now since it's neither wanted and the site still doesn't seem to be at the point where it's required, software is a bit of a bigger concern now.

hybrid the acceptable things that I delete from /qa/ and the mostly dead /megu/ into a /jp/ that will follow the ruleset of non-extremist content(raids and dox) and be 2D content only.

 No.225

File:1353967590730.png (159.05 KB,768x432)

Since I've been invoked, I'd just like to submit to the public record an explanation for disparity between the first and second coronavirus threads; lack of new information. My first thread, as stated in the title, was intended to be a sort-of realtime thread discussing the situation, with a heavy focus on the actual facts surrounding all things related to the coronavirus. As the thread was ending, essentially everything that could be known was already stated. As I was creating the second thread, I quickly realized that there was nothing truly new to report on other than the development of new epidemic clusters. As such, I largely left the thread to itself save for a few posts here and there. Nonetheless there are two, far greater distinctions: 1. Rather than being used as a place for posting credible information, the second thread quickly devolved in a "pseudo blog thread," filled with brief comments and no real tangible, or effectual information, and 2. The bar for discussion was significantly lowered by a [u]thread merge[/u] with what was quite literally a thread compromised of baseless meandering befit of a schizophrenic.

That thread merge in particular, contained verbatim posts from /what/, funnily enough, Vermin.

That aside, I'd really like to know what and who you consider a "content creator." I've certainly made more than a few banners, and contribute to image edit threads whenever they pop up; likewise, as far as I can tell, there's only one thread currently on /qa/ devoted to actual content creation . That out of the way, I completely disagree with your reading of:
>the content creators of kissu care more about people attacking what other's see as low quality threads.
This comes down to a matter of philosophy: you either promote a culture of gatekeeping or you promote ignoring said "low quality threads." There are problems with both approaches. Neglect is fundamentally interpreted as a positive reaction, which spurs on the same behavior. Gatekeeping, by contrast, promotes a vindictive culture of evaluating the worth of posts against one another, leading to conflict and flamewars. The only reason these community-based responses exist, however, has to do with moderation. Or, more aptly, the lack thereof. The meta flamewars which have been occuring have only been possible because the threads and posts in question were not handled; you can either have posters themselves tell off users or you can do it yourself. As much as "self-moderarion" is lauded by /qa/, you can't have it both ways. You don't necessarily have to ban these users, or nuke their threads, but so long as the only rule is "don't be obnoxious," there's going to be an ongoing tension between what is and what isn't allowed. In that same vein, to loop back around to the "norms and teens" side of discussion, the problem I see there is that they have a distinct lack of "taking it easy" mentality. Their language is often crude and/or vulgar, their posts are low-effort (there's a large distinction between a genuine, single sentence reply without formatting and one that's insincere), and there's a very stark "non-conformity" to the way they approach things. To tangentially invoke the "critiques" of the "Kissu is such a hugbox" threads, the problem isn't lack of confirmity in and of itself. Distinct posters have regularly been celebrated on /qa/ (do I really need to list all of them?). The problem is one of assimilation. I.e. <fill in the blank> posts on /qa/, not <fill in the blank> posts X on /qa/.

Also, add me to your "extremist" count if you haven't already :P

 No.227

more a statement that the thread can't go in any direction other than information dumping because the culture of /qa/ leans towards being non-argumentative.

 No.228

>>225
I think the virus just isn't interesting any more. We know so much about it and I think it's become more a political issue now in that it's all down to how people, especially the governments, respond to it. Anyone following scientific media and such already read everything interesting about it weeks ago.
The novel coronavirus... is no longer novel.

 No.229

>>227
Could you elaborate on this?

 No.231

File:raw meat bunny ears.png (995.28 KB,1000x1200)

>>229
To make a scene over what you believe in is considered to be acting as a teen or a schizo and the hegemony is that you should blend in. In the /what/ thread you have a Florida schizo who believes in MK ultra/conspiracy theories and this offers a chance for people to argue over the truth and through argument add new insight to both side's perspectives while keeping track of real world events as the event becomes a game or competition between two competing ideologies. At the opposite end of gamifying real world suffering is documentation of events. The /qa/ happening thread is like this. Document events and we share information that aligns with the purpose of documentation, however new insights can not come out of documentation, it's argumentation that leads to discoveries... and perhaps even culture.

Allowing a place for people with radical opinions to discuss things means, assuming you can control it, more creativity and engagement. Through moderator force you enforce a boundry/division between the two concepts, however it is open borders in nature and anyone can take part in either of the dualities of order and chaos.

 No.232

I probably will end up making another board and removing megu(sorry one other person aside from myself who posts there). This splitting the functions of argument/freedom and documentation/moderation, because there is a divide between the two perspectives here and one is trying to suffocate the other. It's this internal conflict that I feel exists behind the scenes that is the suffocation I speak of. It's most visible in the chatrooms that kissu has set up around the idea of what is and what isn't /qa/.

By doing this I can avoid the struggle I have with explaining moderation and defining the objective I have in my head. It allows Cool to focus more on his perspective of what is acceptable on /qa/ while also allowing myself to expand my own vision of an urban multicultural environment.

The main objection people have is that content will get too diluted, but I can already assure you that this split is necessary and kissu is being choked by the single board mentality. People don't want to see certain content posted on /qa/ that people want to talk about. Myself I would like to be a bit more teen but I never will because that's not the way /qa/ is. I go to other websites to do that and this is a problem since they don't want to share users or create a bridge between us.

I'll give it until April 2nd then I'll make my decision. I believe I see something that the majority does not and I'll let it sit in my head for under a week.

 No.233

Some people want a fast boards that regularly cycle out content and throw in rages over what things are like. Other people want slow boards where OC lingers for weeks and you can talk about how your day was. There's no way to compromise with these two points of view other than hiding what you dislike and replying to what you enjoy, but this doesn't work. What follows is meta conflicts over identity and thus the board is swept into a situation where the OC and bloggers suffer while the teens cannibalize the site and are eventually forced to move on as activity dies down. I do not think that the teens are invasive or that the chill people are soft, but their preferences don't match and without a boundry one can not sustain the other.

So this is basically how I feel about the whole thing. We've had 3 meta threads now where in my opinion more relaxed posters have seen things be less enjoyable. I'd like to resolve this before there's a fourth

 No.234

>>232
>>233
>>231
- Ver

In short. I feel this boundry exists because it's impossible to hold back the meta conflicts that ensue over identity and unless I kill off one side and support the other more issues will grow.

It's unfortunate that the two biggest contributors to this site sit on both ends of the spectrum and are already beginning to get in conflict over the identity. Myself I sit at the middle as a neutral mediator.

\0

 No.235

File:6a8ec51830933c1d4e3f03b6b1….jpg (469.42 KB,1235x850)

I don't think that things should be split up, but rather there should be a unification of the two sides of the board. You seemed to illustrate my thoughts on the matter perfectly in >>231
>new insights can not come out of documentation, it's argumentation that leads to discoveries… and perhaps even culture
This is my greatest reason for being against splitting up the boards, since it'd be leaving the two together that leads to these productive/culture-building arguments. To split up the two and hope that conflict arises within your new board is a bit short-sighted. As you may not realize it yourself, but what you're suggesting and your explanation for doing so is also saying that you will stunt the growth of culture in /qa/ itself in favor of your new board. Just as well, there's no guarantee that this split will work since the only argument you have for why people would use this new board of yours over /qa/ is its "freshness", but you don't elaborate much on how it'd differentiate from /what/ or ota where people can already experience much of the same of what your hoping for with a guarantee of activity. Nobody is wary of teenmin cracking down on their shitposts, but they may worry about you or cool on here. So that lack of faith may really hamper your ability to kick-start the board and have it be a success.

>It allows Cool to focus more on his perspective of what is acceptable on /qa/ while also allowing myself to expand my own vision of an urban multicultural environment.
What I think the most preferable option would be for you and yotgo to work out your differences in moderation/culture philosophy and try to reach an understanding for which the both of you are fine with posting as comes naturally. I think that you're a bit overly harsh on him, even if some criticism you have is justified. He has been more relaxed since he doesn't need to worry about kissu as much as he did /qa/, but that doesn't mean that he's become unable to create. Right now he's probably just focused a bit more on his other projects, like modding. You could try and push him to make more for /qa/ if you want, but I don't believe in forcing people to do anything they may not want to.

Also, excuse me if I'm being presumptuous, but the both of you did not hold back on /qa/ much, at least early on, did you? The more extreme way of holding back any possible teen-like posts or strong opinions you may hold seems to be a more post-split mindset. Since everyone became more wary of that old saying about how acting like retards leads actual retards flooding in believing themselves to be in good company, and, at least I think, people became more concerned with holding everyone together so more extreme /qa/ posts started to fade in favor of what may be seen as more safe. 2019 emphasized the stagnation brought upon by the ever more extreme adoption of these beliefs, and it could be seen in how people from spinoffs started to head back to their spinoffs (like trevor and those who followed him), and the feeling was pretty crap as well. I can't express how nice it was to finally leave /qa/ for kissu, where having fun felt less like work and more actually natural again.

>What follows is meta conflicts over identity
This may not sound ideal, but I believe that from now on these discussions should be moved to the more appropriate board for them when they pop up. Since it is /qa/ tradition to get into big meta fights, and a good bit of people may actually enjoy it. At the same time, it is somewhat of a bad splotch on the board that may be discouraging to some either not accustomed to that specific /qa/ tradition, or those that just have never liked it and tended to hide said threads when they popped up. This would also be useful for invigorating current /b/ since it doesn't really get much activity outside of technical issues or the occasional advertisement which pops up.

>The main objection people have is that content will get too diluted
I really think that this could happen if you were to initiate a split, /qa/ itself still isn't nearly fast enough to justify it being split in two yet. Despite saying that people want to see OC stick around for weeks, that is still perfectly possible with just a couple bumps from page 10, assuming it doesn't get any activity in between bumps. What will be the best fix for people with strongly conflicting opinions I believe will be the update you roll out. A more 4chan-x catalog allows a convenient way of looking at the board as a whole, and therefore makes it a bit easier for people to ignore the threads that may not be to their liking.

I do realize that there is the problem of people that will be against some threads and want moderator intervention, although that path to dealing with that is a bit more tricky, and I'm not sure myself of a perfect way to deal with them. I think that allowing them to voice their discontent (without a mod officially stepping in to turn it into a meta argument about the site itself) and maybe making a /b/ thread to debate about if it belongs or not would be ideal. More >>225 probably has a better idea about how to deal with this specific problem than I do.

That's about the extent of my current thoughts, I hope that at least some of what I said may help you with your decision.

 No.236

>>232
If you want a board for things that aren't /qa/ then dilution is not a concern because the 'not /qa/' content is either not being posted or removed.
Let's take a look at those other sites you go to. Without going into details of which sites are these are can you imagine those people sharing a site with /qa/? Do you want more of those people on /qa/? Right now it's mostly 'non /qa/' behaviours that cause strife then it's going to be 'non /qa/' people and moderation can only filter so much. I may be wrong but only in /jp/sphere do I see glimpses of what I loved about the internet. Nothing else preserved the spirit of fun and stood the test of time. The genral trend seems to be the further things stray from 2D/Random the worse they become.

I'm not even telling you not to do it. It'll start good, while it's mostly imageboard dwellers around, but beware if you want to grow this site through that other board and better have a contingency plan ready.

 No.237

>>236
Well, I'll get into responding to what people have to say about this after I've finished coding, but I figure I'll just say that this is about kissu, not /qa/.

 No.238

>>237
As of current, my idea is that kissu and /qa/ aren't really separate entities as of yet.

 No.240

File:1500749714080.gif (193.9 KB,399x305)

Maybe final note: At least wait until kissu is regularly half as fast as 4/qa/ before trying to split people up, no reason to potentially kill momentum by trying to split things up right now

 No.241

>>231
>the hegemony is that you should blend in.
Yes, but that's a matter of attitude. People share differing opinions all the time, and even have longer discussions on occasion. If you recall the Dark Souls 2 thread it was not the disagreement what turned the thread sour, it was the change in tone which came later.
>add new insights
>leads to discoveries
Framing this as some scholarly pursuit is wishful thinking. It's competitive funposting, learning isn't the point.
>and perhaps even culture.
And a car can speed up by driving off a cliff. Don't ignore that any other type of posting can shape and create culture just as much as rampant shitposting, every community on the net has a culture and using the term so vaguely, with such a grass-is-greener bias, is silly. Be more clear with what you want, you can't have everything. (I feel I'm being overly harsh in this section, I don't mean to be rude. >>232 Do take your time thinking your vision through.)

Radical opinions aren't tied to being "chaotic" or creative, with adequate behavior (which needn't be monolithic) they could perfectly fit in the current /qa/. Particular opinions are not something that's caused a flame war and I really doubt they will be, unless it's fostered.

>>233
This does get me interested in having a second board, but I don't believe we're at that point yet. And in fact, there IS a way to compromise which >>165 came up with. Don't forget about that.
I also agree with >>235 .

 No.243

>>224
If something is acceptable, why would you delete it?
Not everything people don't like needs to be dealt with by the force of moderation. Having mods solve all the community's problems is very much "not /qa/." Moderation should be the last resort, not the first resort.

The problem you attempting to solve with this split is entirely in your head. Some people shat on a guy for making an /r9k/-like thread, they didn't call for it to be deleted or the poster banned (except you). And somehow you saw this as /jp/ purist extremism. News flash: incel culture is broadly disliked, it's not just /jp/. It's not a universal dislike, but it's broad, not specific to any one category of people. Look at https://find.4chan.org/?q=%22back+to+r9k%22 -- that's not concentrated on /jp/ or boards similar to it, it's mostly concentrated on boards with a lot of "/r9k/ leakage" like /fit/. Among "norms" who don't visit imageboards incel culture is even less accepted. Now does that mean that mods should delete everything that smells like /r9k/? No, that would be stupid and unnecessary. One incel is not going to change the culture of a board unless there's so little moderation that he can do it by spamming (which is unfortunately true of some boards, but not here). And /qa/'s posters aren't fragile enough that we can't tolerate small doses of things we don't like. Sometimes people are going to see a thread they don't like and say so. It's a bad idea, especially if done with a tone of irritation, but not everyone is going to have perfect judgment. The idea that a few insults to a thread is going to drive posters away is silly. Anyone who would be driven away by that would not be browsing imageboards.

 No.251

Something that might drive posters away from an anonymous imageboard, on the other hand, is moderators looking up IPs and then talking about what posts users have made in other threads. That is much more likely to drive people away than telling someone a topic they like is shit.

You seem to both want more conflict, but want less of people telling each other their posts are shit and do not belong. Short of disallowing meta-discussion which would greatly change the nature of the board, these are incompatible goals. I frankly don't understand what you want.

Deleting a board and merging it into an unwanted board just so the unwanted board would have at least some traffic would be reprehensible. Don't do that.

 No.253

>>251
Thank you for that first point, I swear to god Vermin is going to bring about his own doomsday scenario if he "publicly" keeps that up. Note vermin that it doesn't matter if you keep doing it on your own, but don't bring that shit up.

 No.254

>>235
what I'm talking about there with the interest in this is that there's a rise in meta discussion and talk about what belongs in /qa/ and what doesn't. That's a sign people are unhappy with the way things are. I can't expect people to change who they like. I'm fine with people arguing over ideas, but arguing over who does and doesn't belong is pointless. There's no way to resolve this kind of thing unless one side packs their bags or conforms. That's not a good buisness moto. There is interest in kissu from `less mature members of the audience` because the gnfos schiz, atechan and so on post here when their sites go down and quickly leave for ota later when they realize that /qa/ is moderated. At the same time, I talk to these kinds of people on other sites, other IRC and so on. It's a waste and I don't hate them, they just don't have a space here because that goes against the vision that people have of /qa/.

It's not a difference between Cool and I, he would like to see double the things I moderate deleted. He does this because his idea of /qa/ is closer to nen while I am more towards Ota when it wasn't pure spam. If he takes the direction in the direction of nen it winds up a board that can only sustain itself on legacy rather than momentum. I think that in the condition that another board exists having qa be an even slower wouldn't matter because it could get by on it's level of quality against everything else.

How early? I wrote him a bot in June I think. /qa/ also had a large amount of conflict and anger that was being used to fuel an idea. It was pretty intense. I remember not even focusing in classes really and just posted on /qa/.

If a tradition exists, then it has to be defended for it's benefit and purpose. I don't like meta discussion because it's a sign that something is wrong. People shouldn't be complaining, problems should be getting fixed.

It isn't a matter of the site speed requiring splitting, it's that we are splitting each other apart already without me having to do anything. How much time is spent on not kissu and why am I not doing anything about this?

My concern is one part "Meta discussion implies conflict that requires fixing", one part "other places succeed on a more relaxed system yet the community pushes slow paced discussion". My only solution to this is A) Ignore it and eventually the site goes stale, B) open up to the possibility of less enforced boards. Weather they'll be popular or not probably depends on a lot of factors neither you or I can estimate.

>>236
I wouldn't have deleted a guro picture of a girl being strangled to death on a random board, but I don't think many people object to me deleting it on /qa/. At the same time someone did object to me doing it and they post on the site a lot. These kinds of things are going to become more apparent as time goes on and cause internal conflict. Sageru's #qa is a very succesful place yet it shares the same space with #jp. It's much more succesful than Rizon #qa.

Sageru #qa is perhaps the best reason why I am right here and that this idea would work. Both channels share content yet #qa lives on because it can't be spammed as hard. /qa/ and /jp/ on kissu would be the similar principle.

>>241
My idea is pretty simple and not based in culture. If people want to gatekeep then I'm going to make a new board for the people they're gatekeeping and keep them out of /qa/ if they don't behave a way that fits their perspective. "Meta discussion implies conflict that requires fixing" "other places succeed on a more relaxed system yet the community pushes slow paced discussion". I don't think the community is wrong, but my idea of what kissu is isn't about one group having control over everything.

>>243
If I don't people will leave. I've already had complaints that we're too soft. If I don't address these concerns people of his perspective will grow bitter and cause problems. This is unproductive and needs to be fixed. This anarchy style of moderation is not what Cool wants and the group of people who use the report system on the site. It's what I'm attempting to create because there's a split in perspectives of how things should be.

>>251
I guess I can lie more about what I'm doing. I can't prove that your government isn't doing the same because they're better at being quiet than me.

Attacking ideas and attacking their right to post are different concepts. Meta discussion has always been cancerous. Whenever it came up on 4chan or kissu I've noticed that casual posters start to feel uncomfortable. If a problem exists it needs to be fixed, weather the fixing is in the person or in practices.

megu is a problem board... it's just me and another guy sharing content that some server hosts could find offensive. If it were more diluted by other random content then it's not really an issue.

 No.255

>>241
I'm not certain about using a mainline board to experiment on ideas that have never been tested. It would require me making another board or putting it onto 4taba as an experiment

 No.258

>>254
Acting too cautiously on the possibility a worst case scenario will occur each time you see a potential problem will eventually drive staleness. Not every report or complaint should be taken as a sign of "do something or I'm leaving". The clash of ideas is what prevents a board from being stale, and may actually turn into a reason that people stay. What you are trying to propose is splitting up /qa/ into gnfos and nen. The two of which both exist, and from my point of view neither are ideal.
(Warning: tired so this following section will be a stream of conscious unreviewed and possibly ramblly)
I'm revisiting this paragraph at the end because I want to make sure that I included somehow that you need to take a bit of risk to see any reward. Take no or too little risk and you wind up with no reward, and in this case it could backfire since imageboards are supposed to be ever-evolving, and while you may think that making a new board will help this, it actually won't. At this current time dividing the board will only increase the divide between posters and lead to stagnation on both boards because there isn't enough posters on either end to keep up the activity on their own without the other. also the lack of vairability that comes from moving these two groups apart will make the boards really stale since it'll just be all of one thing and that's never a good thing. You need the people to clash and be a bit at odds with each other in a way that keeps a balance on the board while not tipping it too far in one direction. In this way it makes it tough, but the result is a more creative overall board that has a bit of something that anyone can enjoy, but not too much that it drives people away. OC is nice but if you have just a board of OC then it becomes stale no matter how creative it is becuase everything is OC and it's the norm so there's nothing special about it. Also I just think it's impossible to have two random boards, both with vague guidelines about what goes on what. and seeing your current state you may take it upon yourself if you do do this move to up your moderation more to the dissatisfaction of everyone while trying to push for people to go on the other board, and while you'll have the best intentions youll just piss people off doing that and probably could end up driving people away most likely.
(end rant)

We can both agree that meta *not good meta but more complaining meta* is not at all healthy for the board, but I think that if people want it, they should be allowed to have it away from the rest of the people posting, much like we are right now. /b/ currently provides a great opportunity for that as it is not only dead, but any meta that would go on it would be beneath a mountain of stickies. Anyone that saw it would more already be there for the meta arguments so that wouldn't be much a problem. Although, if you just want to get rid of it outright that's fine with me.

I don't really know how early, but just early 2017 probably around before and after the freeze. But nobody pulled any punches at that time, and I think threads felt all the more impactful for it. I just don't believe you can replicate that same passion in people if you try to babysit them with moderation.

>we're too soft
I think that people aren't really mad that you're too soft, but rather that they don't see a reaction from people on the board that share their opinion, in which case it's good to encourage people to "self-moderate" to an extent, since it'll allow people that may take issue with a topic to see that they aren't alone if others push back against it as well.

>I wouldn't have deleted a guro picture of a girl being strangled to death on a random board, but I don't think many people object to me deleting it on /qa/
This is the logic that confused me. What are you moderating based on? Did someone report that image? Or was it you assuming that their may be pushback to its presence on /qa/.

Also in regards to sageru #qa it's not anywhere near what you would want the ideal /qa/ to be. It's over moderated on purpose.

I'm probably too tired to address any other points with much more detail, so I'll leave the rest for others.

 No.259

>>254
>If I don't people will leave.
I don't think so. On the other hand, if you start ignoring the input of the community, then people will have good reason to leave.

>I don't like meta discussion because it's a sign that something is wrong. People shouldn't be complaining, problems should be getting fixed.
Not all problems need to be fixed by you. Not all problems are large enough to require a solution. Everything you have done to "fix" this problem has generated more complaints. That dumb /r9k/ thread would have died on its own, but you turned it into a hundred-odd post meta discussion by continuously bumping the thread with posts where you white knighted the OP while simultaneously threatening to ban him over a minor offense.

>I wouldn't have deleted a guro picture of a girl being strangled to death on a random board, but I don't think many people object to me deleting it on /qa/. At the same time someone did object to me doing it and they post on the site a lot.
Don't delete stuff like that then. That sounds like it would have been fine just spoilered. Add an extra warning to the post if you're worried about people looking at it by mistake.

>If people want to gatekeep then I'm going to make a new board for the people they're gatekeeping and keep them out of /qa/ if they don't behave a way that fits their perspective.
This is not helping, this is power tripping. There is a difference between a user wanting to convince another user to behave differently and a user wanting to exercise power over the other user. One is persuasion and one is force. You seem to be trying to monopolize the power to say what belongs, saying if I don't like what a person is posting I have to tell you and not him. That is the sort of thing I would expect from a 4chan mod who cares about their own power more than the well-being of the community. Central planning of posting etiquette will fail here just as badly as it failed on 4chan.

>I've already had complaints that we're too soft.
Where are all these complaints?

>the group of people who use the report system on the site.
Just because one person reported something doesn't mean that the whole community wants it deleted, especially when you're advertising all over 4chan and 8kun.

>I guess I can lie more about what I'm doing. I can't prove that your government isn't doing the same because they're better at being quiet than me.
Not leaking data that would otherwise be private does not require lying. Whether the NSA knows is irrelevant; if they do, it's not a justification to tell more people. Many people post on sites like this because they don't want all their posts connected like on a forum.

>Attacking ideas and attacking their right to post are different concepts.
There's also a difference between suggesting someone talk about something else e.g. "There are many things you can talk about that are far more interesting than your lack of romantic conquests" and forcing them to talk about something else, and a difference between suggesting someone talk about something else and suggesting they not post at all.

 No.260

>>258
I hate to dismiss opinions based on one word but white-knight.

Alright

 No.261

File:1481568327802.png (514.77 KB,850x708)

>>251
>You seem to both want more conflict
I don't think this is true, I certainly don't. I think Vern feels there's value to be had in more argumentative threads, but I wouldn't say that's wanting conflict

>>254
>I don't like meta discussion because it's a sign that something is wrong.
/qa/ and indeed /jp/ and all its spinoffs absolutely love meta discussion, though. I think it's how 4/qa/ ended up with a nijiura-style theme before the spinoffs even arrived. It's just something that is closely linked. Meta is a part of /qa/ spirit! But, it doesn't need to be on the main kissu board. I do think it'd be best-served on /b/ or something.
If people care about something they're going to want to have meta discussions about it, and it's good to see people care about kissu

>>255
>putting it onto 4taba as an experiment
4taba people are happily isolated, I don't think they would enjoy a display of /jp/ spinoff trolling

>>259
>Don't delete stuff like that then. That sounds like it would have been fine just spoilered.

Guro is kind of a grey area when it comes to "NSFW". The image in question was more ryona than guro, but it was an image pasted from #jp so the motive for the thread (and others created at the same time) is questionable.
If you were to use 4chan as an example guro is only allowed on /b/ along with with loli and shota. We (everyone posting then) had a discussion early on in kissu about whether or not the main board should be NSFW or not, and enough people said that they like to browse at work or otherwise don't want it on the main board, so /qa/ is technically SFW.
The question isn't "should /qa/ allow guro?" but more "do people on /qa/ want guro?" and I'm not sure there's any demand. At the least, I don't think there's a majority that would enjoy it rather than tolerate it

 No.262

>>260
If that was your only objection, I accept your concession.

 No.263

>>262
I'm going to respond more, but next you're going to start calling me an SJW or something because I don't want everyone shitting on eachother

 No.264

>>263
Arguing in bad faith will not help your case.

 No.265

>>261
I mean 4taba as in using it how tabamin did to try out interesting alternative ideas.

Like the nested replies or the post grouping. I'd like to see that added into the new front end design and think it would accel because 4taba showed how it could help discussion

Another way to organize data is a larger modification that needs to be tested and prototyped elsewhere

 No.266

>>265
It might not have the same effect on 4taba because 4taba already prunes threads differently from most imageboards. Although you'd still have the effect on visibility.

 No.267

>>263
Also mighty hypocritical for you to object to other people telling someone who posted "I want to have sex" not to make /r9k/ threads while picking two words out of a lengthy post like that for an ad hominem attack. It only reinforces the thesis that you don't really have a problem with shitting on people, you just want to monopolize the act of shitting.

 No.268

>>264
when have I spoken in bad faith. The tone of your arguments has been nothing but ad hominem against my concern that people are not seeing the issue I'm talking about or considering it seriously.

The fact that you point to white knighting as a fault of character is a major red flag to me. I mean, maybe as an American citizen you're used to walking over dead bodies littered on the streets as a symbol of liberty and freedom, but that's not how I think.

 No.269

File:1565892282884.jpg (1.62 MB,1240x1753)

>>265
Hmm, true. 4taba...
It's a nice and quite slow board. Don't think we'd need to do anything official, but it might help to remind people that it exists somehow and can be used for slower discussions

 No.270

>>268
You defended him against criticism while simultaneously threatening to ban him.
You would be advised to look up what "ad hominem" means because looking up people's IPs to try to figure out ways to dismiss their arguments is pretty solidly in ad hominem territory.
And yes, singling out a few words to try to prove someone is from a group you don't like to deflect criticism is ad hominem and bad faith arguing.

 No.272

>>255
I don't think it'd be disruptive at all, and it's the only way to get a realistic idea of how it'd affect the board. It'd be worth it.

 No.273

>>254
Oh... I didn't even consider you're trying to do something like that, I thought you were trying to make a /v/pol/b/r9k/adv/biz/ or whatever but if it's just another /jp/ then there's a hell of an overlap. It's splitting the community into two boards that already exist elsewhere. Redundancy is redundant and deadly.
/qa/ needs to carve it's own path somewhere in the middle or what's the point of it being around? I thought it's supposed to be largely free with the clause that being a total asshole is out. For example one thread with a guro image doesn't exactly seem obnoxious, spoilering should be enough but that guy that went all antagonistic without a reason in a chess thread sure, teach him a lesson. I don't know, it's just a heavily policed community is not what I'd expect from people that just went in and straight up occupied a meta board but maybe I heard something wrong.

 No.274

File:z14hm.jpg (409.56 KB,544x2048)

>>268
Isn't white knighting supposed to refer to valiantly taking the side of (usually stereotypically oppressed) person or group which in the case at hand is actually at fault and shouldn't be defended?

 No.275

>>273
,Calling it not qa doesn't do the idea justice. I was implying #jp

 No.276

File:Screenshot_2020-03-30 Defi….png (34.48 KB,760x294)

>>260
well fuck, guess i need to stop using merriam-webster
fucking pol9k trash dictionary

 No.277

>>273
it's not redundant in my pov. If you post in IRC #jp you get an experience like old jp, if you post on #qa you get an experience like qa. they both share the same irc channel and users regularly pass between the two weather they want to be vulgar or civilized. It creates an environment where they have unique culture. Having a GN board wouldn't be redundant because the overlap doesn't exist. GN is in real world events and Trevor cultism while qa is about documentation and otaku. There's no way that this would be on qa.

 No.278

>>277
You could've really just said in the first place you want a board that replicates #jp...
That's a whole lot more specific than the broad "not-qa" you were talking about, and does make a bit more sense, since there really isn't a place for #jp on /qa/. And that wouldn't really split the board too much

 No.279

Look at it as this... If a #jp poster wanted to be here they would be already, but are not because something isn't being done right. /qa/ can't be more relaxed because that causes issues so all I can think of is an alternative low moderated board

 No.280

File:1458369318608.png (38.52 KB,300x300)

>>276
uuh I feel like I'm not getting something but I'll just autistically point out that dictionaries for standard variant of language don't do well when it comes to slang use

 No.281

>>279
Now that's starting to feel a whole lot like my /trans/ suggestion

 No.282

>>278
Well.. i didn't make the poll, that was cool just as cool didn't maks the other meta poll here, it was I

 No.283

>>282
Um, Cool didn't make the poll, I did

 No.284

>>283
oh, you did

 No.285

>>284
Well just edit the poll then so it's more clear. I mean, it does make it more clear

 No.286

>>285
it's too late... but sure

 No.287

I'm just confused as to why you'd want an atechan board... but I guess if you can get him on it and that's what you want, then sure go for it.

 No.288

>>287
jp schizos are fun

 No.289

File:1365051613260.jpg (17.02 KB,352x277)

>>288
しょうがない

 No.290

>>288
Though a problem I see with this is how you'd stop the board from being /i/ while making it schizo central, since it would be #jp.......

 No.291

>>290
What does oekaki have to do with this?

 No.292

>>288
Those types have gnfos, what, ota, mero, 8gag, 4chan, funnyjunk, facebook, twitter and a crapload of reddit and discord groups for their outrage-fueled "shitpost" monoculture. They don't need a home, they're a major demographic of the modern internet.
There's a nice niche demand for what kissu is offering today to good people and I will never, ever value those creatures (all 2 of them) 1/1000000th as much as I do a kissu poster.

 No.293

Anyways, I was only pretending to be retarded.

The only reason I haven't done it yet is because I'm uncertain about any viable alternatives. Though issues of gatekeeping are going to get tougher and probably will resort to new boards when it can't be resolved... the only counter arguments I've seen here are "outsiders bad, we are good" or "oraaaaaaaaa don't moderate my website!!!"

 No.294

>>293
or I mean to say, counter arguments that present an argument with possible resolution, rather than refutation

 No.295

>>293
Well anything that isn't advocating a split is a refutation. Plenty of people have suggested how to deal with this instead of splitting the boards

 No.296

>>295
The closest thing has been having partial stickies but I'm not going to stick or bumplock every thread on a board because that's too much effort

 No.297

what stuck in your head the most that other people suggested as an alternative to the problem of people wanting to gatekeep whomever they consider an outsider?

 No.298

>>296
I think that a lot of people are refuting your decision because the believe the best course of action is inaction, and that by meddling with how things are right now you might possibly mess up /qa/'s mojo.

 No.299

>>298
When things become problematic this isn't a solution. It's just laziness, a replica of US government.

 No.300

also it seems as if this has become the defacto meta board as I was kind of hoping.
/b/ is about site technology. It ought to be renamed to /g/

 No.301

>>299
But people are saying it's not problematic, but rather healthy. You've got people with completely differing viewpoints on the situation than you.

 No.302

>>301
It's unhealthy for a site to be fighting among itself without any chance of solution aside from one group packing up their bags and leaving or conforming. This is coercion by majority, it's not democratic but a lynch mob mentality.

No one is addressing any of the points that I say and I am repeating them constantly through this thread.

 No.303

you have failed to convince me that this is not the only option when things go bad. You can vote however you want, but your scores don't matter without a viable alternative.

 No.304

>>302
Nobody's really started to really fight each other though. It hasn't gotten out of hand, and is just a conflict of opinion at the moment. Think of it in your country view as a multicultural society where people of differing beliefs gather to post together. What your suggesting is the balkanization of these groups because their ideas can conflict with each other at times.

 No.305

>>304
Some people need space and the only option is to put up a soft divide. It's not balkanization because the assumption is cooperation still exists, it is just mutually understood that there are differences that can't be worked out. I would rather this than the system which promotes those who don't conform into situations of poverty, in imageboard case that would perhaps be ousting them into their own shitty spam infested boards like ota.

 No.306

>>305
Still, if you must go with this idea. You need to think up a more specific topic than "not /qa/" since it will blur the line of where people should post what. When given too many options people may choose to just not post at all, and who knows how many is too many on an imageboard. #jp doesn't work since that would shit all over /qa/'s reputation by inviting in those who would do others harm and lead to kissu as a whole being blamed for it. The only possible option that I can really think of which encompasses what you're saying would be a board for inane blogs like that of the blog thread. Though that could bring up conflict later with people who do post interesting blogs, but under the thinking that their thread is a blog they may elect to post it on the blog board instead of /qa/.

 No.307

>>293
>The only reason I haven't done it yet is because I'm uncertain about any viable alternatives
I would hope the people repeatedly telling you not to do it and listing reasons why it's a bad idea are somewhere on your radar. Yes, you're the admin, but the people using the board have valuable input

>>299
You really need to stop adding quips against the US to your posts. I'm going to get a headache from rolling my eyes

 No.308

>>306
this likely because the problem doesn't exist in any narrow sense as yet. However, the problems of nostaligia vs innovation are not going to be cut and dry. Most problems are not easy to define. In /qa/'s sense I can see new boards not being content divides but being divides based on interpretations of what is right behavior and what is not.

 No.309

>>307
In case you couldn't tell, I'm not a fan of any culture that tries to get forced on me from the south.

Yes, they're saying it's a bad idea but you're saying it from the perspective that /qa/ belongs to you and not anyone else.
I can't agree with this.

 No.310

File:1518027481635.png (309.86 KB,429x429)

>>308
If it's not easy to define then don't make a new board. You want people to just post, not have them go through a philisophical debate in their head each time they go about making a thread about whether it is "/qa/" enough.

 No.311

imageboards are inherently based in japanese culture and the abomonations of 8ch and modern 4chan aren't in my interest.

 No.312

>>310
the divisions are clear, but how can I verbalize that you're allowed to be a schizo in this board, but in this one you're not. It's hard to define social boundaries. In a site like reddit they'll naturally balkanize when there are differences but for a managed site that's harder.

 No.313

>>311
Japan's imageboards also are fast enough to justify having multiple boards for the same topic. You need people to make culture, not the boards themselves. If, you can get enough people posting to define a clear divide in culture on both boards then it may be worth it, but you need to at least pass the 1 PPM barrier to do that. If you don't have enough people posting on both at the same time to prevent the culture of both boards from getting muddled than it will be a failure and may carry with it disastrous consequences.

 No.314

>>313
alright, so you're not dismissing the possiblity of dividing content along what people see as acceptable anymore, it's a matter of doing it right. That's my position so I'm fine with accepting this.

 No.315

I fail to see how this isn't an artificial construct you've created for yourself. Suppose you do make a new board, are you now going to evaluate the "/qa/ness" of threads on /qa/ and move them to "/notqa/" and vice versa? All that's going to achieve is pissing off users who don't understand why their thread(s) have been moved, especially since we still lack even basic codified rules, much less can I envisage a ruleset being implemented to practically define the boundaries between /qa/ and "/notqa/." Likewise, very much in the same line of thinking, what assurance is there that there will even be a contingent of users who do post there? You've pointed to /megu/ as being an abject failure in your eyes, worthy enough that you're outright considering deleting it. For what it's worth, every board outside of /qa/, save for /poll/ (hardy har har), has barely netted any lasting traction. Or, since you've been making repeated allusions to /what/, ota, and #jp, do you plan on advertising this hypothetical board to them and others so that it does gain a userbase? If that's the case, I really don't understand the end-goal here, since that completely side-steps the initial point of "reducing conflict within /qa/."

 No.316

If someone is pushing for more moderation by reporting a lot of posts, make them do so openly so that the community can discuss whether it's justified. One way to do this would be to have a list of dismissed reports, and you could put a little link by each dismissed report saying "Discuss" which when clicked would open the new thread form on /trans/ and put a link to the dismissed report in the comment field.

 No.317

>>302
ironically democracy is the tyranny of majority
you're probably thinking about republic where there are some unalienable rights

 No.318

This has gotten messy.
V, could you state the problem you see, your ideal site and the measures you want to take? As clearly as possible.

 No.319

>>316
Something along those lines.
I don't know the noumbers but it's worth to remember that people who report and get very vocal in meta discussions don't necessarily represent the sentiment of the community at large. Good chunk of people will stay away from meta entirely.

 No.320

File:[Asenshi] Yuru Camp - 05 [….png (1.06 MB,1280x720)

>>309
But remember that we're just anonymous posts on a board. No one is representing a country, religion, etc unless the post is explicitly stating it.
I could be Rin camping in the outdoors of Japan right now

 No.321

>>320
You can't make a good decision on limitted info. It's just a gamble dice roll then. Biasses getting in the way would be a problem, but treating everything as blind would be problem as well.

 No.322

I don't think it's that much of a problem for me to be critical of US culture dominating a website when every imageboard run by a us citizen is a dumpster fire that either turns into hunting down lolcow drama or political fetishism.

But I don't think it's very worthwhile to expand on this and it's just a matter of me speaking my mind again to my own detriment when it would be more advantageous to be manipulative like Hiroyuki or Watkins.

 No.323

as for other comments I'll get to them in a second..

 No.324

>>315
The scenario is a bit of an artificial construct from a combination of paranoia and a way to look at handling future events that I think are beggining to unfold. Mostly to gauge reception and see if there's anything else that strikes me as possible.

The reason why I don't like using rules here is because the problems and justification for moderation are flexible and based on what I percieve to be the problems people have. Problems change from day to day and the rules can't keep changing. It's why if something does get moved it would be because it gathered enough distracting complaint to warrant it. The community in effect would decide what gets moved and I, or a mod, would simply act on what they wish.

I'm not sure as yet how to handle population, but the thing about megu is I've kind of shafted it because it's gone really heavy in the direction of lolicon and that's always been something I said that I would remove from the site. seasonal boards are just a meme that was inspired by nen. /b/ or /g/, gotta rename it sometime... is just for posting about updates and dumping people's advertisements. /trans/ is a good board that's popular. Other things are just experiments, they come and go. Moot deleted a lot of boards too and played around with ideas.

I think "reducing conflict within /qa/" is strange because kissu is not /qa/ and many people can put on different sorts of behaviour depending on where they are. A communist can freely love the slave labour of korean animation in anime while also talking about marx's struggle for the working class.

>>316
>>319
I don't know if it's fair to have someone who's not good at expressing themselves be forced to the brunt of the community because they have a problem. Lawyers exist for this purpose and since I'd be shamed as white-knighting to defend someone who I think is being bullied I'd be hard pressed to consider this a viable solution. The idea is a set up for a meritocracy.

In the end it's just a strategy of bullying people who can't persuade others or suck enough cock to want to be liked by everyone around them. I can imagine a Trevor type would be good under this system because he can gather hoards of teens around him to direct things in the way he wants.

>>317
I believe this is so, it's more of a republic concept.

>>318
I think the mess is unavoidable. I'm not really helping to make things calm.

* The best solution to disputes over content is to put up a degree of separation.
* Because the internet is inherently free and moderation will not be done on the basis of where you posted before it will be open in nature.
* Groups from one board are free to post on others without restriction.
* Moderation is done with respect to the actions on a single board and no moderation is considered global(exceptions to illegal or doxxing activity)

* Problems with ignoring as a strategy.
- Not everyone will ignore content and new contributors will not
- People with serious objections to content will complain and make it vocal
- Hiding a thread only works so long as the person is not trying to evade being hidden

* Problems with discussion as a strategy.
- Not everyone is fluent in english and able to persuade a point
- Some people are not in a mental situation where they can push a point
- Some people feel like democracy is a sham and their point does not matter therefore will stay silent until too late
- Discussion is easy to rig on imageboards and even real life

* Problems with using features as a strategy.
- None, but I'm spending so much time on discussing meta I'm not even sure if I'm going to reach my goals for today.

I'm not sure a problem exists right now since it's a pretty minor issue but the growth in complaints over the ways things are is an indicator I can't ignore and have to start preparing for.
It looks like kissu is still gaining users without me needed to do anything, but it also seems like it's reached the top of the curve with the current system and other measures need to be taken if I want to see the site gain in users.
I fear that without another board to expand there would be backlash over having /qa/ adopt more people.
It might not even be possible to have /qa/ gain more users because any time 4/qa/ won against the frogs for a period of a week there was nothing interesting to put there that generated constant discussion.

It still just so happens that the only thing /qa/ cares about is arguing about the site direction. You guys don't want to argue over anything other than this. I might as well just diversify the site.

 No.325

>It still just so happens that the only thing /qa/ cares about is arguing about the site direction.

If that's true then how come people get worked up over anything on the site to the point they voice their complaints? You can easily see that there are disagreements that could be had, yet you only focus on what happens to be the easiest argument to have on /qa/, and one that you yourself started. Someone could have easily turned that sex thread into an argument which wasn't about the site, but the subject of the thread itself. Instead of trying to push for something like this, you instead turned all discussion in that thread towards the meta.

 No.326

File:good day on qa.jpg (3.82 MB,1349x7696)

>>324
>I'm not really helping to make things calm.
Heheh, indeed.

>* 2
>* 4
Sounds great.
>* 3
Only technically.
>* 1
I don't quite know how to put this, but I feel like this goes against your principle of not defining rules.

>* Problems with ignoring as a strategy.
>* Problems with discussion as a strategy.
I agree.
Going back to fractional stickies, what are your thoughts on letting users determine a thread's fractional value through votes? You said you didn't want to do it yourself, and this way you wouldn't need to, nor would you need some complex automatic system. We must assume it won't be abused.

Looking at /qa/ on 4stats, it seems to have remained relatively stable up until August 2019 (not a surprising date), so I don't know what to say about gaining users. But you have sold me on another board at least existing, although you may end up axing it like /megu/ due to inactivity.
>any time 4/qa/ won against the frogs for a period of a week there was nothing interesting to put there that generated constant discussion.
Against the frogs discussion was often repetitive and straight-up bad. It was precisely in those periods with less frogs that discussion was far better on average. If you look at pic you can find the 2018 stats and API changes threads, both of which are among the best discussion threads 4/qa/ has ever had.

>It still just so happens that the only thing /qa/ cares about is arguing about the site direction.
Hey, this is taking up my time too, I'm trying to work on something else. Also >>325

 No.327

File:[HorribleSubs] Shoujo Shuu….jpg (435.41 KB,1280x720)

>>324
There used to be that one image macro about arguing on the internet. It's not the discussions that matter it's fun and meta is the only subject that bears an effect on it so there's some point in discussing it.
I don't think /qa/ is at a state where it requires a solution. Imho it's a non issue, life continues as normal. Most people don't seem to mind and in that last thread it blown out of proportion because the admin showed up. I still don't understand what are you really trying to accomplish. Kissu doesn't have enough traffic to sustain couple 二次元裏 at the same time, problem and solution are both premature. I don't think it's a catastrophic decision but it's going to be very confusing.
In the end I just wouldn't want /qa/ moderation to become any stricter.

 No.328

File:[Chyuu] Kuma Miko - Girl M….jpg (329.15 KB,1280x720)

>>326
>what are your thoughts on letting users determine a thread's fractional value through votes?

You just made a good idea sound bad.

 No.329

>>325
>>326
>>327
In any case it's not my intention to jump into a situation immediately because the current way of doing things is working. If I was certain it was the best solution I would do it without any input.

I have my gripes with some users and culture. The zellotry some member have towards pushing their ideals onto me met by backlash as I try to form a solid compromise.. I'm not going to pretend that everything is friendly and I don't have problems with the way people view things.

That said the input is still valuable because I can't come to a win-win solution without it. I'll read over what's been written some more later when my head is clearer. I tend to rethink the options that I had insulted a few days later down the line. I'm not just trying to find a good solution for /qa/, but I'm also trying to grow kissu into something more than just one board. I think that /qa/ would benefit having more users cycle into it like on 4chan.

In any case I'll think it over for a week or so odd.

 No.330

>>328
It's the only way.
>>329
Take your time.

 No.332

>>330
>It's the only way.
I don't think that's necessarily the problem at hand. It's the fact that a vote system to determine bump order is quite literally the sorting system that reddit uses. Thereby turning an imageboard from prioritizing thread activity into how much people like/dislike a specific thread.

If there is a vote system, the vote total has to be strictly hidden. Knowing vote totals tends to illicit the bandwagon effect, whereby people tend to vote more for what's popular more than voting for the content therein.

Perhaps another solution would be to implement a sort of "autobump" system to send threads back to page 1 if the number of posts is below a certain number after reaching page X. I suppose in that case, you could decide whether or not threads can use this "autobump" just once, or infinitely. You could also specify multiple "layers." In other words, maybe there's a layer that begins at page 3 and requires less than 10 posts to send a thread back to page 1, page 6 requires less than 20, page 9 requires less than 25, etc.

More generally, I'm just skeptical of any system which is not automated, and actively requires user participation to work. After all, the fractional stickies system still requires people to see the thread in the first place, so voting on it to keep it bumped longer seems counter-intuitive. Likewise, the fractional stickies system also seems very open to abuse; what's to stop people from voting to keep threads that are already popular from monopolizing the catalog? In other words, would such a system not, in practice, just keep threads like the music thread or the blog thread up longer, and actually accelerate other threads moving down the catalog? More cynically, what would there be to stop someone from creating a bot to vote on specific threads?

 No.333

>>332
I say it's the only way because there's three ways to implement a feature, through the staff, the community or an automatic system. V doesn't want to do it and there's no way an automatic system is getting implemented, so it would necessarily fall upon the community.
I agree that it should be hidden, and it could indeed be abused, but that's why I say we must assume it won't be and that people will appropriately use it for denser threads and not easily remade generals or any random thread. You could also stop bots with the same system /poll/ uses, requiring a number of posts made. But yes, if people were to vote for every thread they like then there'd be no point in implementing it. I put some trust in the community.
You could actually just bump the thread as is natural, but it's not a very popular thing to do and it doesn't tend to attract activity. It gives bad vibes or sumthin'.

The autobump system would be as abusable as fractional stickies, or worse. One person's input would be enough to warp board flow, while fractional votes would hopefully require multiple persons' to reach a relevant value. What's more, given enough autobumped threads they could trigger each other and slide the board. It also doesn't differentiate between slower and faster threads, which is the whole point of discussing these measures.

 No.334

One of the points in favor of fractional stickies is that it gives moderators another tool to govern through rewards instead of punishments. Normally moderation does more punishment than reward, so users become resentful of the moderation. It would be important that fractional stickies make up a minority of the threads; otherwise people would start to see lack of the status as a punishment.

There are probably other creative ways moderators can reward users, and those should be considered. Anything that helps moderators spend more time saying "you belong" than "you don't belong."

 No.335

>>334
This is true.

 No.336

>>324
>the thing about megu is I've kind of shafted it because it's gone really heavy in the direction of lolicon
Funny you mentioned that. I remembered you saying:
>I would remove from the site.
So, I've pretty much abstained from using it aside from making the occasional reply or stupid off-topic thread.

 No.340

>>334
Still the negative connotations associated with them far outweigh any use they may have, especially if they're not cosmetic like そうだね.
I just think it's a solution that banks too much on people handling the system perfectly. It's probably something hibiki could consider when kissu is larger and he can start a new board to test it out (that'd get sufficient enough activity to determine whether the idea was a failure or not)

 No.341

>>334
Isn't this repeating history like /r9k/

 No.342

>>336
I'd rather a /jp/ board where it could be an element in a 2d/random space but since the idea is in limbo for low popularity it'll be around for a bit. I could downgrade it to an ecchi-cute board in which case I'd have no issue with it, but undiluted megu is a bit much.

 No.343

>>>/qa/34736

I'm hiding filenames by default, or you allow me to put these people onto a quarantine board. One way or another I have to solve psychotic outbreaks such as the one in that thread.

 No.346

>>343
Eh. Arguably, the filename itself wasn't the trigger but simply something easy to latch onto while lashing out.
Unlike the other throwaway blog threads in the board, it seems this one was perceived as an outsider's. Would you quarantine the angry poster? Because the angry poster wouldn't like the new board as it has been proposed, teen-y and all. Would exiling the OP be more appropriate? It would legitimize flaming, would it not?

 No.348

Another option would be to let people edit their filenames before posting.

 No.349


it's good idea if can be executed right, but I'm worried about layering on way too much complexity.

Ideally all posting will be done through a popout QR form too so space limitations will be factor.

Though it's another dimension to posting that could make better use of the existing field so it's got a better weight than hiding

 No.350

File:d11316d67a.png (18.28 KB,570x344)

>>349
Why not implement it the 4chanX way

 No.351

>>350
true, forgot that was the way it worked on 4cx

 No.352

Automatic filename randomization(can opt out) is going to be in update.

 No.353

Can opt out and can modify

 No.363

File:Screenshot at 01-07-18.png (50.47 KB,688x457)

The problems that I see still exist and /qa/ would be better focused with a 2d/random board.

From this 3 week long survey, heightened activity on Kissu is tied to my actions. Concerns that Kissu would become too slow with another board don't add up because in the end of the day activity all revolves around me bringing in new people to respond to your threads and it has become slow from me not advertising it. I advertise more, you get more people you like.

All those threads you make are just your circlejerk, they do not create "organic growth", it is confirmed by the numbers. http://s11.flagcounter.com/more30/CexS/1
In order for the site to grow it requires an advertiser and a place to put these people. A filter board will help me bring in new users who would otherwise be booted from /qa/.

 No.364

I don't see anything that will make me see otherwise at this point and I haven't yet because there's lots of software still to write, but that may change. Listening to the majority here is synonymous with killing myself.

 No.365

>>363
Why are you measuring activity by views? Of course views correlate with advertising, but it gives you no information on how many of those people are interested enough to stick around. Try looking at how many people are posting instead.

Also, you shouldn't need to use an external service subject to ad blockers for that. Just turn on nginx's logging and get the info you need out of the log.

 No.366

>>363
>A filter board will help me bring in new users who would otherwise be booted from /qa/.
I would argue the opposite. The process of "booting" means that we can be less selective about where we advertise. Advertising will be most effective on sites where people are currently unhappy, but if we advertise on those places, we want them to assimilate instead of bringing along the culture that helped make their home boards a dumpster fire. I'm thinking about sites well outside the /jp/sphere.

 No.367

Regarding majority support, you should feel free to create experimental boards that the majority opposes, but you shouldn't do anything to coerce the community into using it such as simultaneously deleting other boards or increasing their level of moderation.

 No.369

Aimless ramble incoming.

I used to be a regular on 4/qa/ from around mid 2016 to late 2018 (as well as the sageru and Rizon channels since their creation), until I stopped frequenting imageboards or just browsing the internet in general for more than an hour or two a day due to various real life circumstances. Nowadays, I post irregularly here and still haven't returned to IRC.

In the past, very time the idea of a spin-off was brought up, before the moderation on the board became unmanageable, I remember voicing my main concern with a hypothetical imageboard created and run by and for /qa/, and one that I see has also come up in this thread: the loss of anonymity. Why am I telling you all this? Because I would like to offer my two cents on that particular point, not necessarily as a kissu regular but as someone who was always a bit skeptical about a /qa/ spin-off. Feel free to give a shit (or not).

The way I see it, one of the main factors that made 4/qa/ not only possible but also distinct from other boards was the utter lack of moderation (well, for a while - that didn't turn out too well in the end...) This was also perhaps the main reason I enjoyed and felt welcome posting there. Being a small, irrelevant board on a huge site like 4chan, I could be 99% sure that as long as I just posted normally without getting into any trouble, no moderator would give my posts a second glance, much less keep tabs on me or interact with me in any form. There was hardly a moment when I felt like I wasn't really anonymous or had to go out of my way to protect my anonymity, or that I wasn't on equal footing with other posters. Of course, when you spend so much of your time on a place like that, you start to recognize other posters - by their posting style, what they talk about, what images they post, what time they're active on the board, and so on. However, that's beyond the point; you were always able to cultivate various different personas and post in a manner that no one would recognize you without the need to change your IP address or post from a VPN or create a new account, etc. This was also why I enjoyed the sageru channel, despite all the trolling, and why I never really got into the Rizon channel (despite being one of the mods there for some reason). Moving to a spin-off would mean that at least one of us would cease to be just another normal poster and gain access to power and information that the rest of us lack while at the same time (unlike 4chan mods) interacting with other users normally, and to me, this potential loss of anonymity outweighed the benefits to be gained from a spin-off.

When I see the site admin talk about keeping track of IPs and discuss posting histories, I feel like maybe it might be a good idea to take a step back and think about why people come to anonymous imageboards in the first place, as opposed to just using other more popular and convenient formats. This is just my personal opinion, and like I said earlier I am not really a regular poster anymore, and hell, maybe I'm just too self-aware, but to me kissu (and spin-offs in general) feels "harder" to post on than 4chan because I don't feel like my anonymity is being fully and constantly respected, or to put it in another way, I don't get the same "mods don't give a shit who I am" feeling that you get on 4chan.

 No.370

putting aside my various flaws, people who hold who hold responsibility over decisions must act from a position that violates the norms even if it results in xer being ostratrasized and disliked. As long as the site is good then all is good. It's the backlash behind actions that needs to guide things and giving them the option to retaliate.

to that end I am listening to criticism on this topic because when I eventually get to fucking up Vichan's Mod UI I'm going to remove the ability for mods to browse as super users.

Not a complete fix but I don't want to operate a website from a position of limited information. I would be playing mahjong soul if I wanted to gamble

 No.371

>>370
I understand that it's needed to effectively moderate the site, it's just that ideally (for me) mods should be able to keep their mod activity separate from their identities as posters. A bit late to stop identityfagging, though.

 No.372

These are ideals that are hard to put into practice. I'd say this is my goal though to make kissu to a size where there are difficulties managing things, however I am not interested in fanning the flames of revolution so an aspect of kissu will always be a more mainstream approach to online communities that stands in opposition to the norm of imageboards that try to get young men to revolt against political ideas of egalitarianism. More a testament to individual freedom in the face of people who want you to behave a certain way.

A small site can't pretend to be a big until it becomes big. Even then the action of becoming a big site could be apposed by some and approved by others so there will always be people who don't want anonymity despite being anonymous. It's not like Kissu will decide it's a big site anyways. At the same time, you have to support something small if you want it to become big and to the point where this anonymity you want comes to be.
Even then, assuming this site were to unanimously decide that we are big and we are anonymous, if it's just trying to imitate dat 4chan dream then it will always just be a second rank site loved by `I remember the good old days` kinds of guys, but ignorable otherwise and it will bleed users to admins who accept modern times. To this end I think 4taba is a good site for that and is basically everything you want because I'm not a poster there yet hold the keys to the server. Kissu isn't a nostalgia project.

What you admire about 4chan in the next big thought of your paragraph, "etc. etc. I feel anonymous in the crowd" is partially true because many of the boards there have things like IDs, flags, even the IP counter or offsite archives are a tool against anonymity. The only thing that's genuine about 4chan is that it's built up a cult reputation that is believable because of the NDAs and silence from the aboves.

I guess the tl;dr here is that 4chan was only made by the history that is 4chan and that history can only be imitated to a lesser degree. Better to focus on your own history, see who stays around and what you can make.

 No.373

in my opinion this individual freedom is best expressed by the ability for people to complain against the moderation of the site and a looser structure to the meaning of what a board is about.

Contrary to other sites that try to force you into categories of /b/ is for random, /qa/ is for meta, /jp/ is for otaku culture, the functional meanings of these established definitions are blurred by their community's usage of them and the meta that the board's posting restrictions have. A board will likely never be forced into a definition that the community does not want from it and the mods will attempt to be as outsider as possible in their management leaving details to be worked out internally. This is already the case since yotgo spends most of his time modeling and I don't like to post but lurk.

Anyways, that's a bit off topic, but since you made people question my authoritaaa I figure I'll go off on tangents

 No.374

>>373
moderation is for the bigger picture, community is for the small

 No.376

>>372
But see, I'm not saying that I want this site to become big, or that kissu should strive to be like 4chan, or (God forbid) that 4chan and/or /qa/ is/was "perfect" or "ideal" in any way. In fact, anonymity as a result of staff negligence brings with it a whole slew of problems that can be and are mitigated in most spin-offs. I'm saying that anonymity is, to many people, a defining element of "the imageboard experience", so to speak, and so I as a user would like it if you took this opportunity to think about what anonymity means for an imageboard, as well as by which means and to what extent you are able to recreate or reimagine it here on kissu. This is really just meant as food for thought and not as a concrete suggestion or anything of the sort, especially because as I already said, I'm not up to date with everything that goes on here.

 No.377

>>369
I'm not in the mindset to give a nice, long well thought-out response to this post, but I do believe that you've made a great point that vern could definitely take notes from. Although, I think that some of those concerns you have may(hopefully) be unwarranted since he's promised to hold back a bit on breaking down the veil of anonymity. On that issue I find that bringing into account who's who while not on a platform in which people have decided to give up their anonymity is quite foolish in my opinion.

The point you make about how a spinoff is harder to post on rings true to me as well. I've never been one for attaching myself to comments/posts I make, and it's due to that reason I ended up on 4chan in the first place. Even then, it took me a while to actually get into posting on 4chan as I was always worried that I would be an awful poster and that my self would be judged by the staff as I posted. Once the idea that staff were for the most part unconcerned with my posts got into my head is when I found it easier to start actually posting and having fun. With the spin-offs though I've always found it extra challenging to post on them since the feelings that I'm being monitored on them were, and even now somewhat are, not only there, but reinforced by how much more care was taken to moderate problem users. It's why I feel it's easier to post on ota or gnfos than it is on nen. Even for here, I probably would barely posted or maybe not even have come to kissu, had it not been for the fact that I've personally interacted and gotten to know vern. Still, I do find myself sometimes putting on a proxy to say some things that I may not feel confident in tying to myself with the underlying assumption that my every post is being read and traced back to me.

Sageru really was, and still is nice in the sense that you can always feel confident in the fact that there you are anonymous, and you can speak your mind or say whatever you want without having an identity tied to those posts. The mod system may be primitive and allow for some issues to crop up, but for its positives it really allows people to express themselves, in the best or worst ways. Rizon not so much since you always have to be mindful of the name attached to what you post, and it's a big reason that I prefer not to use it all that often either.

>>372
>because many of the boards there have things like IDs, flags, even the IP counter or offsite archives are a tool against anonymity. The only thing that's genuine about 4chan is that it's built up a cult reputation that is believable because of the NDAs and silence from the aboves.

While I do think that it's not great to have mods completely silenced from speaking as mods, I understand the sentiment behind it. They don't want mods to break the immersion of people have which they believe allows them to be Anonymous, for that's the one thing 4chan has going for it that no other imageboard seems to understand or try to replicate. It's probably fine for more long-term users to figure out that they may have never really been anonymous, but for new users it may be an integral reason for why they are even posting in the first place. The earlier stuff you listed is mostly inconsequential since all that is is a temporary identifier for themselves which for some can easily be averted. It does not, most of the time, tie any of their other posts back to them. The point he was making, at least in my eyes, was not that kissu needs to become big&anonymous or anything like that, but rather that it should try and protect the anonymity of its users so that they feel more comfortable posting.

 No.378

File:567px-1percentrule.svg.png (23.35 KB,567x600)

>>363
It's unfair to call kissu a circlejerk. A few people made the majority of threads on 4/qa/ and it's the same thing here. In an ideal situation there wouldn't be a few people wracking their brains to create activities for people, but that's not how the internet works. If you manage to solve the 1-9-90 thing then the rest of the internet will be eager to learn.

>>369
If it means anything I'm the only mod and I hate logging in so I only do it to immediately take action and log back out. I've tried to anonymize myself and I never use a name or code. I guess you need to trust me on this, though, and that's hard to do.
I'm glad to see you back in a form and wish you luck fixing your real life stuff.

 No.379

>>378
I am not saying anything about the community as much as I'm talking about a mindset that is contradictory and focuses on isolating yourself over reaching out to others, the backseat drivers who think they are admins and things like that.

I've found by looking at a views counter and visually observing the number of unique posters is that the system of no advertising ever leads to a condition of stagnation where the 9% disappear and the 1% begins to dwindle to take it's place. Someone MUST always be talking about the site outside of kissu for there to be any kind of new user. Pushing for closed circle growth in my opinion is trying to promote a circle-jerk mindset that leads to destruction. A regular user stated that he's going to be evicted and this is terrible, but from the position of an owner, there has to be a replacement. People will grow tired of /qa/, people will die, people will become unable, but there needs to always be something new happening or the site fails to deliver. This is the situation that I live in and have to be aware of.

>>376
well, the two main models of anonymity that I've seen are "we are legion" or "shitposters". I suppose the most carefree and honest interpretation of anonymity has been s4s wich uses a combination of name and shitposter anonymity to inhabit culture. I don't think an admin can control this without moderating away the people you don't like.

But likewise, I'd like the site to have multiple cultures and different ways to see the world so I don't think I need a stong sense of any of this, the community that comes in can decide and staff&I remove the cancerous ones.

>>377
I don't have the patience to read this.

 No.380

>>379
This is the kind of way that I use my knowledge of IPs and understand posters. To figure out which users are disappearing and keep tracks on that so I know if kissu is in any danger of becoming desolate.
This knowledge makes it awkward to post as a normal user since I have more information than others and it likely comes off as uncanny so I don't post serious stuff aside from meta. Likely I should use my name more to make it obvious to people what's going on.

Internal tools that make people into numbers might be better but I have to program that. I'd rather work with what I have given there are only a few hours in the day to program, enjoy entertainment and manage things. My fluctuating motivation and hormones are also a pain.

 No.381

>>379
I'm not sure there's anyone saying they're opposed to advertising. We do need new blood now and then, yeah. The question is how to do it effectively. We talked about in sageru a few days ago and I think you were there.

>well, the two main models of anonymity that I've seen are "we are legion" or "shitposters".
I'm pretty sure he just means anonymous as in not having an identity and nothing more.

>This is the kind of way that I use my knowledge of IPs and understand posters. To figure out which users are disappearing and keep tracks on that so I know if kissu is in any danger of becoming desolate.
I don't think you need to worry about that. It's understandable that you want the site to do the best it can, but I think you're going to go crazy if you track these numbers, and of course people don't like it. They want to fade in and out without notice. I think the post count (and post length) is a far better gauge than something like this chart >>363

 No.383

>>379
>I don't have the patience to read this.
You don't have to if you don't want to. I intended it to be a short reply before going to bed, and it just ended up being really long

 No.384

>>381
I'm not required to respond to this. In the end I will be doing all the work and you will be arm chair theorizing.

 No.385

>>384
I require that you rethink how you treat Anonymous as an identity rather than the lack of identity

 No.386

File:1540088419840.jpg (47.3 KB,512x512)

>>384
Likewise there's no reason to be needlessly antagonistic. If you've got no reason to reply or simply don't want to, then don't. Outright stating the fact that you're not going to interact with people's thought on things while therein replying saying you're not going to make a response just makes you come off as an asshole.

 No.387

>>386
Yeah, I am. The narcissistic backseat driving is getting obnoxious. Me talking to people is not an excuse for their attempts to manipulate decision making and anyone who `requires` me to accept their opinion isn't worth my time.

 No.389

File:[GJM] To Aru Kagaku no Rai….jpg (411.51 KB,1920x1080)

>>384
>I'm not required to respond to this
You did, though. hohohohoho
My point is that your work of tracking traffic data and such is adding stress to you when it's a superfluous if not flawed statistic. This is about making it easier and more enjoyable for yourself.
In any meta thread you will receive a whole lot of "backseat driving" because people see imageboards as a community and not a consumed product.

 No.390

>>389
There is no community to running the site. It's people ordering changes to be made and bitching when something isn't the way they want it.
I am legally responsible for everything that happens here, but some people would see this as a perfect opportunity to hijack both my passion and the site for their own personal ambitions.

 No.391

I am not interested in entertaining pieces of shit who would rather use my own safety and wellbeing because they have political aspirations on how kissu should be used.

 No.392

>>391
>>390
I don't understand who you are referring to when you talk about political aspirations. I don't think anyone gives a damn about those here. Also why are you so angry? I don't think people were really ordering you as much as they were cautioning you based on their perspectives and opinions. Just because you say you're an asshole doesn't mean you need to force yourself into the position of one all the time.

 No.393

I am not angry so much as I am frustrated that you do not understand the things that I see. I wish that some people would just shut up and try to understand my perspective and what I have to deal with. I don't think it's possible for "the majority" on this site to emphasize with human beings or attempt to approach things from an empathetic point of view.

Basically, your complaints are not productive. They are no different from saying "x is broken plz fix :(".

 No.394

Every time someone has a complaint on an imageboard it is some vague ideal you expect me to understand or an outright rejection of an idea with no alternative that tries to meet a middle ground.

Every time I must work hard to piece together your vague ideas of what it means to post on an imageboard. This is annoying. It does not help me understand you. I am getting sick of dealing with this.

 No.395

>>393
You don't really do the greatest job at allowing others to really see from your viewpoint...
But I kind of agree that since you've decided to quit referring to people by their IPs in conversation on the board, the current concerns are a bit more of a non-issue, or rather have already been alleviated a bit. In my tired rambling I tried to piece together my opinions into a more concise point about how kissu could be more inclusive towards those that value their anonymity, and tried to explain this through trying to help you to understand myself. But I can't exactly define how achievable a state such as what I suggested is, so I can understand if it frustrates you. If I've been failing to meet you in a middle-ground then I apologize for that, but a bit of fault lies with yourself when it comes to others since the point about you being antagonistic towards people that was made is true, and when you act that way it makes people less willing to compromise. At the same time I can understand that you don't want to change your personality just for that alone and pride yourself on being yourself, so I won't suggest for you to change that.

 No.396

>You don't really do the greatest job at allowing others to really see from your viewpoint…
There we go again. You would rather ramble on about how you are right rather than help me understand what my problem is.

 No.397

You only care about proving to others why you are right. You do not have any desire to actually help me build things, just push forward your own ideas and try to force me into adopting them.

I am getting sick of you.

 No.398

>>396
>>397
I tried to give my thoughts on the points >>369 made since I felt strongly about one of his points which was that people like to be Anonymous on anonymous imageboards, and that with a spinoff there's a bit of a barrier that may keep people out due to fear of losing anonymity. A fear which I tried to put into perspective in my post >>377 by explaining what barriers have kept me from posting in the past.

Also learn to take a joke, that first line you discredited my post on wasn't meant to be taken all that seriously and was just an attempt at making the tone of the post a little more lighthearted. Had I known you'd taken as much offense to it as you did I wouldn't have posted it. You really are in a bad mood.

 No.399

Maybe I should try and explain the joke too since you obviously didn't get it. It was about how you oftentimes tend to speak in riddles and that can make it a bit tough to understand what you mean.

 No.400

>>398
It should be very clear that I am approaching the site from a situation of life or death. Someone who has never bet their life into anything other than casual fun can not understand the level of seriousness I put into things that matter. It's for this reason that your jokes will be met by my tone-deaf ears.

>>377
It's extremely presumptuous of you to be assuming you have the right to say what I should or should not be taking notes of. That you try to draw me into a situation where I'm forced to defend credibility is simply obnoxious. I don't even know what I'm supposed to get from this after having my competency insulted on the first paragraph.

This is what I wanted to say when I read it first but I held back because I did not feel as if you were actively trying to undermine the site and have the site potentially shut down for not following your point of view.

 No.401

let me clarify it even more to put it into a more clear terms that even an autistic person could understand.
Some of your shit ideas and intentions to steer the site in dangerous directions are like gambling with my life.

 No.402

>>400
Is that really what it read like... In that case I'm sorry as I could only remember what I was trying to do with it rather than what I actually said.

What I wanted to say is that you seem to treat being anonymous itself as if it's a political identity/concept and attack people who are proponents of anonymity on that basis. While I feel that being anonymous is far from that, and is more about the lack of an identity. Meaning that "Anonymous" could be anybody, and isn't just restricted to a certain type of people. This isn't to say that you need to allow everybody to post regardless of how they act, but rather that a positive about anonymous discussion sites to people is that they don't necessarily need to be part of a pre-established group to take part in discussion. Though oftentimes with spinoffs the feeling that you could just jump in and be a part of a conversation may not be there, or people may feel like they'd be singled out for not having posted before, despite the title of "Anonymous" hanging over their post.

I understand now that you're not in the mood for jokes when it comes to meta conversation like this, and will try my best to carry a more serious tone in my posts.

 No.403

>>402
thank you for replying more seriously

 No.404

All in all I'm not really expecting you to do anything specific based on what I said aside from separating the concept of anonymity from politics, if you even do that. Most of what I said was just my thoughts on the matter of how anonymity on spinoffs may be perceived by newer posters, and how that may affect whether they decide to post or not. So in a way, it was something I'd rather you just keep in mind in case you figure out a way to act on it somehow since you do seem intent on growing kissu. And to those ends I think that allowing visitors to feel as though what they post will not come under scrutiny of moderation based on who they are, but rather that any scrutiny that befalls them will be by the community based on the content of their post, will allow you more easily to accomplish that goal. Not to say that growth is your primary focus, but it is nice, isn't it?

Aside from that I think you're doing a pretty good job, and seeing how /jp/ has turned out so far is making me reconsider a bit of what I've said before in this thread. So I think however you want to approach what I brought up in this post would be nice (though probably you should still discuss whatever you come up with, if anything, with people here or on /b/, since your initial ideas tend to be a bit radical at first)

 No.405

>>404
it's turning out to be decent because of that. I wouldn't have thought of trying to imitate a text board without some issues being brought up beforehand.

 No.406

forces people to make new threads more often and gives the OP more power over the replies(drives things to be more on topic). Allowing other boards to be regular means that /qa/ won't be effected and /jp/ can enhance what already exists

 No.407

in theory anyways. The software's not tuned very well for this.




[Return] [Top] [Catalog] [Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]

[ home / bans / all ] [ qa / jp / cry ] [ spg ] [ f / ec ] [ b / poll ] [ tv / bann ] [ toggle-new / tab ]