[ yn / yndd / fg / yume ] [ o / lit / media / og / ig / 2 ] [ ot / hikki / cc / x / sugg ] [ news / rules / faq / recent / annex / manage ] [ discord / scans / mud / minecraft ] [ aurorachan / desuchan / sushigirl / lewd ]

/sugg/ - Suggestions / Meta

Site meta-talk, help, suggestions, and moderation discussion
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
:
Password (For file deletion.)

Uboachan's scanlation group Patchy Illusion Team has just released two new Yume Nikki Doujins: In the Shallows and Refrain. You can see all of our previous releases here.

File: 1467750192092.png (4.91 KB, 299x276, Fsjal_No_picture_availble2….png)

 No.2973

I've seen the suggestion tossed around in various places on the site that forced anon should be enabled on certain boards. Is this a good or bad idea and why, and for what boards? I may try this out only if there is an overwhelmingly positive response, since it's a fairly big change that could potentially upset a number of users.

Post your arguments here.

 No.2974

File: 1467753300809.jpg (68.18 KB, 642x473, eva.jpg)

Mmmm, I'm one of the posters, I'm one of those who think newfags are okay for the site, and for any site if they know how to avoid being cancerous(AKA lurk before posting, don't be an asshole, saying faggot is okay, who is sei etc)

From my previous post:

the average imageboard poster knows that posting anonymously is the wisest and most polite choice for most situations unless you NEED to use a name, for example for art threads, game dev, cosplay, etc.

Auto-Anon by default in all boards except /ig/, /og/, /fg/, /cos/, /media/, /lit/, /yn/, /x/ and /o/ should be considered, to help maintain the order and quality of this site.

In the boards I meantioned people NEED to post using their names/trips.

It wouldn't even be a big change, I mean, let's be real…the only relevant affected boards would be /hikki/ and /ot/

I don't know about other imageboards that are doing this, however even if all these pros are there there is one con.

Freedom of speech, technically, people have the right to be cancer.

But, do we WANT to have cancer?

We all know the use of imageboards is a privilege, not a right, and I think we should encourage people to post threads that help the site, debate, healthy shitpost and fun.

Having namefag enabled in those boards only encourages personal blogs, circlejerk, and certain feel of belonging.

Tripfags can be cancer…but I think they belong to imageboard culture, they've been there since forever and they will be there forever.

This may have a predictable consequence:
>tripfags invade all the other boards

I think that's perfectly fine, you will see all your favourite characters, Distortion, that Dust dude, Morgan, Booger(if alive), Kibbles, etc.

Except they will be posting about game dev stuff in /ig/, about fangames in /fg/, about their games in /og/ or commenting a cosplay in /cos/

The only difference will be, uh, less blogging in the affected boards since users must be on topic in the other boaards.

I also think namefag should be allowed here in /sugg/ because sometimes specific users are relevant to the content posted.

It could work…or not, but we can have fun trying, the results may mutate our front page into a decent-less-shitposty preview that may encourage foreign imageboard users to lurk and join us.

I also request the word undertale to be filtered and replaced by "memegame".

 No.2975

File: 1467754243073.jpg (271.4 KB, 1500x1188, il_fullxfull.302069509.jpg)

>>2974
>It wouldn't even be a big change, I mean, let's be real…the only relevant affected boards would be /hikki/ and /ot/
but anon that's most of the site
>Having namefag enabled in those boards only encourages … certain feel of belonging.
from an admin perspective (and a functioning human perspective (OH DAMN I WENT THERE)) this is a real good reason to not take away tripcodes

on the other hand:
>Freedom of speech, technically, people have the right to be cancer.
this doesn't really apply here; this is a privately owned board, not a public congregation. basically the owner ultimately determines the rules of the house and the audience decides where to go. it's even up to him to decide whether to ask us for feedback and in this case he has

 No.2976

File: 1467754996221.gif (1.24 MB, 512x288, minewasbigger.gif)

>>2975
Kebles the feel of belonging exists in the other boards as well, the only difference is that there will be less blogging or dumb call-out posts, which are rare, but extremely gross and end in large arguments, and given the…interesting number of chatrooms people share now, they may happen anytime.
I also imagine less hostility against tripfags like the scenario you're having in your /ot/ thread.

You shitpost a lot, and that's okay, I shitpost too, but look at yourself here and now, you made a good post with a good point of debate and you posted as Kibbles.

I don't know, this may work or not but at least we're discussing it.

 No.2977

File: 1467757317483.png (714.84 KB, 727x545, makeuboachangreatagain.png)

I want to build a wall, and nobody builds walls better than me, believe me.
I want all the tripfags on the other side.
Make the tripfags pay for the wall.
Illegal tripfags are a problem.
I have so many fabulous friends who happen to be gay, but I am a traditionalist.


If you vote yes on the wall, I promise Uboachan will be great again, and greater than ever before!
#buildthewall
#MakeUboachanGreatAgain

 No.2978

File: 1467772592269.jpg (304.58 KB, 1162x827, 1438850928750.jpg)

>>2974 pretty much sums it all up. Names aren't necessary in most boards at all, and they've even proven to be harmful most of the times.

>>2974
>Having namefag enabled in those boards only encourages… certain feel of belonging.
I disagree, the "feeling of belonging" is completely unrelated to a "name". Many anons enjoyed this site alongside namefags who weren't obnoxious and dense faggots as well; it's about the content, not so much about the name.

>>2975
>but anon that's most of the site
Neo /n/ is 100% ad posting now, everybody is creating those gay chatrooms and moving there instead of discussing things in the board. If they aren't even posting, then they can't complain. Besides, what damage would it make to not post with a name? Is your name more important than the content you're generating? If so, why? /ot/ is fine without names, in fact, 70% of the problems we have in /ot/ are related to namefags, the other 30% being newfags.



C'mon I trust in you, Trumpsatsu, make ubuu great again.

 No.2979

Make Uboachan Great Again!

 No.2980

just do it

 No.2981

Let's switch gears. Any specific objections to enabling forced anon in /ot/ and /hikki/ only?

 No.2982

>>2981
well, i don't like it.

 No.2983

>>2982
…………..because…?

 No.2984

>>2982
This topic is literally in direct response to you.

 No.2985

Let's not start shit in this thread, just answer the question. <_>

Besides, enabling forced anon won't have any effect on using avatars.

 No.2986

I thought the point of /hikki/ WAS blogging, or at least being able to identify the people in the discussions because theyre of a serious nature.

 No.2987

>>2986
You may have a fair point about being able to identify people on /hikki/, due to it being a self-help board. Any thoughts on this anyone? Maybe the forced anon should be restricted to /ot/ only?

 No.2988

>>2986
For better or for worse, it's pretty easy to identify recurrent anonymous posters. Specially on a fairly small chan like this one.
>>2982
But why you don't like it? Elaborate and explain your opinion.

 No.2989

>>2988
I think what shitposting is on /hikki/ is different from what shitposting is everywhere else. What do you think forced anon will improve on /hikki/?

 No.2990

>>2986
>I thought the point of /hikki/ WAS blogging
Nah, there's difference between making a thread to tell people how your week was when no one asked, and exchanging personal experiences because of debate.

>>2987
Yeah it could be only /ot/, at least to test, to be fair I don't see many users using tripfags in /hikki/ at the moment.
The social factor may be a reason, and people still have to respect the board's topic in /hikki/

 No.2991

File: 1467827249274.jpg (46.76 KB, 254x247, YIFF IN HELL, FURFAGS.jpg)

>>2986
>blogging
use tumblr.

>>2987
I fail to see what's so bad about not having a name attached to your posts. As you said, /hikki/ is aimed to offer "self help" or whatever to its users, and not blogging like the other anon is implying. Will my message be more important if it says FAGGOT!!ILoVEdICks at the name field? Will the advice I could receive change because of that? Will the advice I could give be more relevant than that of an anonymous poster?
At most, it will only be a way to get some people to stroke your dick, and I believe we have enough chats for that.

 No.2992

>>2991
>Will my message be more important if it says FAGGOT!!ILoVEdICks at the name field? Will the advice I could receive change because of that? Will the advice I could give be more relevant than that of an anonymous poster?
Okay this is a good point…this is an imageboard, and we got tons of chats to get things namefagged.

 No.2993

It seems there's a fair bit of contention regarding the application of forced anon on /hikki/. I'll leave this thread open for comments for a couple more days, but I'll probably start by testing this concept on /ot/ only.

 No.2994

>>2993
I think I'm the only poster who gives a shit about keeping names on /hikki/ to be honest. Even than I'm starting to see the other side of the argument. My only concern is that the people arguing against names on /hikki/ don't use or intend to use /hikki/ but I think now that I've brought that up we can discuss that aspect of it to because this thread actually seems to be fairly productive.
>>2991
Tumblr is a different kind of community, and basically when I say blogging I mean talking about your personal life so you can get self help. I don't mean literally going full blown kibbles.

 No.2995

Try it out on /ot/ and see what happens. Trips are useful in the rare instance that some temporary matter of identity needs to exist to further a conversation or project (esp in situations such as an actual game dev responding in a help or comments thread, or in like a cyoa thread). But they should be the exception, not the norm. Peeps be tryina develop identities on an anonymous image board, and that kinda both defeats the purpose of the board *and* opens the door wide for personal insults and attacks.

 No.2996

>>2981
I think it's honestly a bad idea. Why? Simple. if this forces EVERYONE to use Anon, then Staff wont be able to tell other Staff members apart.

 No.2997

>>2996
I think staff are exempt.

 No.2998

#BuildTheWall

 No.2999

File: 1467999722540.png (255.06 KB, 471x563, Touhou_Cirno_9class.png)

>>2996
How are you even a janitor?
I was going to post just the cirnoget but you deserve a special mention.

 No.3000

>>2996
>Staff wont be able to tell other Staff members apart.
Don't insult the staff please, I know they may be slow at times but they are not really autistic.

 No.3001

Forced anon is now enabled in /ot/ only.

Comments here.

 No.3002

>>3001
Now I don't want it.
jk jk

 No.3004

File: 1468134355283.png (487.12 KB, 1000x1000, 1256439464901.png)

>actually taking forced anon seriously

Oh dear, we've reached this point have we?

I really don't think cancer correlates much with names really. The biggest cancerous issues we've had were the deep-pocketed one who shall not be named, drama for other places (who didn't really use names either), the original Cirno Crisis (that was mostly just anons attacking one user regardless of whether they use the name or not), and the Dr. RedPill situation (while not a large situation in itself embodies many terrible threads consisting of venomous people attacking venomous people that really had little to do with names, that user didn't even have one)

I also think were putting the carriage before the horse a bit here, being able to use a name doesn't make someone cancerous, being cancerous make someone more likely to use a name.

>>2974

>Except they will be posting about game dev stuff in /ig/, about fangames in /fg/, about their games in /og/ or commenting a cosplay in /cos/


except that I, and probably other people as well never even touch those places

I know you mean well but I really don't think this is the right move, I think it will kill more livelihood on an already struggling website then help to revive it.

 No.3005

File: 1468166909540.png (137.06 KB, 1216x326, neverforget.png)

>>3004
>the original Cirno Crisis (that was mostly just anons attacking one user regardless of whether they use the name or not)
It was a tragedy, I cried that day…

 No.3006

It's funny how the only people complaining about this are the namefags.
I understand if you want to protect that little "acknowledgement" using a name gives you, but at least try to use real arguments.

>>3004
You know, many names have told me something funny about you and girl, and many times I saw people posting indirect messages on /hikki/ about that. The only reason the bomb didn't explode is because those fuckers left the site, otherwise you'd be the protagonist of yet another name war cabaret, just like that spider faggot, and you'd count your incident among those.

>Cirno Crisis (that was mostly just anons attacking one user regardless of whether they use the name or not)

And do you realize people shat on kyoko because he POSTED WITH A NAME? If he had done it anonymously, nobody, literally NOBODY would have known who they should attack.

>Mr. Redpill

He's a fucking newfag, he can go eat a bag of dicks.

>I also think were putting the carriage before the horse a bit here, being able to use a name doesn't make someone cancerous, being cancerous make someone more likely to use a name.

Ergo, most namefags are cancer. The little number of people who aren't cancer won't be really troubled for not using a name.
Do you want to see an example of why this is positive? Kibbles posted a non-cancerous post right here >>2975 and here >>>/yn/5763 , and you can also count the many helping posts he makes in /hikki/. If he weren't posting with a shitty avatar and a fucking trip, I would never have thought he'd be the overly obnoxious faggot who blogs in /ot/ as if uboachan was myspace 2.0.
This is called "the content being more important than the poster". No matter how disgusting I find him, I wouldn't have minded the other posts because I WOULDN'T KNOW who makes those posts.

>I think it will kill more livelihood on an already struggling website then help to revive it.

How? Could you list some examples of why this would happen?
Honestly, I can see the hate posts being reduced thanks to this, and that's exactly one of the things we need the most right now, plus less circlejerk.

 No.3007

>>3004
Come on batman, join us in /ot/, it will be tanoshii

 No.3008

File: 1468190118575.jpg (118.44 KB, 900x661, zzzzz_john_proctor_by_tbar….jpg)

>>3006
If he weren't posting with a shitty avatar and a fucking trip, I would never have thought he'd be the overly obnoxious faggot who blogs in /ot/ as if uboachan was myspace 2.0.
So you're saying you only hate a poster because they use a name? That sounds more like your own problem. You want to have everyone blindfolded to prevent yourself from seeing something you don't like looking at. I never understood the concept of circlejerk until it was explained to me but then I laughed and regretted I ever even took it seriously. I've never found it bothersome to have people posting with a name or about personal stuff. I still don't understand why anyone cares whether someone shitposts with or without a name, a shitpost is a shitpost. This is a misguided notion, this is falsely attributing this website's problems and forming an plan of attack based on a misrepresentation of namefags.

And if you're really going to bring Kibbles into the matter I should point out that he is the only one that really post a consistent image along with his posts, he could keep on doing as he does regardless of this change just posting a picture of a fox, he is literally the only trip unaffected. I suppose I could follow suit and do the same but I'd rather challenge this misguided rule change directly than work around it (also I don't want to go hunting for images to fill a folder with Batman)

>And do you realize people shat on kyoko because he POSTED WITH A NAME?

So you're saying that the problem is that someone used a name, not that people are attacking people with names?, You realize this rule changes doing the exact same thing, an attack directed only at people with names.

>He's a fucking newfag, he can go eat a bag of dicks.

Yes, true, and that was a problem, but whether he had a name or not was irrelevant, that's my point.

>Kibbles posted a non-cancerous post right here

That was kind of my point, whether someone uses a name or not does not determine the quality of their posts.

The height of this website was when there were lots of names being used, people like Kyo and Booger, its decline was after they had already left, not to say that there is a correlation between the quality of posts and the use of names, but there is certainly no correlation between shitposting and the use of names.

>It's funny how the only people complaining about this are the namefags.

Well of course, we're the only ones having something taken away, people rarely even come to /sugg/ unless it's an issue that directly affects them, you wouldn't expect me to be posting here about something going on in /fg/ or /ig/, I wouldn't even notice.
We would rather not have our names taken away, because, well… https://youtu.be/Kb-dhzSPFiU?t=3

>Would you list some examples of why this would happen?

Basically what I said above, but also, as it's been said it is polite to go anon when you first come to a website, but as soon as you know your way around and have a general understanding of the community I don't see anything wrong with getting a trip. I find it to be a rather natural and smooth process for someone to find integration into an image board community through this process, but we kind of killed that process here. It does give the opportunity for a feeling of belonging for those who choose to go down this path, and as others have said I don't think there's anything at all wrong with a feeling of belonging. (I do however think there's something wrong with prohibiting such) I think we're really shooting ourselves in the foot with this.

>most namefags are cancer

name some

I am a responsible name owner and I support the right to bear names. I won't stand to see the government come take our names away. Names don't shitpost, people shitpost

 No.3009

>>3008
Whoa there captain.
We're just taking away names as a trial in /ot/ not the entire site.

 No.3010

File: 1468190899870.jpg (15.63 KB, 480x360, alfred.jpg)

>>3008
>name some
If we do that some major shitstorm may happen, I'm not sure if that's a great idea master Wayne…

 No.3011

File: 1468194239759.jpg (767.85 KB, 2000x1250, hunting the tripfags.jpg)

>>3008
>So you're saying you only hate a poster because they use a name?
It was an example, mr. counter-argument, I even said it there. Moreover, I hate him for what he posts, not because he uses a name – and I already stated that as well. Calm down for two seconds and read my post without going full aspergs, please.

>So you're saying that the problem is that someone used a name, not that people are attacking people with names?

Let me remind you this is an imageboard, batman, these things HAPPEN. You're moving the point of discussion to something else that's already been addressed in /ot/, and that's the quality of what we see on chans nowadays. And since autism is going to always happen, you can try to limit the circumstances where it's bond to happen.
It's a fact if he posted without a fucking name there would have been no witchhunt at all.

>You realize this rule changes doing the exact same thing, an attack directed only at people with names.

Please man, you can't be serious.

>Yes, true, and that was a problem, but whether he had a name or not was irrelevant, that's my point.

I can say the same thing about "quality posting" (i.e. anything you may find worth/interesting), why do you care whether it has a name or not? In fact, this is why I made the fucking kibbles example.

>The height of this website was when there were lots of names being used, people like Kyo and Booger

And here we're talking about times gone long ago, that atmosphere will never be back. Times change, batman. Just as back then the coexistence of names and anons was fine, it's no longer the case; the fact that most of the big dramas (in fact, "dramas" that chased those people away in the process) are related to names is a proof things don't work like that anymore, and how dangerous tripfag circlejerks can be.

>Basically what I said above

You didn't say anything at all! I asked for any real argument on why it'd be bad, and all I got back is "ITS MY NAME" as an argument. The only interesting point you brought so far is the control of shitposting, on which I fully agree, but we don't even produce that much content nowadays as to be picky on what we can or cannot accept!

>but also, as it's been said it is polite to go anon when you first come to a website, but as soon as you know your way around and have a general understanding of the community I don't see anything wrong with getting a trip. I find it to be a rather natural and smooth process for someone to find integration into an image board community through this process, but we kind of killed that process here. It does give the opportunity for a feeling of belonging for those who choose to go down this path, and as others have said I don't think there's anything at all wrong with a feeling of belonging. (I do however think there's something wrong with prohibiting such) I think we're really shooting ourselves in the foot with this.

Now, while I don't agree with this at all, I can see your point. But I believe the most important fact about those feelings of "belonging" are much more related to the site content than whether you have a name or not.

>name some

It's neither the place nor the time for cabaret, mate. I'm not gonna bring all the shitty names and ruin the whole thread like a little bitch.

 No.3012

>>3011
I understand times change but you're missing my point, I don't see any reason to believe that names of the source of drama or the decline of post quality, you keep stating as though it were a proven fact but without much to back it.

I understand you don't want to be naming names but what I'm really looking for in situations where "most namefags are cancer" as you have put it. I think the ramifications of this thread outweigh its sanctity.

 No.3013

>>3012
>I don't see any reason to believe that names of the source of drama or the decline of post quality
See >>2974 it's not even a big change, however the blogging(k just one fag was doing it atm), the circlejerk, and the foreign chat dramas will be stopping right now thanks to this change.
If things go bad, it will be just a fun experiment and we can go back.

If you want easy to find examples of people without the need of naming them, we had a bunch of fags in /yn/ asking how2RPGMaekr, pointing out things we already know and being underage.

 No.3014

>>3013
The single blogger is unaffected due to using pictures and circlejerk I already addressed but when you say "foreign chat dramas" do you mean stuff going on here about other places or stuff going on in other places about here?

>a bunch of fags in /yn/

The point of my DR.Red Pill situation was that people can still be a nuisance without a name, do you think taking away their name would really change anything?

 No.3015

>>3014
>people can still be a nuisance
Aw, wasn't getting enough attention?

Axe names on all boards. End the irc spillover.

 No.3016

>>3014
>The single blogger is unaffected due to using pictures and circlejerk
It's not the same, I haven't seen him updating since the trip wall was built

>>3014
>do you mean stuff going on here about other places or stuff going on in other places about here?
I mean, like fags going to chatrooms linked to the chatrooms' thread and then posting here like "cock chan was mean2me T_T they ban my feelings"

>do you think taking away their name would really change anything?

Having their post with their names wasn't good, alright let's say it's not about namefagging…but we really lose nothing by trying.

 No.3017

>>3016
>fags going to chatrooms linked to the chatrooms' thread
Ah, I don't actually know what goes on in any of those or any other chans because I've never use them, haven't even touched the Uboachan IRC.
But that's going on outside I don't think removing names here will change anything seeing as that's beyond the control of what's going on here. And if it's going on elsewhere does it really matter?

>Having their post with their names wasn't good, alright let's say it's not about namefagging…but we really lose nothing by trying.

Well, we lose the right to bear names for one… Although this gives me an idea…
Honestly a pretty bad idea for the complications it would incur although it seems people are quite fond of what I would consider bad ideas anyways.
If someone really becomes a nuisance because of their name could you just give them a name ban? I mean this way everyone would directly affected by it would only be those that really use their names to cause trouble… Even though I don't think names really do cause trouble but still.
Obviously this was bad because of the increased moderation required, the rules that would need to be written for this, and the backlash that occurs every time someone seems to have mod action against them. But still, just throwing this idea out there.

 No.3018

This is the kind of debate I was looking for, but it really got started after I'd already enabled the forced anon. Remember this is still a test and I might turn it off if I get convinced that there's no point to it or it's doing harm. But it seems like most of the users want this. Currently there is also no plan to expand it to any other boards.

 No.3019

Honestly, It doesnt work well if you need to know who mods are.

 No.3020

>>3019
Mods can still post with their mod trips and names.

 No.3021

File: 1468289214822.jpg (35.62 KB, 500x248, Autism2.0.jpg)

>>3019
I seriously don't know if you're joking or being serious…

 No.3022

>>2974
>I also request the word undertale to be filtered and replaced by "memegame".

Yes. This.

 No.3023

>>3022
This.

 No.3024

>>3022
This.

 No.3025

>>3022
This

 No.3150

>>3022
testing undertale

 No.3151

>>3022
So, why are you guys so anti-memegame?
Just testing…

 No.3152

>>3151
Nice try, everybody knows that sei will never filter memegame.



[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] [Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ yn / yndd / fg / yume ] [ o / lit / media / og / ig / 2 ] [ ot / hikki / cc / x / sugg ] [ news / rules / faq / recent / annex / manage ] [ discord / scans / mud / minecraft ] [ aurorachan / desuchan / sushigirl / lewd ]