/leftypol/ - Leftist Politically Incorrect

"redsources" is too silly. Like if you wanna add whimsy then put it in the CSS and side-content. The articles themselves should be clinical for ease of citing.

>>2714857
I was on the fence, I think you're right - the pun is too janky to something trying to be easy to use.

You could add some godot games to the side. People coming to play the games might peruse the reading material too. Would make for an edu-taining site people would link to and make tiktoks about.

>>2715160
>You could add some godot games to the side.
The only real Godot game was Escape from Catalunya.

>>2714253
This doesn't look like it's straight from 1997 so it's not a marxist website. Do better.

What's the source code look like? This is plain HTML+CSS, right?
Given what you're showing, it can all reasonably be plain HTML+CSS, so there shouldn't be any JavaScript needed to load the page, if not, then you should rework it so it can be used without JavaScript. That makes the page more accessible.

Also make sure you're using semantic elements well. If you're using markdown then I suppose your renderer would be handling that fair enough, but give a good look over at the source code and ask yourself if there's any divs that are serving the function of an existing HTML element. Divs are fine as long as you're literally using them as divisions though, just there is a common habit to just use them for everything with CSS classes, so I'm mentioning it.

>>2715688
>What's the source code look like? This is plain HTML+CSS, right?
MediaWiki, since it aims to be collaborative, but I've made sure to avoid requiring JS for functionality (e.g. for the summaries, it uses the <details> extension instead of the in-built JS collapsible).

>semantics
I haven't been paying much attention to that, I'll have a look tomorrow. I could have abused <div> or <span> tags with that Resourse box.

The next couple of days should be enough for me to give it some polish, make DB backups and open it up for an early dev demo. No point only posting images if there are comrades with webdev knowledge here.

>>2715688
>Divs are fine as long as you're literally using them as divisions though, just there is a common habit to just use them for everything with CSS classes, so I'm mentioning it.
Mozilla docs linked to https://inclusive-components.design/cards/ , which suggests the Resources boxes can be interpreted as a list of elements, which sounds reasonable to me. Unfortunately MediaWiki is failing to properly render them properly as <ul> due to the <ul> inside the summary, so I can either workaround by abusing an <ol> for unordered cards, or just keep them as <div> cards

>>2714253
I don't want to discourage anyone who isn't a completely lazy fuck like me, but who is the audience for the site? I suggest that, realistically speaking, the only audience you can expect is an audience of fellow debate-bro leftists. So you'd be honing their debate points maybe. Okay, fine. The ultimate problem is that being a debate-bro doesn't have the pull it used to. The overwhelming majority of people who'd be the easiest converts to leftism would still rather spend their time Netflixing or searching on dating apps for new pussy/cock to bang than spend their time pondering anti-capitalist talking points.

>>2721295
It's an important question to ask.
I would expand this and say it's intended audience is mainly public-facing socialist online communities (incl. /leftypol/, some lemmy/reddit comms) who receive a lot of liberal posts and can collectively save time with quick convenience copypasta. Basically an attempt to build a better alternative to curt RTFMposting - because many people will not RTFM, and many online-leftists don't know which Ms are best to send over anyway.
It's also for the debate-bros and redpill dealers in comment sections. The bottom line is that if someone is reading the kind of comment sections where these arguments appear, they're not Netflixing nor chilling. And if most times they see some shitpost talking point, they see it refuted in a quick video with a link to extended reading, I reckon that would at least plant a seed of doubt that hopefully primes them to be more open if-and-when their sex-buddy cries "Marx!" mid-orgasm.

>>2715636
Too modern?

>>2725104
That's a worse layout