[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / booru ]

/meta/ - Ruthless criticism of all that exists (in leftypol.org)

Discussions, querries, feedback and complaints about the site and its administration.
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password (For file deletion.)

Join our Matrix Chat <=> IRC: #leftypol on Rizon
Please give feedback on proposals, new on Mondays : /meta/
New /roulette/ topic: /AK-47/ - Guns, weapons and the art of war. - New board: /draw/


File: 1634516423304.png (38.67 KB, 497x527, 1427670888973-0.png)

 No.13898

11/11 edit: Continue to use this and we'll recycle it over to a new thread next week.

Hello everyone. This is the thread to make this week's proposals. Feel free to have your say whether user or mod. We have these proposals did not pass last week, but may be worthy of further discussion:



Proposal: Moderator votes remain the counted votes in admin decisions, but users should let vote using strawpolls (or perhaps polling systems built into the site?) per topic to display general user attitude to a proposal. If the majority User opinion directly opposes moderator majority vote then the proposals should be discussed and votes called on again after a break of 1-2 weeks to let people rethink positions on a topic.


Proposal: Make this the ‘official’ Leftypol channel >>>/leftypol/534666



Proposal: I think that we should also keep the current userbase engaged, making things like weekly game tournaments, actual organized debates, movie nights followed by discussion and so on. I've been thinking that a weekly leftypol podcast could be a good idea, just a couple of anons talking about what happened in the board and the world during the past week and inviting people to talk if they so desire, we could have debates there, and interviews and other things, and share it on spotify for others to see.



Once again, I must clarify that ONLY MODS CAN ACTUALLY VOTE ON PROPOSALS OR VOTES. Anons are free to have their say and offer suggestions and feedback to improve proposals/votes but these are only advisory and user votes are not counted for official decisionmaking. But who knows, a persuasive enough argument might sway the mod team to your cause?

Please reply to this post to post proposals for consideration next week. If a user proposal seems like a good idea, we may adopt it and make it official. Thanks everyone. Feel free to post your opinions but try not to spam or needlessly bicker back and forth in order to keep the thread clear and legible. Any off-topic posts may be removed without warning.

 No.13901

>Proposal: I think that we should also keep the current userbase engaged, making things like weekly game tournaments, actual organized debates, movie nights followed by discussion and so on. I've been thinking that a weekly leftypol podcast could be a good idea, just a couple of anons talking about what happened in the board and the world during the past week and inviting people to talk if they so desire, we could have debates there, and interviews and other things, and share it on spotify for others to see.
I mean I don't have any problem with this proposal but who would be willing to invest their time and energy to do that?

 No.13905

>pic
fookin' hell that pic gives me conniptions

 No.14584

the freshest proposal thread here: kinda of some time from today but April Fools word filters'd probably be fun, like Fuck being turned to Duck, so any swearing becomes 'ducking' hilarious. Just a thought

 No.14628

>>14584
They did play with wordfilters last April, didn't they? that was fun

 No.14643

>>14584
Also, an even more atrocious theme than jungle becoming the standard for the day.

 No.14645

Remove (you)s on replies.
Keep (you)s on your posts so it is easier to find your own posts.
4chinlets thrive on (you)s and removing them may lower incentive to b8

 No.14669

Since it's late Thursday already, this post will be recycled next week.

PROPOSAL: I propose the rules page be changed to the following rules. The intent of this is to provide clarification, remove 'unwritten rules', and remove long paragraphs, rather than change any policies.

———-

Rules:

GLOBAL:

0) Intentionally evading a ban will result in an immediate, long-term ban.

1) Anyone posting child pornography, child modelling or who attempts to challenge this rule (e.g. 'this is technically legal') will be permanently banned. Their information will be forwarded to relevant legal authorities.

2) Spam and malicious flooding is banned. This includes flooding a thread in protest, posting off-topic content in unrelated threads, and soyjak spam (quoting with no meaningful addition). Bot spam will result in a permanent ban. If you wish to make a post to advertise another site such as an imageboard or disc0rd server, contact the moderators for clearance.

3) Actively promoting extreme illegal activity ('fedposting') may be removed or banned at the discretion of the moderators. There are more suitable sites for doing that.

4) Pretending to be multiple users ('samefagging') in order to fake popularity or start drama will usually result in a ban. Imitating a staff member is banned.

5) Any 'shock images' (gore, extreme pornography, abuse, etc.), regardless of intention, may be removed and punished with a ban. If it's legitimately constructive to a conversation, it may stay up if hidden using the Spoiler Image button and clearly described in the post to avoid being confused for trolling.

6) Direct calls to maliciously raid other communities are banned. This includes raiding other imageboards and calls to brigade live-streamers. Leftypol is not your personal army.

BOARD RULES:
These rules are enforced less rigorously on /siberia/ than they are on more 'high-quality' boards such as /leftypol/ or /edu/.

7) Reactionism and liberalism, or any other kind of non-leftist positions are not banned in itself, as we will endeavour to allow and encourage people of other political philosophies to explore leftism through /leftypol/ so long as they follow the rules contained herein. However, non-leftist users are ultimately to be considered ‘guests’ and thus will be removed if they prove a nuisance or disrupt the normal functioning of the site. Low-effort raiders will be banned.
Opening posts with liberalism or reactionary topics will be treated with far more scrutiny to prevent them filling the catalog.

8) Creating a new thread for a topic with an existing 'general' thread (e.g. creating threads about COVID-19 news, any e-celebrities, or USA mainstream politics) will be deleted or merged and will usually result in a short ban. Creating a redundant thread will be treated the same. Search the Catalog view search to find existing threads.

9) Due to derailing, COVID denialism outside the COVID-19 thread will be deleted.

10) All boards except for /siberia/ (and potentially /roulette/) are 'Safe For Work' boards. Pornography should not be posted on them without good reason, and any pornography on these boards should be hidden using the Spoiler Image option. New threads on /siberia/ with pornographic topics should have a Spoiler Image on the opening post.

11) Posts should, overall, be conductive to an informed and productive discussion. /leftypol/ is not an academic journal, but it also should not be a cesspit of back and forth bickering and pointless insults. Users should attempt to argue for the point they are presenting in an honest and open way and should be receptive to information or arguments that do, in fact, challenge their views.

12) Reactionary 'I am [ideology] AMA'-type threads are considered inherently bad faith and off-topic, and will be removed from /leftypol/.

13) /leftypol/ is committed to the ideal that the left should have an avenue for open discussion, so all ‘mainstream’ leftist ideologies will be permitted (so long as they do not violate the conditions set out in [[Article 1)]]. /leftypol/ does not adhere to a specific leftist ideology. Sectarianism is banned. This includes idpol and '[left ideology] hate' threads.

14) To ensure a basic level of quality, topics or posts will not be tolerated when contributions are not conductive to well-intentioned discussion. Therefore, posts or topics are likely to be removed at the discretion of moderation staff if they;

a) argue under false pretences ("false flagging")
 e.g. "Hey fellow commies, did you prep your wife's bull today?"
b) imply reactionary or false positions of the userbase as a form of group shaming
 e.g. "Why do you guys all hate white people?"
c) are of an overly derisive and mocking nature
 e.g. "haha, btfo commies hitler rulez"
d) are of a gratuitously offensive or hysterical nature
 e.g. "I hate fucking Mudslimes, we need to hang them all before they rape our children"
e) are debating inherently reactionary topics where no reasonable debate is possible
 e.g. "In what way should be exterminate the lesser races, guys?"
f) are low effort sectarian bait rather than good faith discussion
 e.g. “Tankie/Anarkiddie hate thread” or “Why does this theorist suck so much?”
g) are likely to create pointless and unconstructive arguments about ‘idpol’ (as defined in Article 1)
 e.g. “Why can’t I have women as sex slaves?” or “Why are whiteoids like this?”

These examples are low quality posts that are considered, at best, bait, but are better described as spam. Any poster that violates this rule may be subject to a ban, and any post that violates this is subject to deletion at the discretion of moderators, if they feel that the topic may be an avenue for productive discussion.

META:

15) Volunteers may remove other posts according to their own discretion which they feel do not contribute to the stated mission of /leftypol/, but they should try to adhere to the standards of the community and of their fellow moderators, and to refrain from arbitrary decisions. Where there is disagreement among moderators, the matter will be decided by informal consensus of currently active moderators. If there is still disagreement, the matter should be escalated to a formal vote.

16) Users have the right to question and challenge any bans or post removals, or other moderator actions, which they feel are unfair or do not live up to the spirit of the rules. This may be done in the moderation feedback threads on the various boards, on the /meta/ board, through the ban appeal feature, or in the Leftypol Matrix Congress chat, but comments should be considered and constructive, and should not devolve into polemics against the volunteers. Ultimately, the judgement of the moderation team is final.

edits made since posting:
18/11: Moved 7) to board rules, added subtitle to board rules, and applied suggestions from >>14672

———-

PROPOSAL: I propose we publicly and formally reconsider (via /leftypol/ sticky) whether 'Rule 6 in the above list should remain once more staff are recruited.'

PROPOSAL: I propose we publicly and formally reconsider (via /leftypol/ sticky) the extent to which Rule 7 in the above list (currently rule 3) is enforced, due to discontent in the /meta/ moderation sticky (e.g. >>14635 ), excessive ban lengths, user concerns with over-reach, and sterilization negatively affecting organic activity, discussion and entertainment. The rule explicitly states that reactionism and liberalism are not in themselves banned unless they are disruptive.

>>14645
PROPOSAL: Officially forwarding this as a proposal, as I believe it should be voted on.

>>14584
Already a policy.

 No.14671

>>14645
this makes following conversations wank
although it may be interesting to replace (you)s with a red line at the side of a post or similar, which would make it easier to track if you've been replied to without having the exact same effect as a (you). though of course that makes it more difficult to come back to a long thread where you've made a niche point and ctrl+f to see if anyone's engaged with it or not.

 No.14672

>>14669
Some feedback on the Rules:
I think most of the Global rules are too harsh and should probably be mostly excluded from /siberia/ on the pretext of it being a shitposting board. Spamming and shitposting is kinda the point of an anonymous forum, and raiding 4chan is something people do in response to /pol/ raids. So isolating that to /siberia/ (and anchoring particularly provocative posts) permits people to continue to let loose but not shit up the rest of the site.

>Intentionally evading a ban will result in a permanent ban

This is too nebulous: ban-evaders IP hop and often permabans end up blocking legit IPs that do nothing but harm other users, leaving the evader untouched. Moreover a sitewide ban system means that, to post a proper appeal on /meta/, you need to use Tor and on a technical basis that'd be considered ban evasion too.
>Spam and flooding is banned
I think that's kind of obvious, but you should be specific about defining spam. TheThingNoticer shit is obvious crap but sometimes I or other users post different in succession because posting a single and excessively massive textwall post is annoying to other users and the poster.
>advertise a relevant site, contact the moderators for clearance.
Please define advertising a "relevant site", because users link to sites as sources for arguments or news and just general discussion literally all the time. There aren't enough mods active to "clear" things for every link that gets posted, especially since the moderation kind of drops off at times. Archive.is is not infallible and cannot save some sites, neither can archive.org (robots.txt) and freezepage/Googlecache have been failing as of late.
>shock images
The mods should probably provide examples of that in a document, not to mention Spoilers fail sometimes or get forgotten. I suggest that first you give a warning 5 minute ban to let a user know, and if they continue posting shock images then you can hit a longer ban.
>Calls to raid are banned
Does this include agitating support for a leftist movement? Because activism is a common reason for use of this site.

>non-leftist users are ultimately to be considered ‘guests’ and thus will be removed if they prove a nuisance or disrupt the normal functioning of the site. Low-effort raiders will be banned.

Excellent.
>Already a policy.
Great!

 No.14676

>>14671
>more difficult to come back to a … thread where you've made a … [post] and ctrl+f to see if anyone's engaged with it or not.
thats the point
I didnt have any issues with the no (you)s on bunkerchan, and with the new search feature, it generally shouldn't be a problem to find whatever post you're looking for anyway.
(you)s are a matter of convenience

 No.14677

>>14672
>Spamming and shitposting is kinda the point of an anonymous forum
I'm going to say 'no it isn't'. It can be, but there are dozens I've used with substantial quality control and purpose. Lainchan is a well-known example.
But I believe that's a valid point in this case with /siberia/. I think historically there has been issues with inconsistent moderation on /b/ where the only clue apart from experience was the name and the line (something like) "Rule enforcement is more lax in /b/". There were conflicting views by both users, other users, mods and other mods about what is allowed there.
On one hand, the site has stabilized enormously after the dividing of leftychan/b/ and leftypol/siberia/. It's fair to say there was a type of user responsible for the vast majority of prolonged /b/ edgeposting and antagonization, who almost exclusively used /b/ (which is part of why /siberia/ was hit so much harder after the coup than /leftypol/ or any /alt/ board). And, to be frank, it's much more comfy now that they've fucked off. On the other, I also agree that some of the /b/ shitposting was fun, constructive even. The balance is in the middle, for me.
(basically: "yes")
Maybe a "The following global rules do not apply to /siberia/: " clause would be appropriate as it's global except there, adding any caveats for partial enforcement. Does that sound appropriate?

>Intentionally evading a ban will result in a permanent ban

This is a good point. In fact, I just realized we can probably set a 'default' ban time of 1h (instead of blank, which results in a permaban if careless) so hurried anti-raid bans don't perma all the VPNs (and the Tor clearnet ban makes it less and less necessary). Additionally, we should prioritize this issue for making bans default to a board instead of all boards, especially since our rules endorse appeals on /meta/

>you should be specific about defining spam

Good idea, maybe a list of some types of spam like "(raiding, flooding, quoting dozens of posts for a shitpost, unsolicited advertising, soyjak greentexting)". Hopefully other mods chip in with any details as I think I've seen 'spam' used to describe other things.

>Please define advertising a "relevant site"

Good crit, my intent was for that to mean "visit my imageboard /leftypol/!" or "join my chatroom" threads/spam. As with all alt imageboards, we get the generic imageboards spam threads quite a bit. I should clarify that to not include organic endorsement of sites you're talking about.

>shock images

Doesn't it list them?
>5) Any 'shock images' (gore, extreme pornography, abuse, etc.)

>Excellent.

Already a policy ;)

>>Already a policy.

>Great!
Here's the list of the last lot of April filters: https://git.leftypol.org/leftypol/leftypol/commit/695d407d69c0ee02e96f96664d11cfb435bb194c
It was generally well received (except for that thread were everyone laughed at that one anon) so we'll probably do something similar.

>>14676
>>more difficult to come back to a … thread where you've made a … [post] and ctrl+f to see if anyone's engaged with it or not.
>thats the point
<you will read the fugging thread :DDD:DD
<nooo let me only read my replies

What are thoughts on (You)s disabled by default, requiring a checkbox in the [Options] menu to enable? It would de-dopamine raiders a bit and allow regular users the significant convenience.

 No.14678

PROPOSAL: in response to >>>/leftypol/582312 and replies: remove behavior where posting a reply jumps to the bottom of the thread.

 No.14679

File: 1636681960965.png (6.57 KB, 499x249, Oekaki.png)

>>14677
>my intent was for that to mean "visit my imageboard /leftypol/!" or "join my chatroom" threads/spam
I thought that, but it'd good to be clear so other mods don't abuse the rule's vagueness
>maybe a list of some types of spam like
Yes, sounds good.
>set a 'default' ban time
Good idea

>Lainchan

Kinda Esoteric TBH. And you make a good point, that's the reason I like /siberia/ being essentially a trash dump, filtering out high-speed shitposting and bad content from /leftypol/ and the other alt boards.

>a "The following global rules do not apply to /siberia/: " clause

Yes, partial enforcement sounds pretty good, kinda like 4/trash/. I feel that /siberia/ acts as an outlet for the more site-destructive tendencies of anons, letting them be less cancerous on other boards and thus help target bad faith spammers more easily.

 No.14681

>>14676
making that part of the point actively reduces engagement. people coming into a thread to post bait is the primary part of the problem. people posting a niche point about staffing at aeroflot (or whatever) in a thread about the entirety of the USSR, less so.

the lack of (you)s on bunkerchan is one reason i took up a tripflag: to make finding things easier.

>>14677
>What are thoughts on (You)s disabled by default, requiring a checkbox in the [Options] menu to enable? It would de-dopamine raiders a bit and allow regular users the significant convenience.
this is probably ideal, or would at least make an interesting experiment.

 No.14683

>>14681
>the lack of (you)s on bunkerchan is one reason i took up a tripflag: to make finding things easier.
In my original proposal I recommend keeping a (you) on the posts YOU make, but removing the (you)s on the replies.

 No.14686

>>14678
For the love of shit, finally.

 No.14688

>>14681
>people posting a niche point about staffing at aeroflot (or whatever) in a thread about the entirety of the USSR
Is this a real example? link? and even if it is a niche point, it's still related to the content being made.
I think a better example is derailing of threads using content that clearly doesn't belong in regards to the main discourse of the OP in any capacity.

 No.14695

>>13898
Does anyone object to the idea of just making the proposals thread permanent, to reduce workload? It could also give people more time to hash out ideas.

 No.14699

>>14695
I think they should be made monthly and pinned until the end of the month, then a new thread made for the next month.

 No.14744

was my reply deleted
mods should make an effort to ban rightists/reactionaries
they actively scare away actually productive and leftist posters who decide the community isn't worth posting in and leave behind teenagers and /pol/jaks and other shitters who feed back into the scare effect

i've known a few people who've mentioned they don't post here cuz of it myself

 No.14745

>>14744
I remember there being an extra reply

 No.14747

>>14744
>>14745
I did remove it. Saying "you should rangeban reactionaries" sounds like moderation feedback rather than a proposal, because we already ban them (almost every day). Therefore, it's in the wrong /meta/ thread. This is for proposals. Are you proposing a concrete rule/policy change?

 No.14748

>>14747 (cont'd)
And if it is a concrete proposal that all reactionary posts should be banned (which indeed is explicitly not a rule, second half of rule 3), it's worth considering that /leftypol/ may not be the right place for people who are trying to post in a very restricted, 'safe' environment like chat rooms and focused subreddits. The name /leftypol/ itself gives reference to idea that this isn't meant to be as politically restrictive and sterile as other 'left wing' communities. It's a feature. So do take this into consideration in your reply.

 No.14754

>>14747
>because we already ban them (almost every day)
no you don't. there are gaps. also rule 3 talks about people who want to explore leftism while what i see are concern trolls who drop their guise and show their true colors at the drop of a hat, as well as just openly reactionary and belligerent regulars. you should make rules more clear about bad faith stuff

 No.14760

>>14754
more a logistics issue than a rule issue.

 No.14806

>>14754
>openly reactionary and belligerent regulars
If you cannot challenge them (or learn to report and ignore as is the norm of chans) you need to reconsider yourself, it's some random anon's posts on an obscure mug-making site, if anything open reactionaries are easy to deal with, it's the pseudo-communist liberals that try to gaslight people, use fallacies and scream "ur Xphobic" to garner outrage support that are a real issue, since they play on emotions to get people to stop being practical and analytical.

 No.14811

>>14806
i do challenge em

also there should be explicit rules against moving goalposts/meandering conversation or someone that's clearly just jumping in with pre-prepared script without following the conversation

 No.14812

>>14811
(nta) I do actually think that goalposts point is potentially useful, like a mod capcode reply saying "Don't move the goalposts." and if they continue, wack them.

 No.14824

>>14812
yes
there should also be a rule against browbeating ppl with normie "common sense"
like "normal blue collar everyday joe blows that live in my head don't care about X so you're dumb/stop talking about it"

 No.14838

>>14824
>ike "normal blue collar everyday joe blows that live in my head don't care about X so you're dumb/stop talking about it"
You sound like a salty liberal, most of the time [X] tends to be idpol garbage.

 No.14840

>>14838
you sound like a salty rightoid that concern trolls leftypol FOR FREE

 No.14859

File: 1637052003252.jpg (34.22 KB, 534x723, dkqad8ncoz871.jpg)

shrigma flag

 No.14860

>>13898
We need to add a wordfilter for degenerate and degeneracy
polyps just cant help themselves, even false flagging they keep repeating it.

 No.14861

>>14840
>N-no u
>Everyone that calls out my liberalism is /pol/ that'll get 'em!
Go back.

 No.14876

whoevers the admin of this site, you really should add these lines to your https://leftypol.org/robots.txt :
Disallow: /anime/thumb/
Disallow: /anime/src/
Disallow: /edu/src/*.pdf$
Disallow: /hobby/src/*.pdf$
Disallow: /leftypol/src/*.pdf$
Disallow: /meta/
Disallow: /music/src/*.mp3$
Disallow: /siberia/thumb/
Disallow: /siberia/src/

you can remove Allow: / it is non-standard.

by blocking crawlers from google et al. from indexing images, pdfs and/or mp3s from these slower high-risk boards where people frequently post copyrighted material, this will significantly reduce the amount of DMCAs you get in the future. copyright troll bots regularly scour google images for this stuff.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170223/06160336772/google-report-9995-percent-dmca-takedown-notices-are-bot-generated-bullshit-buckshot.shtml

yes, not only should direct links to pdfs be blocked in /edu/ but /hobby/ too, lots of copyrighted books found there:
https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aleftypol.org%2Fhobby+pdf
/leftypol/ too because of the Reading General thread.

/meta/ as a whole should not be indexed by search engines as it is meant for internal communications/complaints, no reason to publicly broadcast it to the world wide web. just from people posting certain keywords like "DMCA" and "child porn spam" and having that indexed for a long time on google et al. could get you unwanted attention or demoted in search engine rankings.

 No.14877

>Proposal: Moderator votes remain the counted votes in admin decisions, but users should let vote using strawpolls (or perhaps polling systems built into the site?) per topic to display general user attitude to a proposal. If the majority User opinion directly opposes moderator majority vote then the proposals should be discussed and votes called on again after a break of 1-2 weeks to let people rethink positions on a topic.


Support

 No.14879

>>14876
Just one problem, this makes it harder to archive stuff, pdfs only save properly on wayback archive and it doesn't run on sites using robots.txt Blocking google crawlers also means this site gets less exposure and so people using the browser (a large majority of the population) are going to be filtered from this site.

 No.14884

>>14879
We can probably allow-list the archive.org bot, not sure what the archive.today (et al.) bot is.

>Blocking google crawlers also means this site gets less exposure

The impact would be small, as it's mostly blocking just images, .mp3s and .pdfs, not the site text. That would mainly affect google images results and people finding .pdfs.
I have some doubts about the need to block anything on /siberia/ as they aren't absolutely filled with commercial copyrighted property likely to get trolled. Worse case, we remove the infringing content.
I think for the .pdfs, it might be better to risk having them up until we start getting hit, since they're a useful resource that may bring people to the site. Does that sound foolish?
I fully agree with /meta/; we have an internal search feature and /meta/ is next-to-useless for public searches. Same with /music/ and anime images, too high-risk for very little reward.

 No.14890

>>14884
archive.today functions fine it just can't save pdfs for some reason. But yes an allow-list for the archive.org bot is a very good idea.

 No.14891

>>14884
>I have some doubts about the need to block anything on /siberia/
Definitely not, and frankly mot of leftypol is so fast paced that little stays up there very long to matter, leftypolarchive on the other hand…
/draw/ is almost all OC and /music/ files are fairly tough to copyright (given that even on youtube many copyrighted songs go up and stay up (including in AMVs).
>anime images
Nah images in anime are pretty risk free for the moment, it's only Youtube that get the banhammer for content, even 4chan is pretty safe, people upload leaked content there all the time.

 No.14893

>>14669
>PROPOSAL: I propose the rules page be changed to the following rules. The intent of this is to provide clarification, remove 'unwritten rules', and remove long paragraphs, rather than change any policies.
👍
>>14645
>PROPOSAL: Officially forwarding this as a proposal, as I believe it should be voted on.
👍

 No.14894

>>14669
>PROPOSAL: I propose the rules page be changed to the following rules. The intent of this is to provide clarification, remove 'unwritten rules', and remove long paragraphs, rather than change any policies.
yeah sure

 No.14895

>>14669
>I propose the rules page be changed to the following rules.
I vote yes on this.
>I propose we publicly and formally reconsider (via /leftypol/ sticky) whether 'Rule 6 in the above list should remain once more staff are recruited.'
For now I say keep it - its not like we have many communities to which it'd be advantageous to raid anyways. Vote no but willing to revisit on a more provisional basis.
>I propose we publicly and formally reconsider (via /leftypol/ sticky) the extent to which Rule 7 in the above list (currently rule 3) is enforced
Current levels of enforcement is fine in my eyes, so vote no.
>>14645
>>14669
While that might be nice conceptually, there is plenty of user-side software to allow for (You)s like 4chanx (which is compatible with this site to an extent) so if they really want it they can easily find it. That besides that was our MO on bunkerchan and it never stopped raiding. Vote nah.

 No.14896

>>14678
oh, and fucking yes on that one

 No.14901

>>14678
Aye for this
>>14669
>PROPOSAL: I propose the rules page be changed to the following rules.
Aye for this
>PROPOSAL: I propose we publicly and formally reconsider (via /leftypol/ sticky) whether 'Rule 6 in the above list should remain once more staff are recruited.'
Nay for this
>PROPOSAL: I propose we publicly and formally reconsider (via /leftypol/ sticky) the extent to which Rule 7 in the above list (currently rule 3) is enforced
Mmm sure, still think we should keep the rule and crack down on reactionary posts, but it's good to have a community discussion about how we go about doing it
>>14645
>Remove (you)s on replies.
Don't really mind either way. Going to abstain on voting on this one.

 No.14904

>>14669
Yes to everything

>>14584
We should LARP like we are going to do another split.

 No.14907

>>14744
It is good that those people left. They don't want a discussion, they just want a hug box where their weak opinions are validated

 No.14925

>>14678
Yes, why not.
>>14669
>PROPOSAL: I propose the rules page be changed to the following rules.
Yes, sure.
>PROPOSAL: I propose we publicly and formally reconsider (via /leftypol/ sticky) whether 'Rule 6 in the above list should remain once more staff are recruited.'
Abstain, I don't really like these kind of 'we vote to consider X' proposals, they don't really mean much. If we want to discuss rule 6 we should just discuss it.
>PROPOSAL: I propose we publicly and formally reconsider (via /leftypol/ sticky) the extent to which Rule 7 in the above list (currently rule 3) is enforced
Abstain as above, for the same reason.
>>14645
>Remove (you)s on replies.
I vote no, I like (you)s.

 No.14926

>>13898
remove anchoring and locking features so you faggots have to start deleting reactionary bait


Unique IPs: 21

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / siberia / hobby / tech / edu / games / anime / music / draw ] [ meta / roulette ] [ cytube / git ] [ GET / ref / booru ]