[ art / civ / cult / cyb / diy / drg / feels / layer / lit / λ / q / r / sci / sec / tech / w / zzz ] archive provided by lainchan.jp

lainchan archive - /q/ - 12938



File: 1486426249696.png (107.17 KB, 267x200, moth.gif)

No.12938

No matter how you feel about the actual subject, the "When did /pol/ come here thread?" appears to have monopolized the image board entirely since it was posted. We're already a slow board and when the "recent posts" is about 80-90% /civ/ on a /g/ spinoff you know there's a problem. I understand that there is an argument about keeping the "politics debate" cancer contained but honestly something needs to be done so we can go back to the kind of discussions the majority of people on here actually want.

  No.12939

This pretty much. Giving them a containment board only makes them feel at home here. It's better to simply drive them out.

  No.12940

File: 1486428860415.png (28.75 KB, 200x133, ye.jpg)

The aforementioned thread has been locked and it seems that /civ/ has been removed from the board list. Statement from applefriend soon perhaps?

  No.12941

File: 1486429354980.png (30.7 KB, 151x200, 20111228.gif)

This is how I feel about most of the posts in /civ/. Unlike technical discussions which usually have clear answers where you can point to other resources like documentation, /civ/ is mostly full of arguments backed up by opinion. Which is why you get this amount of posting in a board that I would say is secondary to the core of lainchan. Whereas someone might have to go out and do some research then come back with what they've found, there's very little effort involved in just spitting out your opinion.

>inb4 this is just my opinion man :3

  No.12942

>>12938
>We're already a slow board and when the "recent posts" is about 80-90% /civ/ on a /g/ spinoff you know there's a problem.
The worst part there was it seemed a good portion of the posters there completely weren't interested in debate and were only interested in trying to insider trade about their views and insulting everyone who didn't hold their exact views. Hell, posters there were so incapable of actual debate that some of them would repeat the same point that another poster was attacking back to them instead of presenting a counterargument, as if they believed simply repeating their views over and over again would convince people that they're right.

  No.12944

>>12942
Can c!rcle jerk be changed from insider trade to something that at least has a similar meaning?

  No.12945

>>12944
I'd direct that at the "kicking a dead whale" thread.

  No.12946

File: 1486441431869.png (85.59 KB, 200x118, Screenshot 2017-02-06 at 8.21.36 PM - Edited.png)

civ is off the board list it is locked,

fully derezzed,---im okay with this

  No.12947

Thanks, jews.

The body was too short or empty.

  No.12948

>>12947
This is why people wanted /civ/ gone

  No.12949

>>12940
>Statement from applefriend soon perhaps?
Wouldn't that be something? Appleman communicating with the community?

Appleman, seriously, you need to log changes and create a page where you explain your motive for such changes, this soykaf is ridiculous, you are running a community, your decisions affect every one here, some greatly. You need to be more transparent.

I don't even mean to say what you did, or what you've been doing is wrong, simply that I seek clarity, and if you offer it at all, it's always begrudgingly.

  No.12950

>>12949

I did communicate.

I updated the sticky in /civ/. But that evidently isn't good enough for you and now you would like a Changelog page, other than the existing Github repository for source code, is that correct ?

Should it just be a /q/ thread or do I need to make another custom lainchan / vichan template and start making my notes public ?

Is that what you are requesting ?

Do I understand correctly ?

You are telling me I need to do things but not stating why.

I didn't realise that I needed to grant every wish that every Lainon every asked for, I thought I was helpful enough, answering posts on /q/, IRC, Mumble,etc.

Thanks for informing me that my efforts to provide clarity so far have failed.

  No.12952

>>12950
> I updated the sticky in /civ/.
Let's see
>/civ/ was locked on 2017-02-06 21:50 UTC. If you want it back, please make a case for unlocking it in /q/.
Hm. Does that qualify as "explain your motive for such changes", as >>12949 wanted? I don't think so.
> existing Github repository
Let's check out https://github.com/lainchan/lainchan. Hm, for some reason there is no commit, issue or pull request documenting the closing of /civ/.

>You are telling me I need to do things but not stating why.

see
>you are running a community, your decisions affect every one here
That's more than enough legitimation.

>start making my notes public ?

why not? Then you wouldn't have to explain soykaf over and over through three different channels (/q/, IRC, Mumble).

I mean, something like
>as you all know, /civ/ was a huge shìtshow, consequently a lot of work for us on the mod team and I don't think it would have gotten better anytime soon, so I locked it.
would suffice.

  No.12953

>>12950
A news section on the front page might be a good idea. Nothing major, just dated one or two line summaries of the last 3-6 major recent changes (in either boards, major features of policies) with a link to a more detailed post if necessary.

You've done well with communicating so far but it's largely been on on an individual basis, so users who weren't present in the thread or IRC when the conversations took place are often left in the dark.

Also, clam down. I understand your frustration, but unfortunately you will need to get use to criticism, both legitimate and illegitimate, and even outright abuse if you intend to continue administrating online communities. Especially one with the sort of theme lainchan has. A community that mixes the individualism of punk with the ego that most tech enthusiasts have means that no matter what you do, some portion of the community will attack you for it.

  No.12963

>>12941
I feel like the fact that this is the situation for any topic shows that /civ/ as a board has failed. This level of research should be requisite for any discussion, politics doesn't get a free pass because "it's muh opinion." This was even explicated in /civ/'s rules, the fact that it isn't being enforced shows either
1) mods aren't willing to enforce them or
2) mods aren't paying attention to the board at all

perhaps if we adopted a policy of only running boards people were willing to moderate, this could be avoided in the future.

  No.12972

>>12953

The old news page that was hidden has now be added to back to the top bar, and I have made one summary posting with some of the more recent changes.

If there is something else missing you think I should mention please let me know.

  No.12984

>>12952
>why not?
Uhh, how do you propose this be implemented? Public IPs for all posters, betraying their anonymity? Site-wide IDs, which is the same thing? Re-programming the way the system works, when it's really not that bad?

>>12963
>1) mods aren't willing to enforce them or
>2) mods aren't paying attention to the board at all
The thing is, no matter what happened to /civ/, there was endless complaining about moderation. Delete outright nazis, and you're an authoritarian who censors opposing opinions. Let them stay, and now there's a bias in the opposite direction. Hell, there is no real need for extreme examples here, half the threads would get some stuff deleted for being outright soykafposts, but people complained about overmoderation, despite the fact that the board was the one with most freedom in posting. /civ/ probably can't happen as it is now, since people aren't willing to try with their posts or accept when useless stuff gets deleted.

  No.13007

>>12984
>The thing is, no matter what happened to /civ/, there was endless complaining about moderation. Delete outright nazis, and you're an authoritarian who censors opposing opinions. Let them stay, and now there's a bias in the opposite direction. Hell, there is no real need for extreme examples here, half the threads would get some stuff deleted for being outright soykafposts, but people complained about overmoderation, despite the fact that the board was the one with most freedom in posting. /civ/ probably can't happen as it is now, since people aren't willing to try with their posts or accept when useless stuff gets deleted.

I'm pretty sure that most people complained because threads or posts that were even slightly more right or conservative sometimes just vanished but threads like "communism is great and people didn't die because of it" or "I'm interested in eco-terrorism, where should I start" which are as punishable by law as "Nazi Germany was great and holocaust didn't happen" were absolutely fine.

Politics is very personal thing and I think that even mods didn't stay neutral and pushed their agenda in this.

Hell, I got my post deleted and I have yet to find the rule that my post violated.

I'm glad that /civ/ is gone and I hope it doesn't come back until proper (balanced) moderation is in place.

  No.13010

>>13007
>I'm pretty sure that most people complained because threads or posts that were even slightly more right or conservative sometimes just vanished
I have no idea what you're talking about, when there was a ton of actual Hitler spam there that was left there for being just on the line, even though I would've liked to see it disappear. There's a pretty constant authoritarianism thread there as well, which is more or less the opposite of communism.

I can't really see the whole picture of mod deletions, but from what I saw, the board was so bad that it was just a bunch of crap in all directions that I think there was a sort of unwritten agreement that a bit more is allowed there. The issue with (perceived) unwritten agreements like that is that to understand how much is allowed on top of the regular stuff is, everyone would need to see all the deleted posts.

I'm willing to bet that, save for margin of error stuff, everything deleted had a reason to be deleted, but since some of the stuff slightly outside the rules was allowed, the amount of error on that part was likely more significant.

If your post got deleted with murky reasons, it was probably because of a lack of elaboration.

  No.13012

>>13010
>There's a pretty constant authoritarianism thread there as well, which is more or less the opposite of communism.

???
How? Both China and North Korea are considered authoritarian regimes. If "communism is good" is considered ok, then "Hitler was good" should be too, even if I don't agree with any of them. That would be a balanced discussion board, which it really wasn't.

>If your post got deleted with murky reasons, it was probably because of a lack of elaboration.


Does "I think you are right, but isn't that considered to be a good thing?" need elaboration? Last time I posted something I experienced and experience daily, it didn't get deleted and neither got responses that were literally "That's racist". Were these responses better elaborated compared to mine?


I'm not salty that my post got deleted, I'm salty that somebody had problem with my post but was OK with threads and posts that encouraged criminal activity and were breaking laws almost everywhere.

  No.13021

>>13012
>Both China and North Korea are considered authoritarian regimes
Communism is generally more economic system oriented, and authoritarian governments can pick it as an economic system, but the way it's generally discussed, as far as I've seen (and I'm not exactly a fan of those threads, so I might not be entirely right) is a discussion of the benefits of a proper implementation and what might prevent it and so on.

The major difference is that "communism is good" is not the same as "Hitler is good" in the way that "USSR is good" is as bad as "Nazi Germany is good", that is, communism and authoritarianism (as systems) can be (according to people discussing) be good, while USSR, current China or Nazi Germany were definitely not.

>Does "I think you are right, but isn't that considered to be a good thing?" need elaboration?

I have no idea and I can't really judge the post. I wouldn't put a mod messing up outside of possibilities, really.

Thing is, I feel like there is some "oh, I don't want to be too hard on the posters" going on, which is why the inconsistencies are there, but I really don't think there is anything major, but I think it's worth looking at these separate occasions just in case.

>breaking laws

I don't think this by itself should mean anything, considering piracy and drug use are entirely casual on this site.

  No.13069

>>12942
> Hell, posters there were so incapable of actual debate that some of them would repeat the same point that another poster was attacking back to them instead of presenting a counterargument, as if they believed simply repeating their views over and over again would convince people that they're right.
You've basically just described CNN.

  No.13070

>>13069
>m-muh CNN
How is CNN at all related to this conversation, or are you just one of those autists who insists on talking about whatever subject they're interested in whether it's related to the conversation at hand or not?

  No.13073

>>12938
This is the board Kaylx should have deleted.