>>409>Edgy black*enter le edgy meme*
*soon to come: la fedora hat meme*
Yellow/black are the most recent and popular attributions of anarcho-capitalist colors, and so I am attempting to find a reasonable and balanced css that resonates such.
I will most likely scrap this one, as mobile is screwed up and that damn reply box is ridiculously obtuse, but these colors are something towards which I will be aiming. As to its glares: I've been thinking about brightening the black, turning it less intensive, and dimming the intensity of the yellow.
>reply boxYeah, I've been trying to fix that. I'm not too knowledgeable about css, plus, I really like properly re-sizable chat boxes. As mentioned above, mobile is pretty much one giant chat box unless I zoom out all of the way.
>censoring name fields is not free speech Forced anonymous is not censorship. If you want to constantly post with a specifically well-known and popularized name, go to facebook or twitter with all of the other normies and namefags. On an imageboard aimed towards anonymity, it is mind-boggling that tripfags even exist. It detracts from the actual conversation and sets in motion a predictable array of responses towards the
individual, as opposed to the
substance provided. A discussion should be about the topics and strength of logic provided, not about who presented it in the first place.The former is more about tackling debate and opinions, the latter is more about recognizing "what my special name is and thus you should know it for some odd reason". Letting your ideology be known is not the same as letting everyone know that you are Jane or John Smith.
As to ideological markers, if you truly wish for an identification of some sorts, there are a variety of personalized flags which you can appropriate for yourself. If you have any suggestions as to which ones should be added, feel free to suggest such.
>What does left-libertarianism have to do with right-libertarianism?Sectarian mindsets are poisonous ones. That members of both sides are engaged within some petty ideological civil war of exclusivity is silliness and actually assists the domination of the state more than furthering the cause for anarchist dissidents. Anarchists that do not aim for at a recognized, even if superficial, solidarity only further the drive for group division and help spread the flames of "You vs Me" dichotomies.
It's as Chomsky suggests, "
The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion but allow very lively debate within that spectrum". That any anarchist board would severely limit what is dialectically acceptable and what isn't seems counter-active to the theme of "being free" and, indeed, towards anarchist discourse itself.
As to your actual question:
Right-libertarianism and left-libertarianism are entwined, concerning themselves with decentralized populist anti-statism and liberatory principles of a holistically free existence, albeit they disagree on several fundamental issues: contractual, democratic, economical, ethical, propertarian, and security-based subjects. This is to say nothing about the divisions within the major camps themselves, as evident within the multiplicity of anarchist philosophies. In the existential struggle for liberation, each and every anarchist is in this together. The position that "you're not a real anarchist" is little more than mindless dribble that delights institutions like the state, as its antagonisms are too busy telling each other that they're "not real" and too busy ensuring that the population doesn't accept the other, and thereby cannot truly affect the growth of an anarchist society. They are the worst sort of discussions, as it little more than shit-flinging and naysaying, all the while each is trying to claim "I'm so free that my ideology rules freedom". If there is any hypocrisy, that would be it.
Besides, the illusion that one singular anarchist sociopolitical and economic theory will dominate an anarchist world is just that- it's an mirage, nothing more than smoke and mirrors. It is my firm belief that a panarchist society is really the only platform that will enable the radical growth of anarchism; all of these radical divisions and the state still dominates just as strongly, if not even more so than when anarchism first entered mainstream literary and political discourse. Outsiders that come across libertarian shit-flinging are further turned away, seeing that even the liberators of humanity are too busy telling other liberators that they are not existing, while its insiders struggle to convince each other of the insignificance of all others. Such practices of "liberation" are nothing more than appeasements towards ideological slavery.
>what's wrong with just one?There are a number of reasons for my decision for two different threads concerning two similar-but-different boards that are linked:
1) Despite /ancap/ having an open door policy towards all political positions, not everyone will be comfortable approaching a predominantly right-libertarian board. Thus, offering another platform not largely composed of a specific ideological angle seems a wise choice; at least, to myself that is.
2) As I happen to have a few other boards besides /anarchism/ and /ancap/, I don't mindlessly and obnoxiously bump my boards. My bumps are timely and spaced out within a period of 3-8 days, as every board owner deserves a balanced and fair platform to advocate their boards.
Regardless, /boards/ is a slow moving one. I don't really see how I would be shutting down anyone else's advertising, given that my own bumps are extremely spaced between themselves.